If it is tax fraud it is stealing from me and from you. You might be okay with that but I don’t like people stealing from me.
Your example is an emotional response and not a legal one. He was not sentenced to long term incarceration. He was illegal killed by guards.
If he was illegally killed by guards wouldn’t the guards have been convicted of something?
huh?
He wasn’t given a life sentence for $14. He was given a life sentence for a long history of violating the basic rules of society…
Stealing on multiple occassions, carrying a gun after being convicted of a felony, and then , yes, stealing again, by invading the home of an elderly couple.
This guy has no respect for common decent behavior, and no ability to learn from his previous convictions. Society is better off when he is locked up permanently.
YOU (in all likelyhood racist) MONSTER!!!
Can’t you see that if he only had 27 more chances to commit 27 more various misdemeanors and/or felonies without any meaningful legal consequences, I am positive there wouldn’t be a 28th needed.
We all learn at our own pace, and that’s perfectly OK!!!
I strongly disagree. There are more than 5,000 colleges and universities in the US, and plenty of them would’ve admitted these kids without anything other than an application, a transcript and tuition. These parents definitely wanted their kids to get into big-name schools, otherwise why pay so much and be willing to break the law?
that would be the expectation on the face of it.
If you look at the guy who was busted for selling cigarettes and died in the struggle the first question asked is should he have died? No. Did his resistance dictate the terms of his arrest procedure leading to his death? Yes.
- You’d reduce it, but not by a whole lot, considering something like 20% of inmates are in for drugs, further considering a lot of those aren’t minor, and/or it’s all the authorities could prove about people deeply involved in criminal activity (as in Al Capone the non-violent tax cheat).
Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie 2019 | Prison Policy Initiative
There would be serious trade offs to greatly reducing the US prison population, and those don’t go away by pointing at societies which don’t have the same social structure as the US. One big reason a larger % of people get locked up in the US is a larger % (though still pretty small) committing serious crimes in the US. It doesn’t mean nothing can be done to improve the situation, but there isn’t one big, simple no cost answer.
- However I agree the answer is definitely not by going easy on organized corruption in a core societal institution like the university system. That’s the kind of crime with far reaching repercussions in further lowering public confidence in institutions. The most successful societies are where that confidence is fairly high. And this kind of crime is relatively easy to deter by showing potential offenders it doesn’t pay, potential offenders who would generally have a lot to lose. It’s not as much people stuck in a way of life outside the law, like a lot of the lower class people in prison, who may be less subject to deterrence.
Jail time is absolutely appropriate for the offenders in this case IMO, as long as it’s not carried away. The sentences mentioned in media, a few months to a couple of years for ‘end users’ depending how deeply enmeshed and what fraudulent acts they added on top (bribes deducted as charitable contributions), seem about right to me.
Only one person in the group got charged on tax issues. I understand having a harder line on that.
Hey, give me a penal system where nonviolent, petty first offenders ALL get the same break or lack thereof, whether from Beverly Hills or from the Projects, and I’m all for it. But white collar crimes of abuse of privilege, well, those seem lacking in setting high-visibility examples unless you get into Securities Fraud territory.
And it’s not like we’re asking for them to be shipped off to Supermax or the chain gang, either. But having the high rollers who abuse their privilege to break the law get a penalty beyond merely loss of income and public embarassment seems just, you know?
I’d way rather see the super-rich get a choice: X years in prison or 90% of your wealth + a week in the slammer. That money could be put to good use & the guilty would be back on the streets in a week to make more money & pay more taxes, rather than costing tax payers for their incarceration.
Here is a list of crimes that caused people to get life sentences. Which is far harsher than what I meant by “going down.” One is stealing two jerseys. Most are drug related.
Even a felony conviction from a small crime is going to have a big impact on a person, even if there is small or no jail time.
But I wasn’t arguing against punishment for small crimes. I was arguing against the lack of punishment for much bigger crimes, specifically those committed by rich white people. That’s a point you’ve been ignoring.
Lori Loughlin and her husband pled not guilty today.
I guess Loughlin’s legal strategy is to put on her very best false Aren’t I Sweet and Pretty smile and grin the bastards down.
My guess is she’s hoping for a plea bargain. IANAL, obviously, but the only cases I’ve seen where someone clearly guilty (caught on tape, dozens of witnesses, etc.) pleads Not Guilty is when they’re hoping for a plea deal. If that’s the case, I hope the DA does’t go that route. It’d send the wrong message.
OTOH, maybe her attorney has spotted some loophole that’d allow her to escape the rap and help her resuscitate her career, if that’s possible: Yes, she was charged, but she was acquitted. I doubt it’d do much good, career-wise, but she’s got a posh lifestyle to support and dwindling prospects for doing so.
She’s already turned town a plea bargain. The one that Huffman took.
The last I heard, Huffman was still looking at jail time. Maybe she’s hoping to wrangle a deal to avoid that option.
Or maybe she’s planning on a jury of her peers. You know, rich celebrities.
Either way, I think she’s going to be very disappointed.
Louglin has both Christian AND Republican cred, maybe she does have enough pull to evade serious consequences!
Maybe, but federal prosecutor’s batting average convicting high profile white collar criminals is not great in recent times. Overall their batting avg is high, but seems to fall down somewhat in those cases, like politicians (eg. Menendez) who seemed pretty much caught dead to rights in the media coverage of the case.
And it’s not because high profile people get juries of rich or high profile people. They get the same below average people who end up on juries generally. Those people might just be more amenable to arguments that defendants are being railroaded by the govt, and perhaps not as eager to convict people for being rich, or for being white, as some other people might assume. Also there are the notorious cases with various types of defendant where juries interpreted ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ as ‘beyond any doubt whatsoever, reasonable or not’.
They sure look guilty based on what the media has reported. And federal prosecutors in particular seem to go for much lengthier lists of crimes and higher potential sentences for people who refuse to fold and take a plea, so there’s often loads of downside for a defendant to take it to trial. But still their right, and hard to say from the outside IMO that the lawyers advising this are crazy, or to assume the defendant is rejecting legal advice by refusing the plea.
Huffman already plead guilty. There will be no jury of her peers. Just a sentencing by a judge. She’s most likely looking at 1-4 months of jail time, from what I’ve read.