Well, the hacker on trial is on trial no more. I heard that he was facing a year or so for just downloading scholarly files from MIT. Meanwhile, Carmen Ortiz, his prosecutor, allowed a ballot-stuffer to plead guilty to a misdemeanor. I see. Ballot-stuffing isn't as deadly as software download. Wow. But don't take my word for it:
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1.../p2p-74077719/
Read all about it!
And then tell me, did he really need to kill himself? Was that a stretch? Or was the prosecution stretching when they pursued him?

If you'll hear my opinion, then read the following:
I think he should not have commit suicide. Now, he's some friggin internet/media martyr who will go down as the Osama bin Laden of hackers: followers love him, governments hate him. That being said, he had agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, so that could have ended it there. Unfortunately, the law went a bit too far in saying no to this offer. I think that while the law is the law (that is, he should be prosecuted), they should have met in the middle, avoided the death, and avoid me making this thread. Tell me if you agree.