6 ms·

The craziest thing about this is that if Jeff didn't conduct all his (illegal) business on his work laptop, he may never have been caught. And, the only reason

by zlast 7y ago

The craziest thing about this is that if Jeff didn't conduct all his (illegal) business on his work laptop, he may never have been caught. And, the only reason HR decided to look at his laptop was to find "a copy of a commission structure to build out the corporate sales team" that Jeff was supposed to leave behind before he left for another job.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
yitchelle 7y ago
I guess he needed to use his laptop to ensure that deal looks legit.
- CharlesColeman 7y ago
  > I guess he needed to use his laptop to ensure that deal looks legit. I think that's true for his work email, but he could probably have gotten away with using a different laptop for the files.
- stefan_ 7y ago
  Take another one? I'm not sure what this means. Do you screen your work colleagues laptops?
kbar13 7y ago
the deal with golden1 would probably have looked weird a few years down the line when the payments didn't match up
- x0x0 7y ago
  Yeah, I don't understand what the plan was for 20 years from now when the contract gets renegotiated. Maybe he figured corporate amnesia would have set in. Still, it seems like there are easier ways to make more money. eg if you're a really good salesperson, there are plenty of companies -- mine included -- that will happily double or triple that $360k/year.
  - ip26 7y ago
    20 years from now, statute of limitations, right?
    - ranDOMscripts 7y ago
      not only that, 20 years from now = new ownership group and records get lost in the shuffle
- ghostbrainalpha 7y ago
  That's the stupidest thing. He would have been busted for sure, but there is no reason he couldn't have reduced the "Upfront" money he took by $500,000 to begin with. If everything had matched up perfectly at the end, there is little reason for anyone to ever look into anything. He also maybe have parked the stolen money in an offshore account for a few years, and not gone crazy shopping before he even left that job. Like seriously, do none of his coworkers who know how much he makes wonder about the size of his mansions?
  - detaro 7y ago
    500,000, later 1,000,000, per year. See the table in the article: the overall sum of the contract didn't change, he asked for 9 million to be paid earlier than initially planned. They'd somehow have to reappear entirely later for everything to look clean.
clairity 7y ago
yes, exactly. he covered his tracks pretty well otherwise, but he apparently lacked a fundamental understanding of how corporate computing assets are managed. it's good that he was caught and punished, especially since white-collar crimes are relatively under-prosecuted. i'm more mixed about the severity of punishment--restitution plus 7 years in prison. on one hand, it seems fair relative to the sentence lengths of other crimes, but prison terms seem onerous and overly-punitive overall to me.
- asdff 7y ago
  I steal a watch, it gets returned, I go to jail. That's more or less been the story since written law. This guy steals 13 million dollars, it gets returned, and you say he shouldn't go to jail?
  - nfoz 7y ago
    Sure jail for a day or few maybe. Would cause tremendous discomfort and embarrassment IMO. But years?? For either of these crimes, sounds crazy. I see jails as a way to remove people who could be violent out of society while they can receive sober reflection, counselling, etc. But to toss around an arbitrary number of years for nonviolent offences sounds vindictive and terrifying.
    - clairity 7y ago
      yes, some jail is warranted, but the magnitudes of the crimes make a difference. a few days for a watch. a couple years maybe (what the defense had hoped for) for millions of dollars, because that represents stealing a few dozen person-years of economic output (not to mention the non-monetary aspects).
      - Gibbon1 7y ago
        I rolled that around in my brain for a decade and eventually decided people who commit financial crimes need to have a day in prison tacked onto their sentence for every $1000 they steal. Under that scheme Jeff Davis dies in prison. And that shouldn't be anything we should care about.

by zlast 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

yitchelle 7y ago

I guess he needed to use his laptop to ensure that deal looks legit.

CharlesColeman 7y ago
> I guess he needed to use his laptop to ensure that deal looks legit. I think that's true for his work email, but he could probably have gotten away with using a different laptop for the files.
stefan_ 7y ago
Take another one? I'm not sure what this means. Do you screen your work colleagues laptops?

kbar13 7y ago

the deal with golden1 would probably have looked weird a few years down the line when the payments didn't match up

x0x0 7y ago
Yeah, I don't understand what the plan was for 20 years from now when the contract gets renegotiated. Maybe he figured corporate amnesia would have set in. Still, it seems like there are easier ways to make more money. eg if you're a really good salesperson, there are plenty of companies -- mine included -- that will happily double or triple that $360k/year.
- ip26 7y ago
  20 years from now, statute of limitations, right?
  - ranDOMscripts 7y ago
    not only that, 20 years from now = new ownership group and records get lost in the shuffle
ghostbrainalpha 7y ago
That's the stupidest thing. He would have been busted for sure, but there is no reason he couldn't have reduced the "Upfront" money he took by $500,000 to begin with. If everything had matched up perfectly at the end, there is little reason for anyone to ever look into anything. He also maybe have parked the stolen money in an offshore account for a few years, and not gone crazy shopping before he even left that job. Like seriously, do none of his coworkers who know how much he makes wonder about the size of his mansions?
- detaro 7y ago
  500,000, later 1,000,000, per year. See the table in the article: the overall sum of the contract didn't change, he asked for 9 million to be paid earlier than initially planned. They'd somehow have to reappear entirely later for everything to look clean.

clairity 7y ago

yes, exactly. he covered his tracks pretty well otherwise, but he apparently lacked a fundamental understanding of how corporate computing assets are managed. it's good that he was caught and punished, especially since white-collar crimes are relatively under-prosecuted. i'm more mixed about the severity of punishment--restitution plus 7 years in prison. on one hand, it seems fair relative to the sentence lengths of other crimes, but prison terms seem onerous and overly-punitive overall to me.

asdff 7y ago
I steal a watch, it gets returned, I go to jail. That's more or less been the story since written law. This guy steals 13 million dollars, it gets returned, and you say he shouldn't go to jail?
- nfoz 7y ago
  Sure jail for a day or few maybe. Would cause tremendous discomfort and embarrassment IMO. But years?? For either of these crimes, sounds crazy. I see jails as a way to remove people who could be violent out of society while they can receive sober reflection, counselling, etc. But to toss around an arbitrary number of years for nonviolent offences sounds vindictive and terrifying.
  - clairity 7y ago
    yes, some jail is warranted, but the magnitudes of the crimes make a difference. a few days for a watch. a couple years maybe (what the defense had hoped for) for millions of dollars, because that represents stealing a few dozen person-years of economic output (not to mention the non-monetary aspects).
    - Gibbon1 7y ago
      I rolled that around in my brain for a decade and eventually decided people who commit financial crimes need to have a day in prison tacked onto their sentence for every $1000 they steal. Under that scheme Jeff Davis dies in prison. And that shouldn't be anything we should care about.