Restitution as a criminal penalty

This question is related to a case getting a lot of press right now, about a banker who did a hit and run on a bicyclist. He was charged with a misdemeanor rather than a felony, apparently in part based on his need to keep his job and therefor his ability to pay restitution. There’s one story about it here, and there’s an ongoing thread here.

In the first link, the prosecutor is quoted as saying:

The bracketed items are my additions for clarity.

As an aside, I find this a very strange attitude for a prosecuting attorney.

Fill me in on “restitution” in terms of a criminal penalty. Am I correct that this is not money paid directly to the victim, but rather to some kind of victims’ find? And that this particular victim would then have to apply to the fund for assistance? IIRC victims’ funds often have pretty low caps on payouts, as there’s always far more damage done than there is money to pay for it. So even if the rich guy pays in $5 million, the victim might be limited to $5 thousand, or something like that.

Am I getting this right?

If I am incorrect, and the offender is required to pay the victim, or the voctim’s medical bills, does this in any way interfere with the victim’s ability to sue for damages in civil court?

Don’t know about this case, but we had an employee who ripped off the company. The person went to jail and makes money working in prison. Every month the company receives a check $20. At that rate the company will get repaid in about 1,000 years.

Restitution can be ordered by the court after a criminal conviction. This payment can go directly to the victim. It does not bar the victim from suing in civil court. In New York this is all covered in section 60.27 of our penal code:

YMMV. IANAL.