4 ms·
Should either be in jail at all? They aren't a physical threat and anything Elizabeth does now will be watched like a hawk. Same with SBF. Just garnish their
by memish 4y ago
Should either be in jail at all? They aren't a physical threat and anything Elizabeth does now will be watched like a hawk.
Same with SBF.
Just garnish their income for life or until they make their victims whole.
- flatiron 4y agoThere has to be some punishment. If I steal $100 from you and the risk is I get caught and all I would have to do is give it back then there would be a lot more white collar crime.
- bombcar 4y agoExactly - taking away freedom is really the only penalty you can apply to white collar crime, or the risk/reward would be grossly in favor of committing the crime - even income garnishments can't push you to absolute zero.
- Laforet 4y agoBefore modern bankruptcy laws, it was common for people who owe a lot of money to go to debtor's prison (and this still happens in some parts of the world with more archaic legal systems). At a glance it may seem contradictory since locking someone up would probably preclude any chance the debtor might have to make money towards the debt but the optics of getting punished for wrongdoing is clearly more important here.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> aren't a physical threat and anything Elizabeth does now will be watched like a hawk Wasn't she trying to raise money for a start-up while on trial? > Same with SBF Isn't he trying to raise money right now?
- hn_throwaway_99 4y agoThis stance is absolutely baffling to me. Just goes to show how our attitudes towards white collar crime (which is orders of magnitude more lucrative than most petty crime) are grossly out of proportion to the harm they cause compared to, say, a car thief.
- memish 4y agoIt's about reoffense, so it's specific to the type. Elizabeth Holmes and SBF needed people to give them a lot of money. They won't be able to do that again without some serious redemption arc. Also their activity would be watched closely and income garnished.
- munificent 4y agoThe punishment is only partially about Holmes, and largely about the message it sends to the potential future Holmeses of the world.
- zajio1am 4y agoI agree that in contrast to regular crime, there is no need for prison for incapacitation purpose of punishment, some record forbidding any kind of entrepreneurship or managerial posts would be enough. For reparation purpose of punishment, garnishing the income would be enough. But there is still deterrence purpose of punishment - if you remove prison from considerations, it significantly changes risk calculations for white collar crime making it much more profitable.