6 ms·
Pierce the veil and go after the family.
by throwawayjava 7y ago
Pierce the veil and go after the family.
- i_feel_great 7y agoThey are wealthy Americans. They are untouchable.
- rosybox 7y agoThis is not true, the Sackler families have already put up $4 billion dollars of their own money as part of one settlement in this and they're still being sued by others not part of the settlement. There's also a criminal investigation into members of the Sackler family.
- braindead_in 7y agoThere was a criminal investigation into Epstien as well. Look what happened to him. They even got his dead mans switch.
- riffraff 7y agoAssuming Epstein was killed, he was killed while he was in prison, both things hardly make him seem untouchable.
- i_feel_great 7y agoThe Epstein affair was not just Epstein the single individual. He could not have operated alone all these years in the way that he did. He got lenient sentences whenever he was brought to justice. The people who supported him remain untouchable.
- darawk 7y agoOk, but he was rich. And he got "touched". Therefore the rich are not untouchable, which was the original point under discussion. Just like the Sackler family does not appear to be immune from prosecution and confiscation of their property.
- TheOtherHobbes 7y agoWe don't know that he got touched. We have a press story with some unlikely events that strongly suggests he got touched. There's a between-the-wars novel by English author Evelyn Waugh called Decline and Fall. The main character gets involved in all kinds of unspeakable crimes, more out of naivety than inherent criminality, and at the end is "disappeared" out of jail and given a new identity. Waugh was an Establishment insider and knew how the upper classes operated. It's a very interesting novel. I'm not suggesting Epstein was naive - far from it. But if you're in a position to bribe prison guards and authorities to cover up murder-by-fake-suicide, I suspect it's not significantly harder or more expensive to bribe prison guards and authorities to cover up an escape. It's debatable if it would more expedient to remove the evidence permanently or have it moved to another location where some of its skills might continue to be useful. But I would be surprised if option 2 wasn't at least a possibility. As for the Sacklers - we'll see if any of them do jail time.
- selimthegrim 7y agoEpstein’s brother identified the body.
- Haga 7y agoGive genetic samples to the public.
- rosybox 7y ago> But if you're in a position to bribe prison guards and authorities to cover up murder-by-fake-suicide, I suspect it's not significantly harder or more expensive to bribe prison guards and authorities to cover up an escape. > It's debatable if it would more expedient to remove the evidence permanently or have it moved to another location where some of its skills might continue to be useful. But I would be surprised if option 2 wasn't at least a possibility. To think any of this is plausible given the context requires an unwell mind.
- mikeash 7y agoThe rich are touchable if and only if they harm other rich people. See also: Bernie Madoff.
- luckydata 7y ago$4B is peanuts. I would put them in front of a firing squad for all the damage and suffering they caused.
- fucking_tragedy 7y ago> This is not true It is true. The Sacklers will never see the inside of a prison and will remain billionaires after the lawsuits and settlements.
- TAForObvReasons 7y agoNot sure why this is downvoted. Shuffling assets and liabilities to protect from bankruptcy proceedings is a common crime and happens every day to companies large and small. The veil can be pierced if it can be established that key people were aware of the situation. Unfortunately it just means this process will be dragged on for years and it is unlikely to recover much from the Sacklers
- grumpydba 7y agoAfter all they are responsible for thousands of deaths. And they knew it. I don't know why they aren't in jail already.
- cies 7y agoThat's because of the "limited" of private limited. (Under capitalism) many costs of having PtLds are externalized.
- smhost 7y agois that inherent? i haven't read Capital, but this doesn't seem so much of an inherent problem with capitalism than it seems like a very dumb implementation liability protection.
- filleokus 7y agoWhat do you suggest instead? The possibility to bankrupt a company without losing more than you put into the venture is in my eyes a feature of capitalism, not a bug.
- NeedMoreTea 7y agoIt's a feature when it's good faith efforts. It's very clearly a bug when it's used to evade no end of abuse, illegality and fraud, or to avoid paying the pollution cleanup. There probably needs to be some exceptional way in law to pierce the shell of limited liability and go after officers, perhaps even claw back from investors and shareholders.
- cies 7y agosee my sibling comment
- tomp 7y agoLimited liability only protects the capital of the shareholders, it doesn't protect the management of the company against criminal prosecution. (In practice, however, managers are only rarely put in jail, both because it's notoriously difficult to prove white-collar crime (except in few cases, like insider trading, which are the pursued with extra vigor), and because CEOs are generally rich and well connected... but the problem there is corruption, not some inherent feature/bug of the idea of limited liability company.)
- vlan0 7y agoI bet we could easily figure out where they live.
- gwright 7y agoHow about we stay away from nasty mob tactics?
- vlan0 7y agoI'm suggesting we launch a mental warfare campaign on the guilty. The system is bought by folks like these. If you think the system will punish them, then I suggest taking a look at precedence for folks like them. It's not in the favor of the general public.