But GP made it clear that the graffiti charge wasn't the target, it was intended to pressure the person involved into turning on a different criminal associate. Ignoring that reality in favor of focusing exclusively on the charge itself seems unhelpful to me.

▲

crote 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"25 to life for jaywalking, but you'll walk free if you snitch" sounds like extortion to me.

If he's an accomplice, them charge him with that, and turn it into a classical prisoner's dilemma. Don't just make up bullshit charges, that's abuse of the justice system.

▲

EA-3167 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Except they're not trumping up penalties, it's just "Pay the fine for Jaywalking or snitch."

In this case the person did a little more than Jaywalking so they're on the hook for more. It's also possible to have information on a criminal act or conspiracy without being an accomplice.

I appreciate the extremely... principled morality of some here, but the law isn't an ethical framework, it's a practical one informed by ethical principles. It's also not a computer program, people are involved who make decisions based on a number of factors ranging from professional and selfless, to careerist and selfish. That's life.

A really easy way to avoid all of this is to stay out of the system, it's not as though he's in for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his starving child.

	▲	4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

adgjlsfhk1 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Extortion for testimony doesn't tend to produce reliable testimony.

	▲	EA-3167 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Perjuring yourself into a felony to avoid a $500 fine on a misdemeanor sure would be a choice, I'm not convinced it's one frequently made.