# Homeless man fined $101 million. Huh? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 18, 2008, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301 "2008-11-18T16:45:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/21 "2008-11-18T21:44:59Z")
> [@threemae](#): > > In all seriousness, I don’t have a cite, but I know from several news stories that I can dig up if necessary that failing to make some payments to the state for criminal matters can often lead to imprisonment. > > I don’t think that it can necessarily apply to restitution payments such as the one assigned against the arsonist here, but as terms of parole or probation, convicts often have to make significant payments to the state or to people that provide “services” related to their parole and failing to pay them can result in their going back to prison. For instance, if the terms of your parole state that you have to take a drug test monthly and pay $100 for the test, simply being willing to take a drug test without having or being willing to pay the money to provide for it can mean going back to prison. Failing to be able to get their finances back in order (especially given the difficulty of regaining employment as a convict) is a significant contribution to people “failing” parole. > [@](#): > > It is a fundamental principle of criminal law that a defendant cannot be incarcerated for a mere inability to pay a financial penalty. The Supreme Court held that a court must find that the defendant “willfully refused to pay or failed to make sufficient bona fide efforts legally to acquire the resources to pay” restitution in order to incarcerate the defendant.108 Willful failure to pay can be measured not only by income and assets, but also by a defendant’s failure to acquire or utilize available resources to pay.109 “Resources” is a broader term than “income” or “assets” and invites consideration of any kind of financial “resource” to which the defendant has access. [http://www.ussc.gov/TRAINING/cgLALrest6-00.PDF](http://www.ussc.gov/TRAINING/cgLALrest6-00.PDF) [http://www.tjpc.state.tx.us/publications/reviews/03/03-4-12.htm](http://www.tjpc.state.tx.us/publications/reviews/03/03-4-12.htm) (court cannot revoke parole without evidence of willful failure to pay restitution) [http://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I01\_0042.htm](http://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I01_0042.htm) (noting willfulness standard) [http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/2/2008/2008-ohio-2385.pdf](http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/2/2008/2008-ohio-2385.pdf) (applying willfulness standard) The willfulness standard (or at least a defense based on inability to pay) also applies to revocations for failure to submit to tests that the defendant can’t afford. [caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/floridastatecases/app/app2\_9\_2003/2D02-4802.pdf](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/floridastatecases/app/app2_9_2003/2D02-4802.pdf) [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=il&vol=app\2000\3980733&invol=3](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=il&vol=app%5C2000%5C3980733&invol=3) (applying willfulness standard to defendant’s claim that he failed to obtain a court ordered evaluation) [http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/opinions/tcca/PDF/982/owenra.pdf](http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/opinions/tcca/PDF/982/owenra.pdf) (court costs and probation fees) [http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/835CD01.pdf](http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/835CD01.pdf) (defendant could not afford court-ordered polygraph). ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/22 "2008-11-18T21:54:23Z")
> [@Tom\_Tildrum](#): > > Is criminal restitution dischargeable in bankruptcy? > [@](#): > > (a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228 (a), 1228 (b), or 1328 (b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt— > > * * * > > (13) for any payment of an order of restitution issued under title 18, United States Code; [11 U.S. Code § 523 - Exceptions to discharge | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/11/usc_sec_11_00000523----000-.html) Also excepted from discharge under Chapter 13 (which offers a broader discharge than a Chapter 7): > [@](#): > > the court shall grant the debtor a discharge of all debts provided for by the plan or disallowed under section 502 of this title, except any debt— > > * * * > > (3) for restitution, or a criminal fine, included in a sentence on the debtor’s conviction of a crime; or [11 U.S. Code § 1328 - Discharge | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/11/usc_sec_11_00001328----000-.html) ---
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/23 "2008-11-18T23:30:07Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Wouldn’t you feel silly if you let him go and he won the Lotto next year? exactly, once he is in the system should he hit the lottery it would go directly to the fine. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/24 "2008-11-19T02:59:57Z")
Another possibility is that he may become famous as the guy who started the big fire of 2008. If so, he may be collecting a lot of money in things like books and movie rights. The government and the victims will now have a claim against any money he collects. ---
**Author:** ![seodoa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4af34b/32.png) [@seodoa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/seodoa)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/25 "2008-11-19T03:19:11Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Another possibility is that he may become famous as the guy who started the big fire of 2008. If so, he may be collecting a lot of money in things like books and movie rights. The government and the victims will now have a claim against any money he collects. This is particularly important as so-called “son of sam” laws, those that try to prevent notorious criminals from profiting from their notoriety as criminals, have been struck down in many states, including California as violating the 1st amendment. As such, restitutionary fines ensure that if any profit is made, it goes to the victims. There is a Straight Dope column by gfactor about these laws, IIRC. Yep, [here](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2239/how-are-criminals-prevented-from-profiting-from-their-crimes) it is. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/26 "2008-11-19T04:44:37Z")
Slate Magazine has a column called _The Explainer_ which can now be conveniently accessed on the left column of their page. I recommend it to all GQ readers. Today’s entry is, [The Millionaire Arsonist: Is a homeless felon really expected to pay $101 million?](http://www.slate.com/id/2204925/) > [@The Explainer](#): > > How’s a guy who sleeps in a tent supposed to pay $101 million? > > He isn’t. Instead, he’s expected to pay a tiny bit every month until he dies. The man, Steven Emory Butcher, currently receives $1,000 a month in Supplemental Security Income, which is basically welfare for the elderly, disabled, or blind. The federal court ordered that Butcher would pay $25 to Los Padres National Forest four times a year while in prison, and then $50 a month once he’s released. ---
**Author:** ![datasos\_adv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@datasos\_adv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/datasos_adv)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/27 "2008-11-19T07:39:53Z")
[raid修复](http://www.raidlab.com) [raid恢复](http://www.raidlab.com) [raid数据恢复](http://www.raidlab.com) [磁盘阵列修复](http://www.raidlab.com) [磁盘阵列恢复](http://www.raidlab.com) [磁盘阵列数据恢复](http://www.raidlab.com) [数据库修复](http://www.db-sos.com) [mdf修复](http://www.db-sos.com) [mdf恢复](http://www.db-sos.com) [sql server修复](http://www.db-sos.com) [sql server恢复](http://www.db-sos.com) [Oracle修复](http://www.db-sos.com) [Oracle恢复](http://www.db-sos.com) [硬盘数据恢复](http://www.cndatasos.com) [硬盘数据恢复](http://www.datasos.org) [数据恢复](http://www.datasos.net) [上海数据恢复](http://www.sitit.com) [上海数据恢复](http://www.sitit.com) [杭州数据恢复](http://www.datasos.cc) [宁波数据恢复](http://datasos.hisunweb.net) [杭州数据恢复](http://www.zjdatasos.cn) [上海数据恢复](http://www.sitit.com) [上海硬盘数据恢复](http://www.sitit.com) [上海 数据恢复](http://www.sitit.com) [数据恢复 上海](http://www.sitit.com) [数据库修复](http://www.db-sos.com) [上海数据恢复](http://www.datasos.org/sh/index.htm) [SQL数据库修复](http://www.db-sos.com/fwxm.htm) [ORACLE数据库修复](http://www.db-sos.com/fwxm.htm) [DB2数据库修复](http://www.db-sos.com/fwxm.htm) [备份软件](http://www.oceanbackup.com) [备份工具](http://www.oceanbackup.com) [数据备份](http://www.oceanbackup.com) [备份下载](http://www.oceanbackup.com) [系统备份](http://www.oceanbackup.com) ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/28 "2008-11-19T17:11:56Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > [http://www.ussc.gov/TRAINING/cgLALrest6-00.PDF](http://www.ussc.gov/TRAINING/cgLALrest6-00.PDF) > > [http://www.tjpc.state.tx.us/publications/reviews/03/03-4-12.htm](http://www.tjpc.state.tx.us/publications/reviews/03/03-4-12.htm) (court cannot revoke parole without evidence of willful failure to pay restitution) > > [http://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I01\_0042.htm](http://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I01_0042.htm) (noting willfulness standard) > > [http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/2/2008/2008-ohio-2385.pdf](http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/2/2008/2008-ohio-2385.pdf) (applying willfulness standard) > > The willfulness standard (or at least a defense based on inability to pay) also applies to revocations for failure to submit to tests that the defendant can’t afford. Certainly I’ll defer to your knowledge of legal issues and my post was obviously in error stating that not being able to pay for a drug test could lead to failing the conditions of parole, but my understanding that the “willfullness standard” is something that obviously judges and parolees often find themselves disagreeing upon. Even if a judge structures your restitution, drug tests, or any other costs so that they take up say 20% of your income, given the likely marginal socio-economic status of convicts to begin with, this can be a significant imposition on how parolees lead their lives and they often cite it as a reason for their failure to meet the conditions of their release. Obviously, if your best experience in making money is through drug dealing, needing to pay the state for your supervision will provide some pressure to return to drug dealing. I’m not here to debate the fairness of the manner in which the “willfullness standard” is applied across the United States, but I think it’s fair to say that the level of money owed to the state is a factor in failing parole. Here’s an article from a local paper on the issue of failing parole that’s highly sympathetic to parolees: [http://www.westword.com/2006-04-06/news/over-and-over-again/](http://www.westword.com/2006-04-06/news/over-and-over-again/) ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/29 "2008-11-19T17:53:24Z")
Let’s leave aside for a moment the question of the destitute - what if a fire were caused by a bunch of college students screwing around with a bonfire, and that fire spread to destroy massive amounts of property, including an entire mobile-home park. Let’s wonder also what would happen if several people were to be injured severely by this fire. What should be done with this bunch - they aren’t homeless and their future earning potential seems okay - assuming they work through some criminal charges, that is. I ask this because it does seem to be the case in this latest California wildfire - at least one of them was caused by a group of college students between 18 and 22. Now, these kids have their whole lives ahead of them - but they screwed over a whole bunch of people. The people in the mobile home park lost everything, and one couple suffered burns so severe they’re in critical condition and might not make it. I do know accidents happen - but setting a bonfire isn’t accidental. They should face some sanction - and it ought to be a pretty steep one, right? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/30 "2008-11-19T18:02:53Z")
> [@](#): > > Add to that, how’s he supposed to get to work on earning that $101 million when he’s in jail? Have they got some sort of massive work-release program for him? > > How about they throw him in the tank for 4 years, get some analysis on him to find out why he was homeless in the first place? Is he nuts? Does the state now owe him anti-nuts medicine? And then let him participate in getting his education while in the barry place like Bundy did. > > Shit, if he’s got to go to jail at least maybe forgive the fine and give him some incentive to participate in society. Like train him to be a fireman or something. Heck, with programs like this, a lot of people would commit arson just to get a jump ahead in their life. > [@](#): > > Even if a judge structures your restitution, drug tests, or any other costs so that they take up say 20% of your income, given the likely marginal socio-economic status of convicts to begin with, this can be a significant imposition on how parolees lead their lives and they often cite it as a reason for their failure to meet the conditions of their release. Obviously, if your best experience in making money is through drug dealing, needing to pay the state for your supervision will provide some pressure to return to drug dealing. I’m not here to debate the fairness of the manner in which the “willfullness standard” is applied across the United States, but I think it’s fair to say that the level of money owed to the state is a factor in failing parole. I’m old-fashioned on issues like this. I think that when you’ve committed a major crime, you should be suffering some. Your life should be worse off than it was before you committed the crime. You should be punished. Because that’s a motivation to not commit crimes. I feel that whatever resources we are spending on helping disadvantaged people get ahead in life should be spent first on the people who haven’t committed crimes. If you’re poor but you’ve resisted the temptation to become a criminal then you deserve a break more than the guy who gave in and broke the law. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/31 "2008-11-19T18:17:34Z")
> [@threemae](#): > > Certainly I’ll defer to your knowledge of legal issues and my post was obviously in error stating that not being able to pay for a drug test could lead to failing the conditions of parole, but my understanding that the “willfullness standard” is something that obviously judges and parolees often find themselves disagreeing upon. Agreed. There are different standards, and some courts seem only to acknowledge that inability to pay is a “defense,” which isn’t the same thing. > [@](#): > > Obviously, if your best experience in making money is through drug dealing, needing to pay the state for your supervision will provide some pressure to return to drug dealing. I’m not here to debate the fairness of the manner in which the “willfullness standard” is applied across the United States, but I think it’s fair to say that the level of money owed to the state is a factor in failing parole. This is a very good point. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/32 "2008-11-19T21:36:18Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > It would make no sense to say"if you are indigent you can do all sorts of nasty things without repercussions". I fail to see how fining an indigent person $100 million constitutes any kind of repercussion at all. You might as well fine him $100 billion, or $100 trillion. Taking away what he doesn’t have is a meaningless gesture as far as deterrence is concerned. You might as well ban him from trading on the stock market, for all the good it would do. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/33 "2008-11-19T21:40:09Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I fail to see how fining an indigent person $100 million constitutes any kind of repercussion at all. You might as well fine him $100 billion, or $100 trillion. Taking away what he doesn’t have is a meaningless gesture as far as deterrence is concerned. You might as well ban him from trading on the stock market, for all the good it would do. It’s a repercussion at least inasmuch as were he to happen upon a hundred million dollars on the street one day, he wouldn’t get to keep it. I know I know. -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![KlondikeGeoff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3e96dc/32.png) [@KlondikeGeoff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KlondikeGeoff)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/34 "2008-11-19T22:31:33Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > It’s a repercussion at least inasmuch as were he to happen upon a hundred million dollars on the street one day, he wouldn’t get to keep it. When I found $100 million, I certainly did not tell anybody. 😃 Thanks everybody for some illuminating discussions to my OP. I think “precedent” is probably the best answer. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/35 "2008-11-20T04:02:53Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I fail to see how fining an indigent person $100 million constitutes any kind of repercussion at all. You might as well fine him $100 billion, or $100 trillion. Taking away what he doesn’t have is a meaningless gesture as far as deterrence is concerned. You might as well ban him from trading on the stock market, for all the good it would do. But as was explained above, he will be paying fifty bucks a month out of a pathetically small income for the rest of his life. A theoretical $100 million bucks might be meaningless - but he’ll miss that $600 a year and it will hurt. ---
**Author:** ![Tabby\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tabby\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tabby_Cat)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/36 "2008-11-20T04:16:00Z")
I know this is about criminal restitution, but I noticed a undercurrent which felt strange to me. Doesn’t the US have custodial sentences in default of payment of fines? Here, the sentence is usually something like “$3000 fine, or 2 weeks in default”. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/37 "2008-11-20T04:43:04Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > But as was explained above, he will be paying fifty bucks a month out of a pathetically small income for the rest of his life. A theoretical $100 million bucks might be meaningless - but he’ll miss that $600 a year and it will hurt. So what is the difference between fining him $100 million and fining him $100,000? If it is about sending a message, why not fine him $100 trillion and send a \*really \* big message? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/38 "2008-11-20T04:58:12Z")
> [@](#): > > So what is the difference between fining him $100 million and fining him $100,000? If it is about sending a message, why not fine him $100 trillion and send a really big message? My posts (#4 and #24) gave two reasons why the court might have decided to give him a large fine rather than one downgraded to his current financial state. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/39 "2008-11-20T14:38:12Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > So what is the difference between fining him $100 million and fining him $100,000? If it is about sending a message, why not fine him $100 trillion and send a \*really \* big message? Because if a multi-millionaire were to set the same fire, he could dash off a check for the $100,000 and be done with the whole mess. Meanwhile, those people who lost their homes wouldn’t have anything to show for it. And the next time something like this happened - like these college kids I mentioned - they could point to the $100,000 as a “standard” penalty and have that paid off in a few years. Equal protection certainly applies here - but the courts would likely get upset here if the application of this punishment meant that this guy were to be permitted no money for the rest of his life. On the sentencing side, there would be an equal protection issue if he were to be fined a different amount on the basis of his income. Punishment isn’t intended to work that way. ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301/40 "2008-11-21T17:53:38Z")
> [@Billdo](#): > > Actually, it looks like that they didn’t fine him $100 million, but rather assessed him $100 million in restitution. > > In other words, they determined that the fire caused (more than) $100 million in damage, and he is required to pay that amount back to restore those who were injured. The Day Fire cost $101,652,000 and he was assessed that amount. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homeless-man-fined-101-million-huh/473301.md?page=1)