I’m issuing an opinion that they’re getting off cheap. But their careers have suffered irreparable harm, so it’s alright. 🙂
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
82 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37719 readers
339 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They should have just plain been disbarred. They were, de facto, lying in court.
They still can be. The state bar has to decide on that.
Exactly this. I imagine the New York bar was waiting for this opinion to get started. Also, I get that Rule 11 sanctions are rare but $5000 seems low given the equities at stake.
Hopefully the get disbarred as well.
Legal Eagle did a cool video on this, for anyone interested:
Hm... I think if they fucked up and were negligent, this is a reasonable slap on the wrist judgement. If they fucked up, and then were knowledgeable in a malicious cover-up of their fuck up, this seems like a light punishment. The evidence seems to weigh towards the second, but the punishment gives them the benefit of the doubt on that.
Should be $5k per individual falsification.
Why does The Register get paid? /s
view more: next ›