4 ms·

This does not seem like justice to me. Are people actually okay with this? I feel like this is something we'd read about the king doing in the medieval ages and

by Sargos 6y ago

This does not seem like justice to me. Are people actually okay with this? I feel like this is something we'd read about the king doing in the medieval ages and grimace while being glad we live in a "civilized" society. What if he's lying? The state might lose out on some old artifacts. There is also ample opportunity and time for authorities to investigate and track this man and the stolen coins as he will be watched like a hawk until they are recovered. What if he's telling the truth? An innocent man is having his entire life taken away. This is a worse punishment than for anything short of first degree murder. Some gold coins vs a human being's life. The choice seems easy to me and it's bewildering that it's not easy for others as well.

exged 6y ago
It's not just some gold coins, it's also the matter of $12.7 million invested in his research endeavor. If you raised $12.7 million to start a company like Theranos you'd also be looking at a steep prison sentence for securities fraud.
- Sargos 6y ago
  I would be tried for fraud like Elizabeth Holmes is where evidence is presented. She is not currently in prison and has been living in a luxury apartment rather than a COVID dungeon like this man has been in for 5 years without trial.
  - phsau 6y ago
    I'm not sure you read the entire article. It's not simply being in contempt of the court for failing to provide information on the asset location, but for refusing to uphold the plea bargain in which he provides limited power of attorney to investigate the trust held in Belize. You can't in good faith claim you can't remember and also refuse to assist in any capacity. He would be free if he provided the power of attorney.
    - pmoriarty 6y ago
      So it basically all comes down to money. If you believe his punishment is just you should believe in debtors' prisons. If you don't believe in debtors' prisons, you should object to this.
darkerside 6y ago
If he's telling the truth then he could sign the LPOA, get the assets located, and move on with his life.
polartx 6y ago
I don’t think you read the article. He’s not being held because the greedy state wants the gold for themselves and he won’t let them have it. He’s being held because he defrauded the investors that funded his treasure hunt and went on the run. The trial can’t begin because those he defrauded cannot be made whole, when he’s clearly in possession of a critical piece of evidence but is refusing to cooperate. Would you feel the same way of Bernie Madoff was better at hiding his stolen money and so he had to wait in jail longer before they started the trial while the investigators looked for it?
- Sargos 6y ago
  >Would you feel the same way of Bernie Madoff was better at hiding his stolen money and so he had to wait in jail longer before they started the trial while the investigators looked for it? If they have evidence that he defrauded people then he should stand trial. If they need to find the money because it is the evidence then no he should definitely not be in jail while they go on fishing expeditions to actually see if he's truly guilty or not. You go to jail when you've been proven guilty in a court of law, not just because some people think you're a bad person. That's the road to a bad society to live in. Granted you do have a point about him not giving them his right of attorney which looks shady but I'm clearly on the side of "It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer"
  - FpUser 6y ago
    >""It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer" 100% Agree.
  - eesmith 6y ago
    Your statement "You go to jail when you've been proven guilty in a court of law" is incorrect. You can also plead guilty before a court trial, and go to jail as a result. I believe most guilty judgements end this way. His Wikipedia entry at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Gregory_Thompson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Gregory_Thompson points out: > On 28 November 2018 a jury awarded Investors $19.4 million in compensatory damages—$3.2 Million to the Dispatch Printing Company (which had put up $1 million of $22 million invested) and $16.2 million to the court-appointed receiver of the other investors In this CBS article we read that Tommy Thompson plead guilty, so what do you mean by saying that he needs to stand trial even after he plead guilty? Quoting the article: > Thompson pleaded guilty for his failure to appear and was sentenced to two years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Thompson's criminal sentence has been delayed until the issue of the gold coins is resolved. > That April 2015 plea deal required Thompson to answer questions in closed-door sessions about the whereabouts of the coins, which the government says are worth $2 million to $4 million. Importantly, he must also "assist" interested parties in finding the coins under that deal. He broke the terms of the plea deal. Is that what you want the trial to be about? Also from the CBS article, > Thompson hasn't just refused to answer questions, the court ruled: He's also violated the requirement that he "assist" the parties by refusing to execute a limited power of attorney to allow that Belizean trust to be examined, as required under his plea deal. How is that a 'fishing expedition'? Fraud was proven, the key person says the stolen coins are held by a Belizean trust, the key person agrees to provide access to the trust in exchange for a plea deal, then refuses to honor that deal. How do you figure that Thompson is "innocent" here?

by Sargos 6y ago

exged 6y ago

It's not just some gold coins, it's also the matter of $12.7 million invested in his research endeavor. If you raised $12.7 million to start a company like Theranos you'd also be looking at a steep prison sentence for securities fraud.

Sargos 6y ago
I would be tried for fraud like Elizabeth Holmes is where evidence is presented. She is not currently in prison and has been living in a luxury apartment rather than a COVID dungeon like this man has been in for 5 years without trial.
- phsau 6y ago
  I'm not sure you read the entire article. It's not simply being in contempt of the court for failing to provide information on the asset location, but for refusing to uphold the plea bargain in which he provides limited power of attorney to investigate the trust held in Belize. You can't in good faith claim you can't remember and also refuse to assist in any capacity. He would be free if he provided the power of attorney.
  - pmoriarty 6y ago
    So it basically all comes down to money. If you believe his punishment is just you should believe in debtors' prisons. If you don't believe in debtors' prisons, you should object to this.

darkerside 6y ago

If he's telling the truth then he could sign the LPOA, get the assets located, and move on with his life.

polartx 6y ago

I don’t think you read the article. He’s not being held because the greedy state wants the gold for themselves and he won’t let them have it. He’s being held because he defrauded the investors that funded his treasure hunt and went on the run. The trial can’t begin because those he defrauded cannot be made whole, when he’s clearly in possession of a critical piece of evidence but is refusing to cooperate. Would you feel the same way of Bernie Madoff was better at hiding his stolen money and so he had to wait in jail longer before they started the trial while the investigators looked for it?

Sargos 6y ago
>Would you feel the same way of Bernie Madoff was better at hiding his stolen money and so he had to wait in jail longer before they started the trial while the investigators looked for it? If they have evidence that he defrauded people then he should stand trial. If they need to find the money because it is the evidence then no he should definitely not be in jail while they go on fishing expeditions to actually see if he's truly guilty or not. You go to jail when you've been proven guilty in a court of law, not just because some people think you're a bad person. That's the road to a bad society to live in. Granted you do have a point about him not giving them his right of attorney which looks shady but I'm clearly on the side of "It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer"
- FpUser 6y ago
  >""It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer" 100% Agree.
- eesmith 6y ago
  Your statement "You go to jail when you've been proven guilty in a court of law" is incorrect. You can also plead guilty before a court trial, and go to jail as a result. I believe most guilty judgements end this way. His Wikipedia entry at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Gregory_Thompson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Gregory_Thompson points out: > On 28 November 2018 a jury awarded Investors $19.4 million in compensatory damages—$3.2 Million to the Dispatch Printing Company (which had put up $1 million of $22 million invested) and $16.2 million to the court-appointed receiver of the other investors In this CBS article we read that Tommy Thompson plead guilty, so what do you mean by saying that he needs to stand trial even after he plead guilty? Quoting the article: > Thompson pleaded guilty for his failure to appear and was sentenced to two years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Thompson's criminal sentence has been delayed until the issue of the gold coins is resolved. > That April 2015 plea deal required Thompson to answer questions in closed-door sessions about the whereabouts of the coins, which the government says are worth $2 million to $4 million. Importantly, he must also "assist" interested parties in finding the coins under that deal. He broke the terms of the plea deal. Is that what you want the trial to be about? Also from the CBS article, > Thompson hasn't just refused to answer questions, the court ruled: He's also violated the requirement that he "assist" the parties by refusing to execute a limited power of attorney to allow that Belizean trust to be examined, as required under his plea deal. How is that a 'fishing expedition'? Fraud was proven, the key person says the stolen coins are held by a Belizean trust, the key person agrees to provide access to the trust in exchange for a plea deal, then refuses to honor that deal. How do you figure that Thompson is "innocent" here?