failblog.org

[Catty1]

Ok, this is likely out of context, but still...

[lizbud]

Sounds about right to me Candice.

[Karen]

At least the homeless man will have a roof over his head guaranteed for a while, and hopefully treatment and education so whatever lead him to homelessness will no longer be an issue when he gets out. I'm guessing the CEO was prosecuted as part of larger case, and there were many, many more people involved. At least he's getting SOME jail time ...

[Taz_Zoee]

I was going to say the exact same thing about the homeless man that Karen did. Sometimes homeless people commit crimes on purpose to be locked up so they get three meals a day and a bed to sleep on.

[Medusa]

Yes, but 15 years???

[wombat2u2004]

One was fraud.
One was armed robbery.
Both were theft.
He had his hand under his jacket. Even tho a weapon wasn't produced, the bank teller probably believed he was armed, and therefore her life was being threatened.
That's the difference.

[lizbud]

At least the homeless man will have a roof over his head guaranteed for a while, and hopefully treatment and education so whatever lead him to homelessness will no longer be an issue when he gets out. I'm guessing the CEO was prosecuted as part of larger case, and there were many, many more people involved. At least he's getting SOME jail time ...

Excuse me, but that is a real stretch. IMO. It's just another example of
our Justice system. Someone convicted for cocaine possession (powder)
gets less time than someone convicted of crack (rock form) possession.

Its all cocaine, why the difference in sentences? Could it be white collar
crime vs blue collar crime?

[mrspunkysmom]

It's many things including rich vs poor. The CEO has a mess of lawyers who work for him. The robber has an overworked public defender. He should appeal though.

[wombat2u2004]

It's many things including rich vs poor. The CEO has a mess of lawyers who work for him. The robber has an overworked public defender. He should appeal though.

Then if the people are judged on the basis of rich or poor, then it is a poor system. The law is to be applied equally to all, and a good judge will know that. The Common Law does not distinguish between rich and poor. But the Common Law DOES distinguish between armed robbery and fraud.

Look at it this way..........two youths enter a convenience store.
One youth grabs a pack of cigarettes, and runs out the door.
The other youth produces a knife and tells the shopowner to give him a pack of cigarettes or else.
Both youths are caught.
Who gets the longer sentence ????

[moosmom]

The judicial system sucks, plain and simple. The judges AND prosecuting attorneys need to get off their duffs and DO THEIR JOBS the way they're supposed to be done!!!

[mrspunkysmom]

Who gets the longer sentence? The one who threatens or implies a threat. Somehow I missed that part.

However, there is still inequity. There are people that commit many crimes, a lot of them threatening and they get lesser sentences. There is bias in the system. Some of it is bigotry of some sort. Some of it is personal. (Scarsdale diet murder. she served 25 years I think, the full sentence, never having done anything wrong before that.)

Then if the people are judged on the basis of rich or poor, then it is a poor system. The law is to be applied equally to all, and a good judge will know that. The Common Law does not distinguish between rich and poor. But the Common Law DOES distinguish between armed robbery and fraud.

Look at it this way..........two youths enter a convenience store.
One youth grabs a pack of cigarettes, and runs out the door.
The other youth produces a knife and tells the shopowner to give him a pack of cigarettes or else.
Both youths are caught.
Who gets the longer sentence ????