It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

10 years in prison or pay $100m to go Free ...Justice ?

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

The point being the man in question most lightly cannot do the time. So the real question is, should our society incarcerate an 82 year old man for 10 years?

If the answer is yes then I imagine that makes our justice system just as bad if not worse than the crime in question. If the answer is no then as far as i can see justice has failed to be done. My conclusion is that its our system of laws that are broken and the fact that monies could quite possibly change hands as some form of appeasement just goes to prove the point.


Justice it seems has its price!


But say it was another 82 year old who wasn't rich on trial for the same thing?

What would you do with him?

Justice should be the same be you rich or poor.
edit on 5-8-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: gortex

What a disgrace. He might get away Scott free from this mess, but what honour he had is lost. Confounded dragon upon his hoard is what he is.


He is a multi billionaire. I doubt he cares about honour while lying on his bed of money.



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: DarknStormy

I suppose it also helped that ....

Judge Noll ruled that $99m would go to the Bavarian state coffers while $1m would be donated to a children's hospital.

Nice distribution of wealth and as a sweetener a paltry $1m goes to charity.
They can spin it as much as they want bottom line is rich man does bad stuff and gets off scot free.

edit on 5-8-2014 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Exactly as i said, justice it seems has its price!


One law for the haves and other for the have not's!

Down right shameless!


The real issue is should an old Man who most lightly won't see out his time in gaol receive a sentence of 10 years? The fact that he may be able to bail himself out of the situation by way of ££££ $$$$ just goes to prove Justice is flawed.
edit on 5-8-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

plain and simple, he did the crime. white collar or blue collar, young or old.
he took no pity on who it would effect, only that his greed be satisfied.

he should have to face the punishment just as everyone else regardless of age.

question, do you think that just certain crimes should be allowed not to serve full sentences or should all folks that are old regardless of what they did, be allowed to skate because they might not get out?

justice is suppose to be blind, which means that it doesn't matter who you are, what you are, how much money you have,who you know, or how old you are.

do the crime, do the time.

edit on 5-8-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake




The real issue is should an old Man who most lightly won't see out his time in gaol receive a sentence of 10 years.

Age is an irrelevance , you can't set age limits on convictions , as hounddog says justice is supposed to be blind to everything but the facts.
If he was innocent and thought he could prove that he wouldn't have had to pay the state to let him go.



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Lives beyond 83,
Makes billions,
gets an offer to pay money in large scale Bribery case.

Won the money and genetics lottery.



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

But what version of justice applies in this case, the illusion of justice imposed upon the average Joe citizen or the real version which it seems can be bought for a price?

Age is very relevant in this instance considering the Mans extended years and any sentence imposed by a court of law would have to take in to account his age, there in lies the problem, 10 years to an 82 year old is essentially a death sentence. If that's not cruel and unusual punishment pertaining to the crime in question I don't know what is.


"What would you do with him?"

That's a tuff question incarceration seems rather draconian but that does not mean I agree with what essential amounts to a get out of jail free card for cash.

Do they have old folks gaol's in the nation in question?

edit on 5-8-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Firefly_
a reply to: TrueBrit

If he did that, he would not have made his fortune the way he did.


What's dishonourable about the way he made his fortune, exactly?



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Excuse me good Sir, that is just ridiculous what you are saying. You are "estimating" that he wont live for another 10 years, and therefore call it a death sentence. I will refute your claim, and counterclaim that the man will live to be 110 years of age, therefore you can easily sentence him the 10 years.

See my point? So sick people with little years to live should also be sentenced lower penalties?

Do the crime, do the time. No discussion. All people of earth KNOW when they have done someting wrong, it is built in our bodies. You can't pay of your conscience. You can ignore it, but it will eventually hunt you down and make you eat everything you refused.

edit on 5/8/14 by JoeSignal because: spelling



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:52 AM
link   
This is only 1/42 out of his total wealth, so by that logic somebody who earns 50 Grand a year should be able to pay a $1190 Dollars fine and walk free for a similar crime.

But no, that's not the way it works, try to bribe a police officer with $50 bucks when you get caught drink driving and the judge will throw the book at you.



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: andy06shake




The real issue is should an old Man who most lightly won't see out his time in gaol receive a sentence of 10 years.

Age is an irrelevance , you can't set age limits on convictions , as hounddog says justice is supposed to be blind to everything but the facts.
If he was innocent and thought he could prove that he wouldn't have had to pay the state to let him go.


Im not sure i agree. Ive seen people in their 80's who act more "child like" than children as their emotional and cognitive abilities degenerate due to age and/or poor health. Im not saying this guy isnt sharp - he might very well be and therefore this doesn't apply to him, but i believe it is a factor in some cases and should be considered. I remember Rupert Murdoch testifying before that committee regarding the phone taping was acting all old and senile when in actual fact he would be functioning very well.



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake




"What would you do with him?"

I would let justice run it's course , if he was found guilty by the jury I would sentence him accordingly , the 10 year figure is the maximum he could face so some leeway could be given due to his age.

Let's not forget we in the UK have just convicted and jailed an 84 year old man(Rolf Harris) , his age was taken into account in the sentence he received.

edit on 5-8-2014 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake




Age is very relevant in this instance considering the Mans extended years and any sentence imposed by a court of law would have to take in to account his age, there in lies the problem, 10 years to an 82 year old is essentially a death sentence. If that's not cruel and unusual punishment pertaining to the crime in question I don't know what is.


that shoe could be applied to his actions also. his greed was not deterred by his age. being 82 yrs old didn't stop him from bribing someone in hopes of making more money and gain assets that he could use or manipulate into further illegal actives. punishment is not just for punishment's sake. it is also used a deterrent. for said individual, or others that may think of doing the same thing.



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: JoeSignal

Buddy even in the US anybody that reaches the grand old age of 92 is doing rather well in my book. Some might say punching well above their weight with respect to longevity.

I don't know if you have ever been incarcerated, it's no picnic i can assure you. Exposing a Man of 82 years to such an environment brings us back to said sentence being of the cruel and unusual variety hence wrong I imagine.

110 years of age??? Now who's being ridiculous.
LoL

Am only pointing out the shortcomings of our supposed interpretation of Justice, i'm not advocating letting him away scot free or even claiming to have a working solution to the problem.
edit on 5-8-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

To be fair that particular beast was touching up little girls for what turned out to be the better part of his career. The moral proclivities our society has regarding the incarceration of the elderly go right out the window where Pedophilia is concerned.

Should also pointed out that there are rather a lot of elderly pedophiles caught in the UK that receive far less time than Rolf Harris received or for that matter the 10 year sentence imposed pertaining to the OP.


The hypocrisy is rather apparent!

edit on 5-8-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   
It must be very nice to be rich enough to buy Justice and the very courtroom it is handed around in like a consolation prize to the losers.

Obviously, this billionaire will never experience the joy of being a loser. He has too many dollars to ever fear that, however much he actually loses as a man.



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: raberto86

I agree with you in this scenario. But as I see it, this is a question of how mentally impaired the old person in question is "because of aging". And therefore how "ill" they are. You can be old and not be impaired. Some old people get mentally challenged as the brain degenerates.

That is not what has happened to Mr Bernie, he is not impaired in no way.



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:28 AM
link   
it is a proven fact that the age expectancy for people has risen over the years. that's what part of the obamacare deal is about. although they swear up and down it's not.

here is a report from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, published in 2011.




U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 1
INTRODUCTION
An increasingly important feature of population aging in the United States is that the older population itself is getting older. 1 That is, the proportion of the population aged 90 and over among the older population has been increasing. Thanks to increases in life expectancy at older ages, the oldest segments of the older population are growing the fastest. A nation’s oldest-old population consumes resources disproportionately to its overall population size, and its growth has a significant impact on societal and family resources, including pension and retirement income, health care costs, and intergenerational relationships (Kinsella and He, 2009; Zhou, Norton, and Stearns, 2003).
90+ in the United States: 2006-2008


i'm not getting into that part of the age question. i'm getting into the increase of people 80 plus living more productive and coherent lives.

so if we start letting old criminals serve short sentences, we will end up with more and more thinking, that i'm old they won't lock me up because of my age. that's no better than juvenile crooks thinking that they will get lighter sentences because they are young.

law is passed mandating terms to serve for breaking laws, and it should be applied across the board.
now when you face mental issues, ie don't know right from wrong, that's the only instance that charging and sentencing should be considered.


edit on 5-8-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: fixed link



posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

I can agree with you some of the way. I know for a fact, though, that people of that age seldom get incarcerated "on equal terms". Most countries imprison their elders on lighter terms regarding work, living space etc.

I don't even think we are disagreeing. I'm just saying, in case of Bernie E: The man is an old greedy fart, running around bribing and looting, not considering the damage he is inflicting, all the while getting an offer to pay his crime off with no prison time in sight. It doesn't take Columbo to figure out that this man should be punished harder then the common man as he is to be a role model and a patron of society. Not let off by paying money.


edit on 5/8/14 by JoeSignal because: spelling




top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join