7 ms·

So all diddy needs to do is get on the stand and describe every single party of his and he’ll get a slap on the wrist? While there should be more incentives to

by shmatt 2y ago

So all diddy needs to do is get on the stand and describe every single party of his and he’ll get a slap on the wrist? While there should be more incentives to cooperate, like the type of prison, allowed visits, etc. claiming someone should serve less time because they described so much of their own crimes is kind of silly

rexreed 2y ago
You only get a reduced sentence if you cooperate in the prosecution against someone else the government / prosecutor is just as or more interested in. That wouldn't be the case with the diddle.
- mandevil 2y ago
  Not technically true. Even without a formal plea, you can enter a plea of guilty and throw yourself on the mercy of the court. Showing remorse and admitting your crimes definitely makes judges like you more!
pessimizer 2y ago
We want to bribe criminals to betray each other. The people who they are betraying could do anything up to killing them to prevent this, and we have to compete with that. The world gets zero benefit to imprisoning this woman indefinitely, it in fact costs money, and if the government had to prove their case against her without her cooperation, it would just cost even more money. Not letting a fully-cooperating sucker like her off is the opposite of a deterrent to crime. It's telling low-level people who are involved in crimes that it's better to keep quiet. We want to encourage them to betray. I hope when she gets out she becomes a celebrity, and it encourages other young people to decide to whistleblow or turn snitch on the scammy companies they work for.
- vkou 2y ago
  > The world gets zero benefit to imprisoning this woman indefinitely What sorts of people does the world benefit from imprisoning indefinitely, and where on the spectrum does, say, being a serial and unrepentant shoplifter, stealing mid-four figures sums compare to being a financial criminal stealing mid-eight-figure sums? She wasn't a 'low level whistleblower', she was one step below the ringleader, and only came clean after the whole thing went tits up and she was staring down two decades in federal. If you're looking for heroes and whistleblowers, I don't think there were any in that whole organization. Just rats turning on eachother once the trap snapped shut around them.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    I think a serial shoplifter or thief is worse. It is a bigger problem for me personally, and impacts far more people. Therefore I think it deserves harsher penalties.
    - vkou 2y ago
      A thief will steal from a few stores. A fraudster of that magnitude steals from anywhere between thousands to millions of people.
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        There is the magnitude of an individual and the magnitude of the summer for each problem.
miki123211 2y ago
She didn't just describe her own crimes, although I'm sure that played a part. She also described somebody else's crimes, and did that in a way which helped the government with sentencing the "real villain."
AlbertCory 2y ago
In the real world, a prosecutor can only nail a higher-up with the cooperation of the people lower down. Those people only cooperate if they get a lighter sentence. It's too bad, but that's how it is and it plays out every day in criminal courts. As for Diddy: a real, disinterested DOJ would say, "oh, you can testify against <people more famous than you>? Well, we might be able to cut you a deal." Of course, if the DOJ is not interested in prosecuting those people, then no deal. If they think Diddy is already important enough and they can't let him slide, then no deal, or at least, a medium-stiff sentence. Finally, two years in prison is not a picnic. See if you want to do it.
- borroka 2y ago
  But a lighter sentence could, for example, range from no jail time to rates of less than 100 percent of the expected sentence in the case of non-cooperation. The prosecutor's recommendation of no jail time is frankly disappointing. She may not have been the main offender, but she committed the crimes. What would her sentence have been if she did not cooperate (and suppose other did or there was enough evidence anyway)? Fifteen+ years? Two years is not a picnic, but given the alternative, it looks like it is.
  - voxic11 2y ago
    > Prosecutors did not recommend a specific sentence for Ms. Ellison It was her lawyers that asked for no jail time. Not the prosecutors.
    - borroka 2y ago
      According to the article I read (CNBC), "The prison term was significantly stiffer than the recommendation by the federal Probation Department that Judge Lewis Kaplan sentence Ellison, who had run the hedge fund Alameda Research, to three years of supervised release, with no time at all behind bars". In the same article, "Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon urged Kaplan for leniency". It seems to me, as prosecutors and Probation Dept talk to each other, that all, except Kaplan, agreed on no prison time for Ellison.
  - 2y ago
stackghost 2y ago
>So all diddy needs to do is get on the stand and describe every single party of his and he’ll get a slap on the wrist? Do you honestly think this is how the legal system works?
xwowsersx 2y ago
No, because when prosecutors offer a light sentence to a secondary criminal in a conspiracy, it's usually a strategic decision to secure cooperation in prosecuting the main target. It wouldn't make sense that a lighter sentence for an accomplice/secondary sets a precedent for a principal actor and Diddy is the principal actor in his case, AFAIK. (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with any of this, just saying this is the internally consistent approach.)

by shmatt 2y ago

rexreed 2y ago

You only get a reduced sentence if you cooperate in the prosecution against someone else the government / prosecutor is just as or more interested in. That wouldn't be the case with the diddle.

mandevil 2y ago
Not technically true. Even without a formal plea, you can enter a plea of guilty and throw yourself on the mercy of the court. Showing remorse and admitting your crimes definitely makes judges like you more!

pessimizer 2y ago

We want to bribe criminals to betray each other. The people who they are betraying could do anything up to killing them to prevent this, and we have to compete with that. The world gets zero benefit to imprisoning this woman indefinitely, it in fact costs money, and if the government had to prove their case against her without her cooperation, it would just cost even more money. Not letting a fully-cooperating sucker like her off is the opposite of a deterrent to crime. It's telling low-level people who are involved in crimes that it's better to keep quiet. We want to encourage them to betray. I hope when she gets out she becomes a celebrity, and it encourages other young people to decide to whistleblow or turn snitch on the scammy companies they work for.

vkou 2y ago
> The world gets zero benefit to imprisoning this woman indefinitely What sorts of people does the world benefit from imprisoning indefinitely, and where on the spectrum does, say, being a serial and unrepentant shoplifter, stealing mid-four figures sums compare to being a financial criminal stealing mid-eight-figure sums? She wasn't a 'low level whistleblower', she was one step below the ringleader, and only came clean after the whole thing went tits up and she was staring down two decades in federal. If you're looking for heroes and whistleblowers, I don't think there were any in that whole organization. Just rats turning on eachother once the trap snapped shut around them.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  I think a serial shoplifter or thief is worse. It is a bigger problem for me personally, and impacts far more people. Therefore I think it deserves harsher penalties.
  - vkou 2y ago
    A thief will steal from a few stores. A fraudster of that magnitude steals from anywhere between thousands to millions of people.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      There is the magnitude of an individual and the magnitude of the summer for each problem.

miki123211 2y ago

She didn't just describe her own crimes, although I'm sure that played a part. She also described somebody else's crimes, and did that in a way which helped the government with sentencing the "real villain."

AlbertCory 2y ago

In the real world, a prosecutor can only nail a higher-up with the cooperation of the people lower down. Those people only cooperate if they get a lighter sentence. It's too bad, but that's how it is and it plays out every day in criminal courts. As for Diddy: a real, disinterested DOJ would say, "oh, you can testify against <people more famous than you>? Well, we might be able to cut you a deal." Of course, if the DOJ is not interested in prosecuting those people, then no deal. If they think Diddy is already important enough and they can't let him slide, then no deal, or at least, a medium-stiff sentence. Finally, two years in prison is not a picnic. See if you want to do it.

borroka 2y ago
But a lighter sentence could, for example, range from no jail time to rates of less than 100 percent of the expected sentence in the case of non-cooperation. The prosecutor's recommendation of no jail time is frankly disappointing. She may not have been the main offender, but she committed the crimes. What would her sentence have been if she did not cooperate (and suppose other did or there was enough evidence anyway)? Fifteen+ years? Two years is not a picnic, but given the alternative, it looks like it is.
- voxic11 2y ago
  > Prosecutors did not recommend a specific sentence for Ms. Ellison It was her lawyers that asked for no jail time. Not the prosecutors.
  - borroka 2y ago
    According to the article I read (CNBC), "The prison term was significantly stiffer than the recommendation by the federal Probation Department that Judge Lewis Kaplan sentence Ellison, who had run the hedge fund Alameda Research, to three years of supervised release, with no time at all behind bars". In the same article, "Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon urged Kaplan for leniency". It seems to me, as prosecutors and Probation Dept talk to each other, that all, except Kaplan, agreed on no prison time for Ellison.
- 2y ago

stackghost 2y ago

>So all diddy needs to do is get on the stand and describe every single party of his and he’ll get a slap on the wrist? Do you honestly think this is how the legal system works?

xwowsersx 2y ago

No, because when prosecutors offer a light sentence to a secondary criminal in a conspiracy, it's usually a strategic decision to secure cooperation in prosecuting the main target. It wouldn't make sense that a lighter sentence for an accomplice/secondary sets a precedent for a principal actor and Diddy is the principal actor in his case, AFAIK. (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with any of this, just saying this is the internally consistent approach.)