Sentencing options - you decide.
- Thread starter anglolawyer
- Start date
anglolawyer
Banned
OK, my bedtime is about 10 p.m. GMT and I will post the answers about half an hour before that, in a bit more than three hours from now. Amazed by some of the answers but I think the real answers are pretty amazing too.
My recommendations:
A/ Keeping in mind the lengthy nature of the fraud and the previous convictions, ten years in prison and seizure of all assets;
B/ Sounds like it would be called reckless driving in the U.S., but no accident or injuries, which usually gets a fat fine and a license suspension. $500, 30 days no driving.
C/ Fraud and conspiracy, but nobody injured and no money collected. 30 days jail, couple years probation, fat fine depending on the defendants' resources.
A/ Keeping in mind the lengthy nature of the fraud and the previous convictions, ten years in prison and seizure of all assets;
B/ Sounds like it would be called reckless driving in the U.S., but no accident or injuries, which usually gets a fat fine and a license suspension. $500, 30 days no driving.
C/ Fraud and conspiracy, but nobody injured and no money collected. 30 days jail, couple years probation, fat fine depending on the defendants' resources.
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 36,711
750 mil - that's got to draw several years' worth of jail time (and restitution orders). Presumably the number of years might depend on how much of the money can pay back and the extent of the prior offences.
The Land Rover guy - seems he should be able to stay out of jail if he pays a fine and costs.
The contempt guys - usually contempt involves jail time here but not always. I'd give them 30 days.
ETA: Ah, I see further details now and will change the Land Rover guy to revocation of licence and a short jail sentence - didn't realize that when he did it twice, that meant he'd been caught twice and that he'd been charged with dangerous driving. So, I'd say 60 days.
The Land Rover guy - seems he should be able to stay out of jail if he pays a fine and costs.
The contempt guys - usually contempt involves jail time here but not always. I'd give them 30 days.
ETA: Ah, I see further details now and will change the Land Rover guy to revocation of licence and a short jail sentence - didn't realize that when he did it twice, that meant he'd been caught twice and that he'd been charged with dangerous driving. So, I'd say 60 days.
Last edited:
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,196
I am surprised at how many want to put these guys in prison when they pose no danger to others. Prison is good for putting away nuts who put others at risk or habitual offenders where all else fails, for pretty much everything else it is rubbish.
anglolawyer
Banned
Yes, my fault. Land Rover guy faced two charges of dangerous driving and one of breach of bail as he failed to show up for a hearing. Please feel free to amend his sentence as you (and everyone else also) see fit.
I should have disqualified LashL from this as she has specialist knowledge. What the heck. Too late now.
Hercules Rockefeller
Woof!
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2011
- Messages
- 4,504
Well, I'm just guessing based on what they could face in Denmark.
Case A
5-7 years in prison.
Case B
A fine (perhaps).
Case C
120 days suspended prison + fine.
Case A
5-7 years in prison.
Case B
A fine (perhaps).
Case C
120 days suspended prison + fine.
After posting my prediction, I looked up a bit more about case B.
Seems that there were multiple components to any punishment he received, one of which related to him not appearing at trial though on bail.
btw. it was a Vauxhall Frontera (which IMO should have attracted a 20 year sentence for merely driving it
)
Seems that there were multiple components to any punishment he received, one of which related to him not appearing at trial though on bail.
btw. it was a Vauxhall Frontera (which IMO should have attracted a 20 year sentence for merely driving it
)
Last edited:
Prison is a strong deterrent to others contemplating similar crimes. A con man sees fines as just the cost of doing business, but the prospect of hard time might cause him to think twice, especially in the case of a banker or broker who can earn a pretty good living honestly.
At least in my case I didn't put down what I think they deserved, I put down what I thought they'd get.
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 36,711
Ah, in that case, I'd up my guess on Land Rover guy's sentence to 60 days for the first dangerous driving; 120 days for the second dangerous driving; and another 60 days for the fail to appear, for a total of 8 months (and licence revocation for a year).
The mortgage fraudsters, I'll leave at several years - minimum of 5 -depending on how much restitution they make, etc. and the contempt guys, I'll leave at 30 days.
anglolawyer
Banned
After posting my prediction, I looked up a bit more about case B.
Seems that there were multiple components to any punishment he received, one of which related to him not appearing at trial though on bail.
btw. it was a Vauxhall Frontera (which IMO should have attracted a 20 year sentence for merely driving it
LOL
Well, to be fair, I did mention the components at the start:
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 12,637
Actually, punative penalties generally only deter people who are unlikely to commit crimes in the first place. For most actual criminals, penalties are really no deterence at all, they don't fear the penalty/incarceration and most really do not believe they will be caught or punished. The only time deterence works is when people attach severe negative consequences to their potential actions and when they are pretty sure that they are going to get caught and punished for their actions if they attempt to commit them.
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,196
I think watching all of his assets being taken away and the prospect of life long supervision is more effective than locking them up to share their skills with other criminals.
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,196
....
btw. it was a Vauxhall Frontera (which IMO should have attracted a 20 year sentence for merely driving it
OK I do remember that one, but not the punishment, I did not even know the driver had been caught. It was Jeremy Clarkson who drove a Discovery to the top of a mountain.
I have another suggestion
D - what should be the punishment for being Jeremy Clarkson?
stilicho
Trurl's Electronic Bard
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 4,757
I don't know about the others but, in this case, it boils down to whether the deals can be safely unwound and the capital recovered. If they can be then I'd recommend a suspended sentence and revocation of the applicable licence for a reasonable term.
anglolawyer
Banned
On deterrence we can only know if it works we re-run the software with no deterrence in it. Which is kinda difficult. Many years ago the NYPD went on strike for one day and if I recall correctly there was lots of crime and disorder. In August last year, there was a widespread breakdown in public order in the UK, ignited by the cops shooting a guy dead in some inner city area of London. The rioting and looting there was copied in many places throughout the country. Heavy sentences were imposed on those convicted. Many thousands work in positions of trust in which they could quite easily steal serious amounts of money. Were it not for deterrence would not more of them be tempted? A little while ago I came close to being disqualified from driving. I had time to contemplate the prospect and I did not like it. I have amended my driving considerably, mainly because of this deterrent. I believe in deterrence but don't expect to much of it.
anglolawyer
Banned
Life imprisonment - at least
