10 ms·

If you steal more than $5K three times in California, you will get 25 years in prison [1], and while I think that's disgusting and detestable, I don't want any

If you steal more than $5K three times in California, you will get 25 years in prison [1], and while I think that's disgusting and detestable, I don't want any elites getting special treatment either, so as to force change in those sentencing guidelines. [1] https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html

throwaway5959 4y ago
It's pretty disgusting how little jail time she's receiving for the scope of her crimes.
- sebzim4500 4y ago
  11 years is quite a long time and seems suitable for scamming some idiots out of their money. IMO the reason it seems low is that people get such unreasonably long sentences for doing far less.
  - stametseater 4y ago
    > suitable for scamming some idiots out of their money. Agreed. Of course she deserves more prison time for scamming the patients, but she wasn't convicted for that.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > 11 years is quite a long time And 11 federal years is a longer sentence than 11 years in most state systems, since there is much less opportunity to serve less than a full sentence in the federal system (short of executive pardon/commutation). There’s very limited good conduct time, but no systematic parole eligibility and early release.
  - 00F_ 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - sebzim4500 4y ago
      I'm not saying all rich people are idiots, just the ones that invested in Theranos.
- adrr 4y ago
  Stealing tens of millions from VC funds that have multi billion dollar portfolios. Thats the scope. Compared to stealing catalytic converter off someone making $40k a year and who has $2,000 in the bank and will need to spend half their savings to replace their catalytic converter.
IIAOPSW 4y ago
Right, but Holmes didn't steal $5k more than three times. She stole millions of dollars but only did it once. So your statute doesn't apply.
- arthurcolle 4y ago
  Can't tell if serious. Can you see how the second might be seen as worse than the first? Literally perverse incentives. "Go big or go home" and no worries! Couple years in Federal summer camp and you go back to your cushy upper class lifestyle as a consultant or startup advisor, or "executive coaching" for other future/wannabe scammers
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - gumby 4y ago
    To me it seems to be clearly pointing out the injustice of the "three strikes" law.
  - IIAOPSW 4y ago
    You may not like it but that is in fact the letter of the law. The letter does not get bent to produce the outcome that feels more fair or just. To do so is to abandon the principle of rule of law to begin with. You probably should learn at some point, the legal system is basically a pedantic genie interpreting 3 wishes. "oh I wish the 3 strikes law applied to people like Holmes as well." "Granted". Don't blame me. Make better wishes.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  She only got caught once, but as an ongoing thing I think it's safe to say that she stole more than once.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - IIAOPSW 4y ago
gumby 4y ago
> I don't want any elites getting special treatment either... These days I normally roll my eyes and stop reading when I encounter someone saying "the elites" but in this case it is 100% appropriate: she was a member of a wealthy elite, and both deliberately and casually used her connections from the get go.
- explaininjs 4y ago
  Did you mean "causally"? Not sure the degree of formality is relevant.
  - pianoben 4y ago
    As an idiom "casually used her connections" can mean "without due consideration" or "without compunction". It implies that "using her connections" was an easy and simple choice for her, as opposed to one in which she wrestled with the moral dimension.
  - gumby 4y ago
    No, (and I'm not sure that "causally" would even result in a comprehensible sentence). Her deliberate use was exploiting her very close childhood friendship with Tim Draper's kids to get Draper to fund her and use his network to find other investors and to get the message out. Another was her using her network to get a number of distracting and bizarre board members (ex generals and the like), especially when Vally VCs (other than Draper) refused to give the company the time of day. The casual way I noticed was how she just slipped into a milieu of Ted talks, various "though leader" pieces, and circulated at Davos and wherever. No gawky fish-out-of-water period. This is quite different from the typical nerd "has to get used to things" situation and gave her tremendous credibility with the rubes outside the valley. I would drive or bike past their office on Page Mill and for a long time had no idea what they did, despite having been in the life sciences myself at the time. They were weirdly physically in Silicon Valley but simultaneously not part of it.
    - explaininjs 4y ago
      “She both deliberately and causally used her connections” would mean she concisely chose to use the connections and the use of those connections was a necessary condition of whatever transpired. Seems to me to be a much stronger statement than “she used her connections and didn’t seem to care too much about doing so”. Regarding her seeming effortless transition into the public spotlight, I’d imagine it’s learned from a young age as an “elite”. Fun fact, her great* grandfather made the yeast company you probably use.
thih9 4y ago
> If you steal more than $5K three times in California (...) Possible typo, linked article lists $950. Quote: "Grand Theft is punishable under California's “Three Strikes” system. (...) If you get three “strikes” on your record, you'll serve a minimum of twenty-five years in a state prison. (...) to be guilty of Grand Theft under CPC §§487(a)-(d), you must: Take property or services worth more than $950; or (...)". Source is the same, i.e.: https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html
dragonwriter 4y ago
The federal sentencing guidelines have nothing to do with California state criminal law. Of course, if an act is both a federal and state crime, you can be prosecuted for each. In fact, if an act is a crime in multiple states (which is possible), you can be charged and punished separately by each state as well as the federal government if it is also a federal crime. This rarely happens even where theoretically possible, but it can (its much more common for other jurisdictions to prosecute if you are acquitted in one but the act could be prosecuted in another as well.)
- ashwagary 4y ago
  >if an act is a crime in multiple states (which is possible), you can be charged and punished separately by each state For the California three strikes law, am I correct in guessing all three strikes have to be in the state of California, or can 1-2 of the earlier strikes be in another state? If the former is true, is the optimal choice after 2 strikes to leave California permanently (other than ceasing criminal activity of course)?
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > For the California three strikes law, am I correct in guessing all three strikes have to be in the state of California The prior strikes don't have to be in California or under California law, but if they are convictions from another jurisdiction, the conviction must include all the elements of a California offense which would be countable as a prior strike (one that is classified as a “serious or violent felony”.) The final strike must be a conviction under California law. > If the former is true, is the optimal choice after 2 strikes to leave California permanently Well, I suppose, but note that sonething like 23 other states and the Federal government have three strikes laws, too, and many of them (including the federal one) consider prior strikes from other jurisdictions. And habitual criminals aren’t often warmly welcomed by foreign immigration authorities.
bradleyjg 4y ago
Three strikes and you’re out isn’t about retribution, it’s about the strong evidence that the specific deterrence and rehabilitation effect of prison will not work on a particular individual.
- p_j_w 4y ago
  >rehabilitation effect of prison There is no such effect in the USA. Prisons are 100% not designed to rehabilitate anyone here.
  - xtracto 4y ago
    What do you think of Danny Trejo's rehabilitation [1]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Trejo#Life_of_crime_and_incarceration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Trejo#Life_of_crime_and_...
    - p_j_w 4y ago
      One person rehabbing doesn't invalidate the mountains of evidence the other way.
- burnished 4y ago
  Anyone guilty of wage theft getting hit by that law? Just saying, in practice its clearly not about jailing menaces to society.
  - bradleyjg 4y ago
    Do you know of anyone that’s been convicted of wage theft, sent to prison, convicted of a new count of wage theft, sent to prison, and convicted of a new count of wage theft … or did you just want to flog your hobbyhorse regardless of how poor the fit was?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
cscurmudgeon 4y ago
Are you from the area? On the way I literally walk through multiple open air stolen goods sellers that have been around for years. The bay area is famous for folks walking out stores with stolen goods: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/after-san-francisco-shoplifting-video-goes-viral-officials-argue-thefts-n1273848 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/after-san-francisco-sho... You can kill someone with a gun and spend just 7 years in prison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Kate_Steinle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Kate_Steinle Btw, I fully support Holmes getting punished but lets not misrepresent the ground reality.
- trinsic2 4y ago
  Yea, my wife works at a retail store here in the bay area and theft so normalized its unbelievable to me. They hire low paying loss prevention staff that have 0 power to do anything and just use to their time to look daunting while following shoplifters around so they can claim insurance loss when they walk out of the store with merch. They don't call the police or do anything that could be cause for the criminals to bring a suit against the store for violating their rights.
diydsp 4y ago
Three strikes can be triggered with much less, even petty theft can trigger it. In this example, the defendant received 25 years in prison for his third crime of stealing a pair of socks[0] "Specifically, the Three Strikes law made it possible for a repeat offender to receive a prison sentence of 25 years to life for a nonserious or nonviolent felony (for example, petty theft with a prior)"[1] [0] https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-the-shame-of-three-strikes-laws-92042/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/cruel-an... [1] https://lao.ca.gov/2005/3_strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm https://lao.ca.gov/2005/3_strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm
- nickpinkston 4y ago
  Disgusting... thanks for sharing.

throwaway5959 4y ago

It's pretty disgusting how little jail time she's receiving for the scope of her crimes.

sebzim4500 4y ago
11 years is quite a long time and seems suitable for scamming some idiots out of their money. IMO the reason it seems low is that people get such unreasonably long sentences for doing far less.
- stametseater 4y ago
  > suitable for scamming some idiots out of their money. Agreed. Of course she deserves more prison time for scamming the patients, but she wasn't convicted for that.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > 11 years is quite a long time And 11 federal years is a longer sentence than 11 years in most state systems, since there is much less opportunity to serve less than a full sentence in the federal system (short of executive pardon/commutation). There’s very limited good conduct time, but no systematic parole eligibility and early release.
- 00F_ 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - sebzim4500 4y ago
    I'm not saying all rich people are idiots, just the ones that invested in Theranos.
adrr 4y ago
Stealing tens of millions from VC funds that have multi billion dollar portfolios. Thats the scope. Compared to stealing catalytic converter off someone making $40k a year and who has $2,000 in the bank and will need to spend half their savings to replace their catalytic converter.

IIAOPSW 4y ago

Right, but Holmes didn't steal $5k more than three times. She stole millions of dollars but only did it once. So your statute doesn't apply.

arthurcolle 4y ago
Can't tell if serious. Can you see how the second might be seen as worse than the first? Literally perverse incentives. "Go big or go home" and no worries! Couple years in Federal summer camp and you go back to your cushy upper class lifestyle as a consultant or startup advisor, or "executive coaching" for other future/wannabe scammers
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- gumby 4y ago
  To me it seems to be clearly pointing out the injustice of the "three strikes" law.
- IIAOPSW 4y ago
  You may not like it but that is in fact the letter of the law. The letter does not get bent to produce the outcome that feels more fair or just. To do so is to abandon the principle of rule of law to begin with. You probably should learn at some point, the legal system is basically a pedantic genie interpreting 3 wishes. "oh I wish the 3 strikes law applied to people like Holmes as well." "Granted". Don't blame me. Make better wishes.
rootusrootus 4y ago
She only got caught once, but as an ongoing thing I think it's safe to say that she stole more than once.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- IIAOPSW 4y ago

gumby 4y ago

> I don't want any elites getting special treatment either... These days I normally roll my eyes and stop reading when I encounter someone saying "the elites" but in this case it is 100% appropriate: she was a member of a wealthy elite, and both deliberately and casually used her connections from the get go.

explaininjs 4y ago
Did you mean "causally"? Not sure the degree of formality is relevant.
- pianoben 4y ago
  As an idiom "casually used her connections" can mean "without due consideration" or "without compunction". It implies that "using her connections" was an easy and simple choice for her, as opposed to one in which she wrestled with the moral dimension.
- gumby 4y ago
  No, (and I'm not sure that "causally" would even result in a comprehensible sentence). Her deliberate use was exploiting her very close childhood friendship with Tim Draper's kids to get Draper to fund her and use his network to find other investors and to get the message out. Another was her using her network to get a number of distracting and bizarre board members (ex generals and the like), especially when Vally VCs (other than Draper) refused to give the company the time of day. The casual way I noticed was how she just slipped into a milieu of Ted talks, various "though leader" pieces, and circulated at Davos and wherever. No gawky fish-out-of-water period. This is quite different from the typical nerd "has to get used to things" situation and gave her tremendous credibility with the rubes outside the valley. I would drive or bike past their office on Page Mill and for a long time had no idea what they did, despite having been in the life sciences myself at the time. They were weirdly physically in Silicon Valley but simultaneously not part of it.
  - explaininjs 4y ago
    “She both deliberately and causally used her connections” would mean she concisely chose to use the connections and the use of those connections was a necessary condition of whatever transpired. Seems to me to be a much stronger statement than “she used her connections and didn’t seem to care too much about doing so”. Regarding her seeming effortless transition into the public spotlight, I’d imagine it’s learned from a young age as an “elite”. Fun fact, her great* grandfather made the yeast company you probably use.

thih9 4y ago

> If you steal more than $5K three times in California (...) Possible typo, linked article lists $950. Quote: "Grand Theft is punishable under California's “Three Strikes” system. (...) If you get three “strikes” on your record, you'll serve a minimum of twenty-five years in a state prison. (...) to be guilty of Grand Theft under CPC §§487(a)-(d), you must: Take property or services worth more than $950; or (...)". Source is the same, i.e.: https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html

dragonwriter 4y ago

The federal sentencing guidelines have nothing to do with California state criminal law. Of course, if an act is both a federal and state crime, you can be prosecuted for each. In fact, if an act is a crime in multiple states (which is possible), you can be charged and punished separately by each state as well as the federal government if it is also a federal crime. This rarely happens even where theoretically possible, but it can (its much more common for other jurisdictions to prosecute if you are acquitted in one but the act could be prosecuted in another as well.)

ashwagary 4y ago
>if an act is a crime in multiple states (which is possible), you can be charged and punished separately by each state For the California three strikes law, am I correct in guessing all three strikes have to be in the state of California, or can 1-2 of the earlier strikes be in another state? If the former is true, is the optimal choice after 2 strikes to leave California permanently (other than ceasing criminal activity of course)?
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > For the California three strikes law, am I correct in guessing all three strikes have to be in the state of California The prior strikes don't have to be in California or under California law, but if they are convictions from another jurisdiction, the conviction must include all the elements of a California offense which would be countable as a prior strike (one that is classified as a “serious or violent felony”.) The final strike must be a conviction under California law. > If the former is true, is the optimal choice after 2 strikes to leave California permanently Well, I suppose, but note that sonething like 23 other states and the Federal government have three strikes laws, too, and many of them (including the federal one) consider prior strikes from other jurisdictions. And habitual criminals aren’t often warmly welcomed by foreign immigration authorities.

bradleyjg 4y ago

Three strikes and you’re out isn’t about retribution, it’s about the strong evidence that the specific deterrence and rehabilitation effect of prison will not work on a particular individual.

p_j_w 4y ago
>rehabilitation effect of prison There is no such effect in the USA. Prisons are 100% not designed to rehabilitate anyone here.
- xtracto 4y ago
  What do you think of Danny Trejo's rehabilitation [1]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Trejo#Life_of_crime_and_incarceration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Trejo#Life_of_crime_and_...
  - p_j_w 4y ago
    One person rehabbing doesn't invalidate the mountains of evidence the other way.
burnished 4y ago
Anyone guilty of wage theft getting hit by that law? Just saying, in practice its clearly not about jailing menaces to society.
- bradleyjg 4y ago
  Do you know of anyone that’s been convicted of wage theft, sent to prison, convicted of a new count of wage theft, sent to prison, and convicted of a new count of wage theft … or did you just want to flog your hobbyhorse regardless of how poor the fit was?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

cscurmudgeon 4y ago

Are you from the area? On the way I literally walk through multiple open air stolen goods sellers that have been around for years. The bay area is famous for folks walking out stores with stolen goods: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/after-san-francisco-shoplifting-video-goes-viral-officials-argue-thefts-n1273848 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/after-san-francisco-sho... You can kill someone with a gun and spend just 7 years in prison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Kate_Steinle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Kate_Steinle Btw, I fully support Holmes getting punished but lets not misrepresent the ground reality.

trinsic2 4y ago
Yea, my wife works at a retail store here in the bay area and theft so normalized its unbelievable to me. They hire low paying loss prevention staff that have 0 power to do anything and just use to their time to look daunting while following shoplifters around so they can claim insurance loss when they walk out of the store with merch. They don't call the police or do anything that could be cause for the criminals to bring a suit against the store for violating their rights.

diydsp 4y ago

Three strikes can be triggered with much less, even petty theft can trigger it. In this example, the defendant received 25 years in prison for his third crime of stealing a pair of socks[0] "Specifically, the Three Strikes law made it possible for a repeat offender to receive a prison sentence of 25 years to life for a nonserious or nonviolent felony (for example, petty theft with a prior)"[1] [0] https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-the-shame-of-three-strikes-laws-92042/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/cruel-an... [1] https://lao.ca.gov/2005/3_strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm https://lao.ca.gov/2005/3_strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm

nickpinkston 4y ago
Disgusting... thanks for sharing.