It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:39 AM
I don't think any billionaire on the planet made their all their fortunes legally without acting, at leat once in a while, immorally. Probably many millionaires made it but billionaires, I can't believe it.

He should pay just like the rest of us sheep.

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:40 AM
a reply to: gortex

German Law is an ass the trial is there also his co conspirator was paid £26 million as a bribe.

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:51 AM
a reply to: JoeSignal

I'm not disagreeing with anyone per say. I don't claim to have an answer all through i don't think incarcerating an 82 year old for 10 years is justice pertaining to the crime in question. They say the punishment should fit the crime yet child molesters receive far shorter sentences than 10 years for a far worse crime. Just makes no sense.

Nobody should be able to purchase justice it defeats the purpose and entirely negates the concept.

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

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 10:07 AM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Catholic church used to sell indulgences. In the US, you used to be able to pay a guy to take your place if you were drafted by the military. This is an extension of that. The rich have always had their own set of rules. Same as it ever was.

Now if you're 'The State' and you can either park some old fart in a cell until his time on Earth is up, or squeeze $100M out of him, which sounds better?

Personally, I'd jail him for 5 years and still pull half a billion out of him. But I've never liked the guy, anyway.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 10:10 AM
a reply to: yeahright

That seems more appropriate sentence to fit the crime.

The money should go to a good cause through chance would be a fine thing.

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

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 10:16 AM
A wise man once said "It's not the principle, it's the money"

I find it ironic the man on trial for bribery offers the court 60mil to wave his prison sentence and if accepted apparently is not bribery, nor indeed an admission of guilt.

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 10:19 AM
It's no different than all the bankers laundering £Billions in cartel drug money or fixing markets. They all get to walk away free by paying a fine. Those without the financial clout go to jail. Whether 23 or 83 is irrelevant, he should serve the time for the crime he committed, no question about it.

This is what makes the laws such a farce and the idea of justice for the rich and well connected is a complete joke.

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 10:21 AM

originally posted by: JohnTheSmith
Wait a minute... this guy is suspected and being accused of bribery, and the court (prosecutors) will END his trial for an offer of $100m???? Can anyone else see the irony here?

Wow, just wow.

Sorry just started reading the thread, hadn't even finished reading the first page when I read this. That's exactly what I thought as I read the headlines. It's utterly crazy

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 10:22 AM
a reply to: yeahright

I'm not sure prison is the best juice to quench the thirst of justice with very rich people. Prison is too much a shock and change to their whole reality and living situation. They can adapt better to it because it's a "before and after" change of everything in life for every level they live it.

I have a better idea.

Rather than move them into totally new surroundings that help the shock treatment to break from the past and accept a new reality? Send them to the hell of purgatory between those two. It's what we call daily life for you and me. It's what a billionaire would call hell on Earth.

Simply take their money. All of it. I don't suggest stealing it. No. It can be held if that is what society demands, but for the chosen term of years? Give the billionaire the living wage of a pensioner just getting by with absolutely no means or options to get more for x years. See how meaningful that misery is compared to a prison where they are likely to have as much respect inside for their resources as they have outside.

It's better to have never had something, then to have had it and then lost it. - Let them live the truth of those words.

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 10:25 AM
a reply to: Dimithae

To be honest by the age of 82 one should really know better obviously the person doesn't and thinks it's acceptable to buy his way out of the situation. That being said 10 years seems extreme considering beasts get less time for kiddie fiddling.


posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:42 PM
Right, let's set a few things straight here......

1) The judge did say that his age would play a factor in any punishment SHOULD a guilty verdict be returned, and said that Mr Ecclestones importance in the survival of the business he spent 40 years building should be taken I to account.

2) Most important is the reason why the judge accepted this deal, he stated that the case against Mr Ecclestone was very weak, and a long drawn out trial may have rested on opinions of a few facts. The deal was acceptable to the court because a guilty verdict WAS NOT a forgone conclusion.

If you have followed the case you will know that this all centres on a middleman, it was his dealings on Ecclestones behalf that raised issues. I feel that the deal was suggested to prevent a long, personally damaging trial, that would have ended in a verdict of innocent, leaving Formula 1 and it's management embarrassed by things that really had no bearing on the business deals at the centre of the trial.

Yes, he's filthy rich, but he is that way because of the work he has put in to grow the sport, attract new technologies, take it to new developing markets. He is a visionary business man, who loves the sport he has helped make famous, there is a distrust of anyone who is rich these days and I don't think people who work hard at something they have a passion for should be vilified for making money doing it.

You have all compared this to other crimes, we are not talking about a violent criminal, we are talking about a business man who made a bad choice of business partner, who has now paid what would have been owed if the deal had been done correctly, a prison sentence isn't the only way to show penance for a bad choice that inadvertently harms another party.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in