posted
Indeed, I absolutely gloat. I sniggert, snortle, and chigger. News link. Seems comrade Hovind is as good at law as he is at geology, biology, and all those other subjects he sullies with his willful stupidity.It is an absolute pleasure to see him come up against someone who can insist that arguments should be honest, rebuttals not ignored, and - best of all - will lock him up if he loses the argument. Go, IRS!
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't approve of gloating at other people's misfortune.
That is not, however what's going on here. Misfortune is bad luck, something that can't be predicted or prevented. Hovind tried to defraud the government and it didn't work. Laugh away.
As someone who knows what it's like to pay employers taxes and has suffered through a tax burden that seems to be inordinately high on small businesses, I have no sympathy for someone who makes that kind of money but doesn't pay his taxes.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
(though Belle is correct in that this technically isn't schadenfreude. Just couldn't resist posting the link.)
Posts: 1805 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I disagree; it may not be misfortune I'm gloating at, but I'm certainly taking pleasure in other people's problems. 'Schade' might best be translated as 'injury' or more idiomatically as 'Bad Stuff'; it doesn't say anything about luck.
Anyway, it seems Hovind's fortune wasn't that great for him after all. Bwah-hah! Eat hot non-divine justice, scumbag! Now also with puns!
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always thought he was baselessly arrogant. In this case I believe Schadenfreude Pie is absolutely called for. As is jailtime.
Posts: 1156 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Guilty as charged! Victory is ours! Now, let's just hope the judge has hemorrhoids, just paid a huge amount of taxes, and feels like really cracking down on cheaters. Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wish news reports wouldn't put the maximum sentence only "faces up to 228 years in prison" when reporting possible sentences. It's terribly misleading - in many cases, multiple counts don't lead to consecutive sentences, so when the person gets 5 years (example only - I have no idea what the typical sentence for this crime is) people think he got off easy.
They ought to report the heartland of the sentencing guidelines or ask someone who knows that typical sentences are for first offenders.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
An interesting point : There were 58 counts, and the jury was out for three hours. That gives them about three minutes to the count. Quick work! Seems the prosecution did its work well - not least, chucking out any fanatical creationists from the jury. If you look at the comments section of the link, it certainly seems there are people who would have let him off.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
See Part T on this page for typical sentences.
Guesing the total tax loss from the $845,000 mentioned, then he's at offense level 18 or 19.
The aggregate amount is used for multiple offenses of similar type according to this rule plus adding 5 offense levels, putting him at 24 or so.
Based on that, the heartland sentence is 51-63 months (making my 5 year guess not so bad).
I skipped many steps that could increase that, though. He probably gets an additional 2 levels for impeding the investigation, making it 63-78 months, and if he has a criminal history it will increase more.
My guess for Dr. Dino is 6 years, with the caveat that depending on how the crimes are grouped, it could be significantly higher. Also, the judge can depart up or down now, so this is really a guess.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
He will serve the entire sentence he's given barring some exceptional circumstance - there's no parole in the federal system any more.
However, he may be given a mixed sentence - prison plus home detention plus probation, for example. But once that's set, he'll serve it.
Technically, judges can revisit sentences at any time (downward only, of course), but will do so only for rare events - compassionate release for health, rewarding someone who helps convict someone else, etc.
Fastow, the architect of the Enron scandal, only got 6 years, but the judge knocked 4 years off an already sweet plea deal for Fastow's help nailing Lay and what's-his-name, Skilling.
Edit: and if you're following this story, please bump this when he's sentenced so I can check my guess.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
After reading the article, it looks like Hovind definitely had it coming. He almost certainly knew he was breaking the law, and just didn't care. I was unaware that his nuttiness extended wayyyy beyond the whole "Dr. Dino" thing, which was nutty enough in its own right.
Dagonee, I didn't realize there were formulas for calculating sentences like that. Thanks for a fascinating explanation!
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks, Shigosei. Federal sentencing is very complex. Until sometime last year, these ranges were mandatory - decisions to go outside them could be overturned on appeal and higher sentences could be imposed. Many of the facts that determined the ranges were determined by the judge, not the jury.
For example, a person convicted of possession of, say, 20 g of cocaine could (but not any more) be sentenced for having 500 g. This philosophy is called "true offense sentencing" and the idea is to have the judge set the sentence based on what was done, not the few elements that make up the definition of the crime.
This philosophy is actually of (legal) liberal origins - its greatest proponent on the court is Breyer. The decisions overturning the mandatory nature of the guidelines had Breyer joining all the conservatives except Scalia and Thomas. Scalia was actually the swing vote in determining the limits of the judge-found facts in sentencing, which is very unusual.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Woo-hoo! 120 months in jail, plus some supervision time; restitution to the tune of 600 thousand; minor court costs; and - cherry on top, as it were - a fine of 200 dollars. That must be the judge really stretching the book to throw whatever he can at the scum. I'm going to be happy all day, now. Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
He created a place called, "Dinosaur Adventure Land?"
I'd visit just once because I am sure it would be an interesting experience.
And on day 4, also known as the "Cretaceous period," God created Tyrannosaurus Rex! The dinosaurs all went extinct on day 5.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
I wish I could see the guidelines workup they did. I'm betting that the bank reporting violations were grouped seperately from the tax violations - the fine total seems to indicate this.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Darn, off by 4 years.
I wish I could see the guidelines workup they did. I'm betting that the bank reporting violations were grouped seperately from the tax violations - the fine total seems to indicate this.
Hey Dag, defense attorneys obviously are happy when the defendant gets a less harsh sentence, even more so if he is exonerated. Do prosecution attorneys become more happy as the fines and jail time increase? Is there a point of diminishing returns? Or are they typically just happy to obtain a conviction?
edit: Obviously this assumes that the defense attorney believes he is defending a truly innocent man/woman.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Do prosecution attorneys become more happy as the fines and jail time increase?
Some do no matter what, which I think violates the spirit of the job.
A defense attorney's job is to achieve the best outcome for his client he can within the bounds of the law and ethical rules - with best outcome likely being "least time for my client." He is perfectly justified in being happy when he gets a guilty client off - he has done his job, and it's an important job. The prosecutor's job is not the opposite of the defense attorney's job. He is supposed to seek a just resolution, which does not mean the max for everything. (By definition, if a legislature put in sentencing ranges for a given offense, then only the "worst" instances of that offense should get the max, with "worst" taking into account a lot of different things.)
Most prosecutors do become more happy the closer the sentences are to what they consider to be just - which often means "higher" than what the judge gave or higher than an average citizen would consider.
quote:Obviously this assumes that the defense attorney believes he is defending a truly innocent man/woman.
Caught this edit. As I said above, I don't think that's true. A defense attorney getting someone an acquittal can be happy even if he knows the defendant did the crime, because we don't put people who did the crime in jail. We put people who were proved beyond a reasonable doubt to have done the crime in jail.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
(As an aside, one of my teachers in HS was a former defense attorney who said he "never asked" his clients about their guilt or innocence. Food for thought.)
posted
The comments accompanying the article are kind of interesting. I'm bothered by the people who are defending his behavior because they feel his ministry is beneficial or because he is a "good Christian." Nope, sorry, not a blank check to break the law. (And I don't think he was confused about whether he was breaking the law, either. He knew what he was doing.)
What really gets me is this comment: "Hovind rendered unto God what is Gods and refused to bow the knee and grant the IRS god rule over his tongue."
And what was Jesus talking about with the whole render unto thing? Oh, yeah. Paying taxes. Ironic, isn't it? Alas, Hovind failed to remember the bit that came before, about rendering unto Caesar (or George, as we call him these days). I suppose he can always hope an angel will come to break him out of jail. Or maybe an earthquake.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
