4 ms·

This isn't a sentence. This isn't a crime being punished. It's civil contempt. It's designed to coerce the person in custody into complying with the court order

• tannhauser23 8y ago
  Except that at the end of the civil contempt confinement the prosecutors often file criminal contempt charges.
  • thrill 8y ago
    Civil contempt can be generally viewed as (not) doing something for the benefit of the complainant. In criminal contempt it's for the benefit (or protection of the sanctity) of the court itself.
• gnode 8y ago
  That doesn't mean that the coercion couldn't be: pay a fine for each day you fail to comply, as is commonly used to coerce corporate persons. Putting someone in a cell for something when they're not a danger or flight risk is barbarism.
  • learc83 8y ago
    The most common reason for holding someone in contempt is for refusing to follow an order to pay money. Ordering them to pay more money isn't going to be effective. There really isn't anything else you can do. You can take their stuff, but if they had assets that could easily be seized, you would do that in the first place. Corporations can be fined into compliance because making money is generally a corporation's only purpose. The closest equivalent for and individual is removing time from their life--jail time. A jail cell is basically the last resort to force compliance. It's also what will eventually happen to individuals running a corporation if they keep defying court orders.
    • gnode 8y ago
      That's true, but in this case it's not being used as a last resort, but seemingly as a matter of course.