6 ms·

Right, if they think your "corporation" is just a shell to shield you from justice, they will just prosecute you instead of going with the charade of trying to

by moftz 6y ago

Right, if they think your "corporation" is just a shell to shield you from justice, they will just prosecute you instead of going with the charade of trying to punish your shell company. The feds rarely have trouble prosecuting someone when they want to, they've got somewhere between 95-99% conviction rate.

singlow 6y ago
I am not sure if I disagree with your main point. But the conviction rate is only proof that they don't prosecute cases when they do not have the evidence to win.
omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago
That's only for really obvious cases. Part of the problem is that a corporation can effectively distribute liability across different people/groups, so no single individual can have a really good idea, or is even aware of what's happening collectively, to facilitate bad behavior, so to speak. Doing this allows them to effectively engage in the same bad behavior an individual can, but without the risk associated with a single individual doing all of those things themselves. It also may allow them to scale better too. :/
8note 6y ago
Isn't that conviction rate based on not pursuing cases that aren't a sure shot?
- kelnos 6y ago
  Well, sure, conviction rates only cover cases when charges were filed, so we'll never know when they decided not to bring charges in the first place because the strength their case didn't meet some internal threshold. But I think the Feds are pretty good at building cases. Since it's a crime to lie to a federal investigator, all they have to do is find some fact they can prove about you that you'd be likely to lie about, and get you to lie. (Technically the lie has to be material to the investigation, but in practice any vaguely related lie seems to do.) Apparently it's often not that hard to do; they're trained to exploit the psychology of the situation to their advantage. And once you've lied, they have something on you, and they can use that as leverage to get more.

by moftz 6y ago

singlow 6y ago

I am not sure if I disagree with your main point. But the conviction rate is only proof that they don't prosecute cases when they do not have the evidence to win.

omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago

That's only for really obvious cases. Part of the problem is that a corporation can effectively distribute liability across different people/groups, so no single individual can have a really good idea, or is even aware of what's happening collectively, to facilitate bad behavior, so to speak. Doing this allows them to effectively engage in the same bad behavior an individual can, but without the risk associated with a single individual doing all of those things themselves. It also may allow them to scale better too. :/

8note 6y ago

Isn't that conviction rate based on not pursuing cases that aren't a sure shot?

kelnos 6y ago
Well, sure, conviction rates only cover cases when charges were filed, so we'll never know when they decided not to bring charges in the first place because the strength their case didn't meet some internal threshold. But I think the Feds are pretty good at building cases. Since it's a crime to lie to a federal investigator, all they have to do is find some fact they can prove about you that you'd be likely to lie about, and get you to lie. (Technically the lie has to be material to the investigation, but in practice any vaguely related lie seems to do.) Apparently it's often not that hard to do; they're trained to exploit the psychology of the situation to their advantage. And once you've lied, they have something on you, and they can use that as leverage to get more.