That to me is what pushes me over the edge to jail for her: defrauding investors arguably should not involve jail time but I think knowingly playing games with medical procedures, food safety, etc. should be one of the electrified third rails that everyone knows is not worth any profit.
> there is one criminal justice system in this country. That's an illusion. There's almost no wealthy criminal that sees the walls of a prison - and if they do, they find ways to get out very quickly thanks to their connections.
In general, wealthy people make up a small proportion of the population and tend (though not always) towards greater intelligence, or at least education, than the average. Both of these factors make them less likely to show up in prisons in general. It doesn't have to be about connections and special favors. Sure, many wealthy people can afford better legal defense and the justice system definitely makes things easie…
> In general, wealthy people make up a small proportion of the population and tend (though not always) towards greater intelligence, or at least education, than the average
Because the rich won’t have any incentive to change the system otherwise.
As if the poor couldn’t vote to change things if they wanted to.
Which they have been doing, as you might have noticed. This has led to lavishly-funded opposition aimed at splitting that coalition
- note the sums poured into misrepresenting the SF DA, for example. The case of making treatment of the poor more humanely is more sympathetic so there’s every reason to believe that opposition to consequences for rich people would be _less_ well funded and more affluent people would find excuses not to support it, just as we’ve see for things like trying to get rich people to pay taxes at the same rates.
Conceiving two children while you're facing a possibly very long time in prison seems like an incredibly selfish thing to do. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
As if the poor couldn’t vote to change things if they wanted to.
Vote for whom? Which political party represents interests of the people who are looking for systematic changes in favor of the working class? It's extremely hard to democratically enact change even in countries with multiple political parties and proportional representation. The US doesn't even have that , it's an illusion of choice with 2 parties who are equally corrupt.
If this was genuinely an important issue to even just the 38 million people living under the poverty line, they could certainly find candidates. If you count low-income people as poor, you’re speaking of something like a hundred million people.
The real problem is that people simply don’t care. People are much more willing to go to the polls over their right to own guns than issues like this.
I'm not really informed about this case. Did she do any damage to people or just to capital?
Both: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1... That to me is what pushes me over the edge to jail for her: defrauding investors arguably should not involve jail time but I think knowingly playing games with medical procedures, food safety, etc. should be one of the electrified third rails that everyone knows is not worth any profit.
Are you equally as mad that there are people who walk away with 5 years in prison after performing 8-9 figures worth of unnecessary lab tests in order to bill Medicare? Or physicians who get millions in kickbacks to prescribe expensive compounded drugs that might not even work? Holmes is a drop in the bucket of overall healthcare fraud (this kind of crime has a lot of recidivists) and is probably one of the less egregious cases.
Punishment isn’t only about the crime in the past. Punishment is used as deterrence against possible future crimes by others - to show what will happen if they do something similar
I don't think it should be that, because that can cause people who committed not very serious crimes to be punished disproportionately as an example. It's unjust.
I think people who commit crimes should be seriously punished simply because of all the resources we have to spend to be vigilant against such things.
Both: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1... That to me is what pushes me over the edge to jail for her: defrauding investors arguably should not involve jail time but I think knowingly playing games with medical procedures, food safety, etc. should be one of the electrified third rails that everyone knows is not worth any profit.
Are you equally as mad that there are people who walk away with 5 years in prison after performing 8-9 figures worth of unnecessary lab tests in order to bill Medicare? Or physicians who get millions in kickbacks to prescribe expensive compounded drugs that might not even work? Holmes is a drop in the bucket of overall healthcare fraud (this kind of crime has a lot of recidivists) and is probably one of the less egre…
I do want them to face consequences, yes. Whether that’s jail time or financial ruination depends on harm - an extra test which doesn’t harm the patient is more waste than endangerment, and in this hypothetical case you also have the much harder question of proving intent. One of the other inequities of the American system is that white-collar crime usually requires you to prove not only that someone did something but also that they had criminal intention. Unless someone leaves documents showing they intended to bilk Medicare that is a tricky case of proving they didn’t reasonably want the data to rule out a possible diagnosis.
I don't think it should be that, because that can cause people who committed not very serious crimes to be punished disproportionately as an example. It's unjust.
I think people who commit crimes should be seriously punished simply because of all the resources we have to spend to be vigilant against such things.
Sure. But the punishment should be proportional to the deed not to how underfinanced is your law enforcement budget.
It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the UK system either. Bail in the UK means adherence to specific conditions, i.e. live somewhere the police can find you, stay away from the victim and don't leave the country. It doesn't involve cash changing hands. If you've done something very bad, or are a big flight risk you will not be granted bail, but again, not a money issue. The person you're responding to is refer…
Cash bail totally exists in the UK, even if uncommon. I’ve had to hand over money to get a friend out after he was arrested due to an extradition request. > If you've done something very bad, or are a big flight risk you will not be granted bail, but again, not a money issue It absolutely is a money issue. The bigger surety you can put up, the less those things matter.
It absolutely is not. It's about risk of absconding. Secondly, no, cash bail is not a thing in the UK. Someone being arrested in the UK for extradition is not part of the UK justice system, they are merely passing through at the request of a foreign nation. Unsurprisingly, foreign nationals can't have their passport taken away by a foreign country, who'd have thought?!?!??!