Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 219 posts

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#61

Post by lajamerr »

Georgelemental wrote: post #53
lajamerr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a clear difference between deterring a individual and putting a amount so high it will get taglines so people will pay attention and think that could happen to them as well if they were to commit a similar crime and get caught. It's all about intentions. And I don't want my government prosecuting people and giving them high sentences just to deter other people. It's barbaric behavior. Like cutting the hand of…

> And I don't want my government prosecuting people and giving them high sentences just to deter other people. Deterrence is the whole point of punishing crime. Every society in human history has done this. It's not "barbaric," what's "barbaric" is allowing criminals to do horrible things to innocent people without any incentive against it.

Deterrence for the individual is fine only if it's made with sole intention/consideration of that individual. Additional punishment added on to deter unrelated future parties is not fine. I am not responsible for the future people and their actions.

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#62

Post by atdrummond »

crhulls wrote: post #25

I am not all sympathetic to Oberlin, but this judgement is absurd. It is many many lifetimes of income for a small bakery. Even if they were forced into bankruptcy, this is beyond the pale. "The latest amount consists of about $5 million in compensatory damages, nearly $20 million in punitive damages, $6.5 million in attorney’s fees and almost $5 million in interest." This only contributes to our litigious society wh…

$5 million in compensatory damages is far from a lifetime of income for this store. They did a very good business before Oberlin drag them through the mud and were a staple for town and gown alike. It wasn’t just a cookie and cake shop.

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#63

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

scarface74 wrote: post #54
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #43

> Carmen Twillie Ambar: archaic chase-and-detain policy regarding suspected shoplifters was the catalyst for the protests. If you witness a crime you can arrest the criminal. It's basic civics. Something you might find about in an institution of higher learning. Don't know if they have one of those in Oberlin.

Yes, what could possibly go wrong giving private citizens the right to detain other private citizens https://www.nytimes.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-shooting-georg...

The only reason police can detain people is because they are citizens. They don't have any special status that other Americans don't enjoy.

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#64

Post by kansface »

lajamerr wrote: post #31
dmitrygr wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is what punitive damages are - they are not required to be connected to the size of the damage, they are meant to punish the defendant for royally (in the judge's view) fucking up, and send a message to other similar defendants to not do such things And $5M in compensatory damages seems about right for 2 years of a successful small bakery

Honestly I'm not very keen on pinning blame/monetary responsibility on single individuals/companies to 'prevent/deter' unknown future crimes. We shouldn't be signaling with big punishments bigger than the crimes call for. We should carefully consider the crime based on the individual and how much punishment is appropriate for that individual to compensate the victim/deter that single individual/company from continuin…

Because we need incentives so that egregiously bad, intentional behavior doesn’t become a business decision for the rich.

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#65

Post by lajamerr »

soared wrote: post #58
lajamerr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I'm not very keen on pinning blame/monetary responsibility on single individuals/companies to 'prevent/deter' unknown future crimes. We shouldn't be signaling with big punishments bigger than the crimes call for. We should carefully consider the crime based on the individual and how much punishment is appropriate for that individual to compensate the victim/deter that single individual/company from continuin…

By your logic rich organizations can purposefully commit crimes against small businesses knowing the fines will be incredibly small.

There's nothing wrong with big punishments if it meets the crimes. But I shouldn't have disproportionate punishment so that my case can be used as taglines/references on "you could get this huge big punishment so don't do it."

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#66

Post by scarface74 »

atdrummond wrote: post #57
scarface74 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, what could possibly go wrong giving private citizens the right to detain other private citizens https://www.nytimes.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-shooting-georg...

Not what happened here at all.

> If you witness a crime you can arrest the criminal

He did not say “if you witness a crime you can call the police”. I don’t want a society where any random yokel thinks he can detain someone.

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#67

Post by sidewndr46 »

crhulls wrote: post #25

I am not all sympathetic to Oberlin, but this judgement is absurd. It is many many lifetimes of income for a small bakery. Even if they were forced into bankruptcy, this is beyond the pale. "The latest amount consists of about $5 million in compensatory damages, nearly $20 million in punitive damages, $6.5 million in attorney’s fees and almost $5 million in interest." This only contributes to our litigious society wh…

Hence the punitive damages. It doesn't go nearly far enough. Even if Oberlin College had to pay the $36 million (spoiler: it does not and this will never effect it financially) it would barely notice it.

To truly deter this kind of behavior, at least 40% of their endowment should be taken as punitive damages. They should be put in a bad enough situation financially that they need a bailout.

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#68

Post by lajamerr »

kansface wrote: post #64
lajamerr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I'm not very keen on pinning blame/monetary responsibility on single individuals/companies to 'prevent/deter' unknown future crimes. We shouldn't be signaling with big punishments bigger than the crimes call for. We should carefully consider the crime based on the individual and how much punishment is appropriate for that individual to compensate the victim/deter that single individual/company from continuin…

Because we need incentives so that egregiously bad, intentional behavior doesn’t become a business decision for the rich.

Punish those individuals when the time comes, punish them for the equal amount of crime they caused. Don't add additional punishment in order to add a deterrence for others.

You should not punish people to stop the future actions of unrelated people by giving certain ones bigger punishments than meets the crime.

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#69

Post by scarface74 »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #63
scarface74 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, what could possibly go wrong giving private citizens the right to detain other private citizens https://www.nytimes.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-shooting-georg...

The only reason police can detain people is because they are citizens. They don't have any special status that other Americans don't enjoy.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-qualified-immunity-and-what...

You really think any random person can detain someone? Do you also think you can force someone to stop for speeding? You can arrest someone for smoking weed as an ordinary citizen?

Do you think you can sleep with a prostitute and then arrest them?

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/20/c...

Re: After a Legal Fight, Oberlin Says It Will Pay $36.59M to a Local Bakery

#70

Post by bruce511 »

ghufran_syed wrote: post #9
PaywallBuster wrote: post #4

is this considered taxable income?

yes, but they probably have a lot of losses from the past two years they can use to offset some of the taxes

This is such a strange reply.

If the business is running at a loss (including legal fees) then yes that loss can be used to reduce the tax burden this year.

But since the loss burden is 100% [1],and the tax burden say 50% this is worse, not better. Sure the 5 million accumulated loss means 2.5 million less tax, but it also means 5 million gone to cover the losses..

[1] losses are funded from somewhere, and those funds typically have to be replaced sooner or later (or bankruptcy). Working capital, reserves, loans etc. Unless they're like listed on the stock exchange.

Post reply on HN