White-collar crime

Great Debates
1

I’d like to address whether the focus of law enforcement, and sentencing actually reflects the damage caused by those crimes. Also I’d like to know if you think the media focus on violent crimes versus white-collar crimes is justifiable. For the sake of these discussions, I’m purposely excluding “Drug Crimes” for several reasons, among them being the difficulty in establishing the cost to victims, if there are victims etc.

What got me to thinking about this is a discussion I was having with my wife regarding the convict who got sentenced for 20yrs in Texas for stealing a candy bar. I’d also read an article the same day in an Indy regarding corporate executives who’d been sentenced to probation for fleecing there company out of millions of dollars (sorry I don’t have a cites, but I’m looking and soon as I find them I’ll post them) for either of those. But it got me to thinking about white collar vs. violent crime.

It’s been estimated by the National White Collar Crime Center that 1 in 3 American Households are the victims of white-collar criminals. White-collar crimes range from credit card fraud to embezzlement. The cost to victims is hard to estimate but is thought to be in the millions to billions of dollars.

Meanwhile for violent crimes, the chances of being a victim of a violent crime are much less. For instance you have a 4 in 1000 chance of being robbed and a 2 in 1000 chance of being raped. For more try this report, or you can look at the Criminal Justice Report and here’s a good graph that shows the difference in sentencing.

2

Sorry everyone, I stepped out for a minute and came back and found my links aren’t here. :eek:

Here they are in the order I mentioned them:

National White Collar cirme survey: NW3C Home

First report

CJS report
http://www.ussc.gov/ANNRPT/1998/table13.pdf

The Graph
http://www.ussc.gov/ANNRPT/1998/fig-e.pdf

Can anybody tell me what I did wrong, I used MS Word so I could hyperlink on the words instead of these long links, then pasted it here :confused:

3

I have the rather unpopular stance that if I’m clever enough to take somthing from you (and get away with it–without hurting anyone), and you aren’t clever enough to stop me, I am entitled to it. sort of like, “I’m smarter than you, so I deserve this more”, like the french guy who burrowed into a bank vault and stole a ton of money (I think they called the caper, “fric-frac”), I think he deserves that money–but at the same time, I feel sorry for the people who got their money stolen from the bank. I know there’s no moral dustification for my feeling, but it’s the way I feel.

as for drug crimes, I feel that as long as the only person getting hurt is doing so willingly, there is no victim, and thus should be no crime.

4

I agree that there is definitely a double standard applied. Several possible reasons:

  1. Historical. Many forms of white collar chicanery have only evolved in recent times, made possible by the increasing financial complexity of our times. as a resault they do not violate longstanding taboos to the extent that violent crimes do.

  2. Ambiguity. Many white collar crimes are not as clear-cut as violent crimes. If someone robs you at knifepoint there is no ambiguity as to what happened. If someone ensnares you in a crooked deal it is sometimes not clear to what extent the victim participated in his victimization.

Furthermore, sometimes the crimes are themselves of ambigous morality. As in insider trading, which is legal in some other countries, and is certainly not comparable to robbing at gunpoint.

  1. In many cases white collar crimes involve no direct victim (stock market manipulation). This causes less of a reaction than does a person that was directly victimized.

Having said all that, I do believe that there is a double standard being applied. I would also suggest that you hook up with the concurrent thread which is discussing the issue of how much the amount being stolen relates to the severity of the crime. This seems to be part of the point you are making.

5

First. Because the board uses vb code copying and pasting from MS Word won’t work. I always like to preview my posts before hand. I’ve made too many mistakes not too, although sometimes I do forget.

As for why they focus on blue-color crime? Easy. The country is based on the rule of the ruling class. They don’t want us thinking that the ruling class is causing more damage than homeless people who need to eat. The laws are created and enforced for the rich.

6

stuffinb:

Do you have a cite for this? Was this one of those “three strikes and you’re out” deals?

eggo:

Words are not enough to express my contempt for people like you.

oldscratch:

So you’re saying most violent crime/street crime is committed by homeless people? Are you quite certain that’s the position you want to take?

7

eggo,

Don’t forget the equally idiotic “stance” that if I’m strong (or armed) enough to take somthing from you (and get away with it–without hurting anyone), and you aren’t strong enough to stop me, I am entitled to it. sort of like, “I’m stronger than you, so I deserve this more”, like the American guy who held into a bank and stole a ton of money … I think he deserves that money

8

Jesus Fucking Christ. Where the fuck do you get this bullshit? No I’m not saying that most violent crime is commited by homeless people. Are you purposely trying to be antagonistic, or do you really not understand my comment. Nowhere did I state that violent or steet crime is largely commited by homeless people. Go back and read what I posted. Ok. Now read it again. Ok. Now once more for good measure. Still don’t got it? It was a flippant generalization.

**

I’m not from Texas but I can give you examples from California. Here are 100 of the worst stories.

ONe of them was sentanced to 25 years to life for petty theft, of razor blades. There are countless stories from aroud California of these kind of injustices.

9

oldscratch,

Stories of the type that you describe are not related to the issue of violent vs. white collar crimes. The reason these injustices come about is because of the movement towards mandatory minimum sentences, which have removed much of the discretion that a judge would otherwise have to take severity-of-the-crime factors into account. They would apply just as well to white collar crimes regarding sentences that are applicable there. But there is also an issue of why embezzling $1000 should have a diffeent punishment than stealing it outright.

10

IzzyR, yeah I agree it’s a double standard, that’s was my point. You can steal a little old ladys life savings and get off with a slap on the wrist…

pldennison, here’s your cite, it was in Texas and yes he was a repeat offender, but none appear to be felonies, oh and it was 16yrs not 20 :rolleyes:.

http://commondreams.org/headlines/040700-01.htm
eggo, I agree with the others regarding the “I have the unpopular…” statement, but agree with you in regards to the drug war that’s why I excluded it.

By the way, I was wondering if maybe the light sentencing reflected reparations. Nope. Here’s another cite:
http://www.ussc.gov/ANNRPT/1998/table15.pdf

11

Oh, OK, I get it. It was a gratuituous reference to a social issue completely unrelated to the concept at hand, which was white collar vs. blue collar crime and the punishments for each, for no real purpose excecpt to once again show how evil successful people are. As long as we’re clear on that.

stuffinb: Thanks for the cite, which mentions that “. . .prosecutors bumped the theft to a felony because of Mr. Payne’s history, which includes 10 convictions, including theft, criminal mischief, assault and possession of a controlled substance. One of those convictions was for stealing a bag of Oreo cookies.”

Yes, what a martyr for unfair sentencing this man is. A real model citizen being harassed by the fascist police state. :rolleyes:

12

Quote:
Yes, what a martyr for unfair sentencing this man is. A real model citizen being harassed by the fascist police state

sigh
Did I say anything about facist police states? did I say anything about role models? WTF?

I used this as an example of my point, go back to the OP, and read what I said about the crime in proportion to the sentencing. That being white collar crimes may do as much damage or more but aren’t sentenced at the severity of white collar criminals. What a jackass!

Also did you bother to read the average sentencing report I provided?

13

**

Wow. Once again you don’t get it. Did I mention that successful people were evil, did I even hint at that? I don’t see it. But of course it’s much easier for you to put words in my mouth.

I just noticed stuffinb’s post. This seems to be a talent of yours. Do you actually try and read or comprehend what anyone else posts?
My point was that laws are stiffer for blue collar crimes becuase of the way our government is formed. As a tool for the ruling class to keep a hold on the reigns of power.
**
[/QUOTE]

14

stuffinb:

No, you simply used a dishonest, emotionally loaded premise in your OP, to wit: “What got me to thinking about this is a discussion I was having with my wife regarding the convict who got sentenced for 20yrs in Texas for stealing a candy bar.” You failed to address the larger issue, which was that in this particular case, this was a ten-time loser who seems to have a problem with keeping his hands off of other people and other people’s stuff.

What is the proportionate sentence, in your opinion, for a ten time offender?! I think this guy should maybe be as far away from people as possible.

How much do ten-time white-collar offenders get punished?

oldscratch:

Yes, it couldn’t possibly be because, (A) as IzzyR notes, the very concept of “white-collar crime” is a relatively recent one whose ramifications are not as notable and immediate, and (B) “blue collar crimes” actually result in people being raped, murdered and beaten? Heaven forbid that those could be legitimate reasons.

I’m not going to argue against the premise that different categories of crime carry different sentences, and that persons of means can escape punishment for crimes which persons without means cannot. Those are self-evidently true. (I recall a case last year in Cleveland where a municipal judge, of all people, was caught in a local discount store with items stuffed in the waistband of her skirt, under her blouse. She claimed she was carrying them to the register because she had neglected to get a cart or a basket. No charges were ever filed.)
No, my problem is that, as I suspected, there was more to stuffinb’s original post than meets the eye; namely, that the candy-bar thief in question was a habitual offender with a lengthy criminal history. A jury heard the evidence and felt that 16 years was the proper punishment for someone who has repeatedly shown that he cannot play well with others.

Yes, by the way, I read your links. However, you seem to be arguing that the punishment for a crime should be based, at least in part, on its likelihood of occurring. (Why else would you be arguing, in your OP, based on the rate per 1,000 of murders and rapes?) I can’t disagree more. The punishment for a crime should be based on how much we want to deter potential perpetrators, how much damage is caused to the victim(s) of that particular crime, and how likely the perpetrator is to repeat that crime. Violent criminals are notoriously recidivist; Michael Milken, OTOH, is highly unlikely to repeat his crimes.

Now, in one paragraph, you refer to “corporate executives who’d been sentenced to probation for fleecing there company out of millions of dollars.” (BTW, was this embezzlement, or securities fraud, or something else? These are very different crimes with very different sentences.) You then state: “White-collar crimes range from credit card fraud to embezzlement.” Whoa–back up!! Just what kind of people are comitting credit card fraud? Corporate executives? Highly doubtful. More likely, in my experience, that it’s the middle class and the same people who commit petty thefts.

By the way, drug use should be decriminalized and all current offenders should have their sentences erased.

15

soo… what would you classify under some rich boys going out and beating someone to death then getting away with it because they have influence?

I mean really the guy probably woulden’t have gotten 20 years for all 10 crimes combined and none of them are worth even a year in jail. In fact stealing a candy bar isint worth a day in jail because it wastes money.

No no wait I got it… 10 traffic violations and and you get a life sentence (especially those people who run stop signs) Would you agree to that pldennison?

16

He was given many chances by the state to fly straight. He decided he didn’t want to do that so he stole a candy bar. It was an extra large candy bar though. He proved that he could not live in society without being a thief. He got what he deserved.

Marc

17

pldennison: *Violent criminals are notoriously recidivist; Michael Milken, OTOH, is highly unlikely to repeat his crimes. *

Ahem.

From a 1998 account:

Now, a fine is not a conviction, and Mr. Milken is thus technically not “recidivist”. But he doesn’t come off looking particularly rehabilitated, either. If he runs afoul of the SEC eight more times, do we get to put him away for 20 years too?

18

That’s a valuable insight. Thanks.

19

Kimstu:

Absolutely. I also think he should be tried on criminal charges of working in the securities industry illegally.

Asmodean:

I would consider it a miscarriage of justice. Do you have a particular case you’d like to discuss?

Let’s keep in mind, those are the ten times he was caught and convicted. I reiterate, this man obviously has no intention of keeping his hands of off people and their stuff. Assault? Criminal mischief? Come on.

Yes, that’s exactly what I believe. :rolleyes:

I also was thinking this morning of some further criticism’s of stuffinb’s OP and his links.

First, he tries to compare the (alleged, according to an advocacy group) rate per household of white-collar crimes to the rate per 1,000 population of rape and murder. Apples and oranges. There are not 1,000 people per household. Can you maybe find a link that compares like to like?

Second, the links provided show the figures for average sentences served, not for sentences recommended (or required) by law. A few things that need to be kept in mind:

  1. Many violent criminals and property criminals do not serve **any[/y] time for the first few offenses; they receive probation (largely because the prisons are clogged with nonviolent drug offenders). The sentences represented by the links stuffinb provided may very well be composed of a large proportion of repeat offenders, who are exactly the type of people who should be in prison.

  2. The recommended sentences for some of the categories of crime provided in stuffinb’s links may indeed be the same. For example, under Virginia law, credit-card fraud is synonymous with grand larceny, and is punishable by the same sentence, which is to say “a period not exceeding twelve months or fined not more than $2,500, either or both.” Similarly, embezzlement is, under Virginia law, synonymous with either grand or petit larceny depending on amount taken, and is punishable by an identical sentence. So no disparity exists between possible sentences.

Looking at his links, however, one finds that in 1998, 760 persons convicted of embezzlement served an average of 5.5 months; 2,658 persons convicted of larceny served an average of 6.8 months. Big difference in the number of convicts, there. That effects those figures quite a bit. But is 1.3 months really a big difference in mean sentence length for two crimes which, at least under Virginia law are defined and punishable identically? I don’t think so. (The median number of months served, BTW, was identical: 4.0. That means half served more than 4.0 months and half served less.)

Similarly, 6,228 persons convicted of fraud (which in VA is a Class 4 felony), served an average of 12.9 months, nearly twice as much as those convicted of larceny! Where exactly is the disparity there? Seems like the “white-collar criminals” are getting much higher sentences. Even the median was exactly twice as high: 8.0 months. Same with forgery and bribery; in both cases, convicts served higher sentences than larceny convicts.

What say you to that, Dopers?

20

quote:
No, you simply used a dishonest, emotionally loaded premise in your OP, to wit: “What got me to thinking about this is a discussion I was having with my wife regarding the convict who got sentenced for 20yrs in Texas for stealing a candy bar.” You failed to address the larger issue, which was that in this particular case, this was a ten-time loser who seems to have a problem with keeping his hands off of other people and other people’s stuff.

Did you notice I used the word “convict”. In other words I never tried to hide the guys criminal background and even posted the cite. That doesn’t sound dishonest to me. :rolleyes:

Then you said:
What is the proportionate sentence, in your opinion, for a ten time offender?! I think this guy should maybe be as far away from people as possible.

Have you spent anytime in jail? Given any consideration at all to the cost of locking someone up for 16 years over a $.075 candy bar. Compare that with millions of dollars and “probation”. Oh yeah that seem fair. For the record, I went and looked them up, each of the crimes other than the assault are Class C misdemeanors, not felonies. So lets look at the cost two others property in relation to the sentence. How misdemeanors are classified form the Texas Criminal Justice System
(1) a Class C misdemeanor if:
(A) the amount of pecuniary loss is less than $50; or
(B) except as provided in Subdivision (3)(B), it causes substantial inconvenience to others;
(2) a Class B misdemeanor if the amount of pecuniary loss is $50 or more but less than $500;
(3) a Class A misdemeanor if the amount of pecuniary loss is:
(A) $500 or more but less than $1,500; or
B) less than $1,500 and the actor causes in whole or in part impairment or interruption of public communications, public transportation, public water, gas, or power supply, or other public service, or causes to be diverted in whole, in part, or in any manner, including installation or removal of any device for any such purpose, any public communications, public water, gas, or power supply;
Ok, lets multiply that out, at the at the maximum just for the sake of argument. $500 x 9 = $13,500 + $0.75 = $13, 500.75 = 16yr sentence. Oh now I see it. :confused:

Quote:
How much do ten-time white-collar offenders get punished?

That’s not the point. Millions of dollars in damage, you get probation. That’s really fair. :rolleyes:

Then:
No, my problem is that, as I suspected, there was more to stuffinb’s original post than meets the eye; namely, that the candy-bar thief in question was a habitual offender with a lengthy criminal history. A jury heard the evidence and felt that 16 years was the proper punishment for someone who has repeatedly shown that he cannot play well with others.

Wrong the judge decided 16 years was an appropriate sentence, go back and read the story again

Quote:
Yes, by the way, I read your links. However, you seem to be arguing that the punishment for a crime should be based, at least in part, on its likelihood of occurring.
------------------------------------------------------------No, I’m arguing that the punishment should fit the level of damage you’ve done.

Quote:
(Why else would you be arguing, in your OP, based on the rate per 1,000 of murders and rapes?) I can’t disagree more. The punishment for a crime should be based on how much we want to deter potential perpetrators, how much damage is caused to the victim(s) of that particular crime, and how likely the perpetrator is to repeat that crime.

Oh I get it now a probation sentence is sure going to deter the next guy who decides to fleece his company. :rolleyes:

Quote:
Violent criminals are notoriously recidivist; Michael Milken, OTOH, is highly unlikely to repeat his crimes

A blanket statement, where’s you proof of that. I know it’s well established by rapist, but what about robbery murder and the others?

Quote:
Now, in one paragraph, you refer to “corporate executives who’d been sentenced to probation for fleecing their company out of millions of dollars.” (BTW, was this embezzlement, or securities fraud, or something else? These are very different crimes with very different sentences.)

They set up a bogus company and invoice their company.

Quote:

You then state: “White-collar crimes range from credit card fraud to embezzlement.” Whoa–back up!! Just what kind of people are comitting credit card fraud? Corporate executives? Highly doubtful. More likely, in my experience, that it’s the middle class and the same people who commit petty thefts.

Hey I didn’t make the categories; I just pointed it out so that we could establish a definition for white-collar crimes.