posted
I just had to laugh my head off at the conviction of the transient . Oh, the irony. The courts are either insane, stupid, or have a high amount of imagination.
quote:A homeless man has been sentenced to nearly four years in prison and ordered to pay more than $101 million for starting two fires
Exactly how are they going to get this money, or even a penny? I guess they might be able to garner the man's money from any job he might have; every penny. He could be both homeless and starve to death while he works, if he can, for very low wages. Then again, maybe the courts can see to the future and there is a huge lottery the man can win. They can jerry-rig the results so that the man can win and then give it all to them. It could be a felon governemnt bailout, except the government has already paid expenses. Briefly I thought maybe he has rich relatives that will have to pay the penalty, but that goes against the sense of individual responsibility jurisprudence; unless you are a company.
Then there is his incarceration for the four years. I know that prison is supposed to be a horrible place, but I know what I would want if in his situation. In the U.S. if I had no money and lived on the streets I would do whatever it took to be put into prison. There is food, shelter, books, computer usage, limited recreation, church, schooling, etc. There are only two things that make prison a bad place; limited amount of freedom and the company.
Honestly, however, I am not sure how this person could be punished. They should have skipped the fee and put him in prison for life. At any case, I can't help thinking his life is better now than it has been if it ever was.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just sent a letter saying that you are his next of kin Occasional, I'm sure you will find a solution to his problem. Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Restitution is awarded in criminal convictions based on damages, not ability to pay. The issue is "how much damage did this criminal act cause?"
There are arguments that can be made after restitution is awarded, some of which are based on ability to pay.
They pretty much never garnishee all a person's wage (prison may be an exception - I don't know).
Restitution is often not fully paid off. There are several purposes for ordering it anyway. First, it creates an official finding of the amount of monetary damage caused by the crime. Part of criminal proceedings, beyond actual punishment, is for society to recognize the wrongs done against it and its members. Second, it assigns responsibility for that damage to the person. Third, it furthers the deterrence of others who might not be as assetless as this defendant. Fourth, it provides the possibility that victims will be recompensed should the defendant's circumstances change.
quote:Then there is his incarceration for the four years. I know that prison is supposed to be a horrible place, but I know what I would want if in his situation. In the U.S. if I had no money and lived on the streets I would do whatever it took to be put into prison. There is food, shelter, books, computer usage, limited recreation, church, schooling, etc. There are only two things that make prison a bad place; limited amount of freedom and the company.
Honestly, however, I am not sure how this person could be punished. They should have skipped the fee and put him in prison for life. At any case, I can't help thinking his life is better now than it has been if it ever was.
And yet I've seen dozens of homeless people resist being sent to prison over and over again, in climates a lot less nice than California's. I suspect those who have experienced prison, homelessness, or both have a different view than you do.
As to only two things making prison bad, you're thinking of some place other than American prisons. Plus, the company is not just bad, it's very bad.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are only two things that make prison a bad place; limited amount of freedom and the company.
The "company", as you call it (and that is a nice way of putting it), is quite a big deterrent in my book.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think this may make a rather sad support for the case that helping the homeless has wider tangible benefits than are immediately obvious.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well Dag, I'd argue in some cases, that is, in some medium to low security prisons where privileges are awarded to non-violent (presumably non-rapist) prisoners, one could get along, if not very well, then at least middlingly well. There's nothing about it that would be desirable to a tax-paying citizen with other options, but I guess I could sort of imagine a situation in which prison would be an improvement for somebody with, say, a severe alcohol problem- there's access in some prisons to drug-dependency programs, educational programs, music, libraries, and doctors. Probably none of these things are that good, but some of them just might be adequate or useful for some people. I am just suggesting that there may be hope in the "rehabilitation" model for American prisons- I have occasionally heard positive stories.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
