|
Does Martha Deserve it?
Well she lied, cheated, stole and got caught.. so I guess she deserves to
go to JAIL. I think they should fine the #%&$ out of her and put her back to work to pay some big taxes. But on the other hand those with plenty of money are not very afraid of paying a fine.. big deal.. but some time in stripes scares nearly everybody. Laurence |
Does Martha Deserve it?
larry wrote:
> Well she lied, cheated, stole and got caught.. so I guess she > deserves to go to JAIL. > .. but some time in stripes scares nearly everybody. > > > Laurence I don't think they wear stripes anymore. The big question is, does she look good in ORANGE? ;-) |
Does Martha Deserve it?
re recent news articles; Ex-chairman Ovitz of Disney who got a $120mil "severance package" after less than a year on the job..... It's legal, but it's theft ! People who scam Federal income tax for billions ( collectively ) Feds then settle for "a dime on the dollar". But if you or I were short by five bucks, they'd "take your house" to make an example of you. I guess we all have our sore spot. Martha acted on a tip from her broker. ( who doesn't ? ) She acted on it, and got caught Like the scene in The Wizard of Oz..... "Pay no attention to that man behind the drape "...... <rj> On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 13:42:35 GMT, "larry" > wrote: >Well she lied, cheated, stole and got caught.. so I guess she deserves to >go to JAIL. I think they should fine the #%&$ out of her and put her >back to work to pay some big taxes. But on the other hand those with >plenty of money are not very afraid of paying a fine.. big deal.. but some >time in stripes scares nearly everybody. > > >Laurence <rj> |
Does Martha Deserve it?
larry wrote:
> Well she lied, cheated, stole and got caught.. so I guess she deserves to > go to JAIL. I think they should fine the #%&$ out of her and put her > back to work to pay some big taxes. But on the other hand those with > plenty of money are not very afraid of paying a fine.. big deal.. but some > time in stripes scares nearly everybody. I like the system they have in Norway <?> where fines, even for traffic violations, are based on income. A $100 speeding ticket for one of the working poor is a hefty penalty, but it means nothing to a millionaire. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
larry wrote:
> But on the other hand those with plenty of money are not very afraid > of paying a fine. Of course not, because to her, a fine of a few thousand dollars is pocket change. That same fine would ruin my finances for years. Fines should be proportionate to the person's net worth. Martha probably has a few hundred million dollars worth of assets, so fine her half. Even to a multi-millionare, half of her money is a huge blow. At the same time, the same argument could be made about Microsoft. I think the government wanted to fine them a few million, when they have about $45 billion in the bank. They have more money in the bank than most countries' GDP. Fine them about $44 billion, and use it to repay part of the national debt. Make them useful, same with Martha :-) -- John Gaughan http://www.johngaughan.net/ |
Does Martha Deserve it?
larry wrote:
> Well she lied, cheated, stole and got caught.. so I guess she deserves to > go to JAIL. Why jail? Her's was a non-violent crime. Since it was financial in nature, it would seem appropriate that the punishment should be financial as well. I think they should fine the #%&$ out of her and put her > back to work to pay some big taxes. But on the other hand those with > plenty of money are not very afraid of paying a fine.. big deal.. Make the fine commensurate with both the amount of the financial crime *plus* a penalty based on income. > but some > time in stripes scares nearly everybody. Prison isn't a deterrant. It never has been. People who commit crimes do so with the belief that they're never get *caught*. -- Darryl L. Pierce > Visit the Infobahn Offramp - <http://mypage.org/mcpierce> "What do you care what other people think, Mr. Feynman?" |
Does Martha Deserve it?
>On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 08:01:26 -0600, "jmcquown"
> wrote: > >>I don't think they wear stripes anymore. The big question is, does she look >>good in ORANGE? ;-) Prisoners assigned to work details wear black and white stripes in Florida. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 13:48:08 -0600, Steve Wertz
> wrote: >On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 08:01:26 -0600, "jmcquown" > wrote: > >>I don't think they wear stripes anymore. The big question is, does she look >>good in ORANGE? ;-) > >Federal prisoners get to wear normal clothes most of the time. > >-sw Every Federal prisoner, that I have seen, wore the orange jump suit. Of course there may be some that wear normal cloths, possibly at the "club fed" prisons. Pan Ohco |
Does Martha Deserve it?
|
Does Martha Deserve it?
|
Does Martha Deserve it?
"larry" > wrote in message ... > Well she lied, cheated, stole and got caught.. so I guess she deserves to > go to JAIL. I think they should fine the #%&$ out of her and put her > back to work to pay some big taxes. But on the other hand those with > plenty of money are not very afraid of paying a fine.. big deal.. but some > time in stripes scares nearly everybody. > > > Laurence There are a couple problems as I see it. First, people with money usually go to prisons where they get carpet in their "cells" and roam freely, and watch cable, etc. I don't think it is going to benefit anyone if she goes to jail, and since she maintains she is innocent, I doubt it will teach her anything either. The jails are already overcrowded and costing taxpayers ridiculous amounts, when so many of the people there could be contributing to society instead of living off it. The unfortunate fact is that jail time does *not* scare everybody. If it were such a great deterrent, then the numbers would be drastically different than they are. People like Martha, people who use drugs (note, I said use, not deal), people who commit "victimless" crimes...there needs to be some other stop gap in place to deal with these people. Jail is not a solution. She needs to be fined, to the extent of the money she should have lost in the deal at a minimum. She should also be doing plenty of community service works....hey I know! She can "Martha-ize" peoples houses, organizing them, filling the pantry with goodies, and lets not forget creating a beautiful garden space in which to relax with a good cup of Earl Grey.... kimberly |
Does Martha Deserve it?
"John Gaughan" > wrote in message ... > larry wrote: > > But on the other hand those with plenty of money are not very afraid > > of paying a fine. > > Of course not, because to her, a fine of a few thousand dollars is > pocket change. That same fine would ruin my finances for years. Fines > should be proportionate to the person's net worth. Martha probably has a > few hundred million dollars worth of assets, so fine her half. Even to a > multi-millionare, half of her money is a huge blow. Except that the fines are already more than a few thousand bucks...not to mention she lost 1/4 of her worth the day she was convicted. She was worth around 4.5 million in the morning, down to just over 3 in the afternoon. kimberly |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Dave Smith wrote:
> I like the system they have in Norway <?> where fines, > even for traffic violations, are based on income. A $100 > speeding ticket for one of the working poor is a hefty > penalty, but it means nothing to a millionaire. Also in Finland. Methinks you've heard about that 170000 euros fine for speeding in the city, for a young finnish millionaire. Methinks it's right, too. Vilco BTW - 170000 euros = 190000 dollars. Nice? |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> Why jail? Her's was a non-violent crime. Since it was financial in nature, > it would seem appropriate that the punishment should be financial as well. Since when has our judicial system ever been based on an "Eye for an Eye"? > Prison isn't a deterrant... Right. It is a punishment. ~john |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Vilco wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote: > > >>I like the system they have in Norway <?> where fines, >>even for traffic violations, are based on income. A $100 >>speeding ticket for one of the working poor is a hefty >>penalty, but it means nothing to a millionaire. > > > Also in Finland. > Methinks you've heard about that 170000 euros fine for > speeding in the city, for a young finnish millionaire. > > Methinks it's right, too. > > Vilco > > BTW - 170000 euros = 190000 dollars. Nice? > > Exactly; adjust the fine to an index of pain which is common to all. How many times have I left my car on the sidewalk after 2 AM, to get a 5 buck fine. Now in NYC, that would amount to a 75$ fine, and possible towing of the vehicle with even more money; ouch! that hurts. Rich -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dum spiro, spero. (Cicero) As long as I breathe, I hope. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> Prison isn't a deterrant. It never has been. People who commit crimes do so > with the belief that they're never get *caught*. I would think that prison would make the person come out worse having to associate with all the other criminals in there. You get a nice mix of different types of crookedness to rub off on you. I won't say what I think the solution is :-) regards, Ben -- "What passes for wisdom may only be eloquent foolishness" Cheap long distance calling using Onesuite (http://www.onesuite.com). 2.5 cents/min anywhere in the U.S., to Canada or the U.K. No monthly or connection fees! Use promotional code 038664643 for 20 free minutes. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Steve Wertz wrote:
> They only wear orange jump suits when they travel someplace (like > court or being transferred to another prison). Have you ever > actually been *in* a Federal prison, or just seen it on TV and the > movies? I have been *to* prison, not *in* ;-) and I can honestly say that from what I saw, and what the person serving time said, is that they wear khaki pants and a button shirt, but the colors are bland light brown. This was a federal prison, not state, and no transportation to or from court going on that I saw. -- John Gaughan http://www.johngaughan.net/ |
Does Martha Deserve it?
|
Does Martha Deserve it?
Steve Wertz wrote:
> I think *in* sounds better than *to*. Depends on how you use it in a > sentence, I guess. I think a less ambiguous way of saying what I said is: I have visited prison before, but I have never been an inmate. > Maybe they do have different standards for different prisons. Even > some state prisons allow inmates to wear regular clothes (especially > female inmates). There are some limitations though - like nothing > that resembles a guards uniform, of course. When I visited federal prison I was not allowed to wear shorts, even as a visitor. I can understand why they would not want women (like prisoners' wives) wearing daisy dukes and gettin' a groove on in the visiting room, but damn it, I am a heterosexual male (sorry Sheldon, no luck ;-) ). Anyway, even if they do wear normal clothing there has to be limitations. -- John Gaughan http://www.johngaughan.net/ |
Does Martha Deserve it?
On 2004-03-07, larry > wrote:
> Well she lied, cheated, stole and got caught.. so I guess she deserves to > go to JAIL. The hot question is, is Martha gonna toss a salad!! (OBfood) No, seriously, does she deserve to go to jail? Yes. WILL she go to jail? Doubtful. Has justice been served? Not till Ken Lay is a bitch! nb |
Does Martha Deserve it?
>> I like the system they have in Norway <?> where fines, even for traffic
>> violations, are based on income. A $100 speeding ticket for one of the >> working poor is a hefty penalty, but it means nothing to a millionaire. >> > >You can't even explain your point. Are you saying the fines are more for a >millionaire? Sometimes I think your are a dumbass. > >The Wolf Explained it purty good, even a dumb piece of wolf cocky doody like you finally understood... betcha counting to a hundred was the stumper for you... he may be a dumbass but his ass on its worst day has a higher IQ then your brain on its best day. ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
Does Martha Deserve it?
"<RJ>" > wrote in message > Martha acted on a tip from her broker. ( who doesn't ? ) > She acted on it, and got caught > This was not just a tip from the broker. It was relayed information from an inside source. It is illegal. You and I don't get tips like she got. Then she lied. Maybe she does not deserve 20 years, but there must be some punishment for the crime. Ed |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "<RJ>" > wrote in message > > > Martha acted on a tip from her broker. ( who doesn't ? ) > > She acted on it, and got caught > > > > This was not just a tip from the broker. It was relayed information from an > inside source. It is illegal. You and I don't get tips like she got. Then > she lied. > > Maybe she does not deserve 20 years, but there must be some punishment for > the crime. In theory, the court is supposed to take two things into consideration. It is supposed to administer a penalty to punish a specific deed and to act as a general deterrent. We cannot hope to catch every slippery stock transaction and then apply a modest penalty, which in some cases is not even as high as the profits made from the illegal trades. The penalty needs to be high enough that others planning the same sort of scams will not be willing to take the risk. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
|
Does Martha Deserve it?
The Wolf wrote:
> The Wolf is disappointed. Apparently your canadian dumbass seems no > longer interested in honest banter. > > Back up your points with documentation. I side with the Canook. No legal system can catch every infraction. Deterrence is key -- make the punishment bad enough that people will not want to risk getting caught, even if the chance is very slim. The other side of the issue is to put in safeguards so the wrongly accused can prove their innocence. -- John Gaughan http://www.johngaughan.net/ |
Does Martha Deserve it?
notbob wrote:
> The hot question is, is Martha gonna toss a salad!! (OBfood) Funny... of course, isn't she single? Or, more accurately, she does not have a husband? Tossing the ol' salad is fairly gross, unless of course you are talking about lettuce and dressing ;-) -- John Gaughan http://www.johngaughan.net/ |
Does Martha Deserve it?
|
Does Martha Deserve it?
Levelwave© wrote:
>> Why jail? Her's was a non-violent crime. Since it was financial in >> nature, it would seem appropriate that the punishment should be financial >> as well. > > Since when has our judicial system ever been based on an "Eye for an Eye"? I never said our judicial system was. I was questioning why "she deserves to go to JAIL" when her's was a non-violent crime. >> Prison isn't a deterrant... > > Right. It is a punishment. The OP said "some time in stripes scares nearly everybody." I was responding that it does *not* scare nearly everybody; those who commit crimes do so thinking they will never be caught and, therefore, aren't deterred by punishment since they expect to never receive any. -- Darryl L. Pierce > Visit the Infobahn Offramp - <http://mypage.org/mcpierce> "What do you care what other people think, Mr. Feynman?" |
Does Martha Deserve it?
ben wrote:
> Darryl L. Pierce wrote: >> Prison isn't a deterrant. It never has been. People who commit crimes do >> so with the belief that they're never get *caught*. > > I would think that prison would make the person come out worse having to > associate with all the other criminals in there. You get a nice mix of > different types of crookedness to rub off on you. Exactly! It becomes a staging area for the next wave of criminal activity since the person is now a convicted felon and less likely to get a real job. But, my question (not for you personally) on this subject just boils down to this: why do non-violent crimes *require* any jailtime (in reference to the OP's message)? If it's not a deterrant, and it doesn't make things better nor does it rehabilitate them, then of what use is sending someone who committed a crime like insider trading to prison for 4 years? When she comes out she'll still have her money. It seems that fining her proportionally to her income and/or net worth is much more effective and meaningful. > I won't say what I think > the solution is :-) Now you've piqued my curiosity... Send it in email if you don't want to say it in here. I have a research paper due and I'm now considering writing it on why non-violent crimes should not receive any jailtime. -- Darryl L. Pierce > Visit the Infobahn Offramp - <http://mypage.org/mcpierce> "What do you care what other people think, Mr. Feynman?" |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Nexis wrote:
> > > > > Of course not, because to her, a fine of a few thousand dollars is > > pocket change. That same fine would ruin my finances for years. Fines > > should be proportionate to the person's net worth. Martha probably has a > > few hundred million dollars worth of assets, so fine her half. Even to a > > multi-millionare, half of her money is a huge blow. > > Except that the fines are already more than a few thousand bucks...not to > mention she lost 1/4 of her worth the day she was convicted. She was worth > around 4.5 million in the morning, down to just over 3 in the afternoon. But what about the honest people who lost a substantial portion of their hard earned savings because of her crooked dealings? There have been a significant number of crooked stock deals. People have invested their savings under the belief that properly invested money will grow and provide them with financial security, and at the same time, helping the national economy to grow. Meanwhile, shifty CEOs and major investors are working out crooked deals to grab a quick profit at the expense of the legitimate investors. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
"Darryl L. Pierce" wrote:
> I never said our judicial system was. I was questioning why "she deserves to > go to JAIL" when her's was a non-violent crime. > > >> Prison isn't a deterrant... > > > > Right. It is a punishment. > > The OP said "some time in stripes scares nearly everybody." I was responding > that it does *not* scare nearly everybody; those who commit crimes do so > thinking they will never be caught and, therefore, aren't deterred by > punishment since they expect to never receive any. You have a point. Some people have been getting away with it completely, and those who have been charged and convicted have received fines that are insignificant enough that it has been worth their while. What the heck. Rip off the shareholders for a few million dollars and pay a few hundred thousand in fines and you are still far ahead. The fines do little more than to take a slice out of the illegal profits. More stringent controls on the market and more rigorous prosecution will increase the risk of getting caught. Increase the penalties to the point where illegal trading activities will result in a real loss and/or jail time. The increased probability of getting caught and suffering make the risk less attractive. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:26:32 -0600, Steve Wertz
> wrote: >>Every Federal prisoner, that I have seen, wore the orange jump suit. >>Of course there may be some that wear normal cloths, possibly at the >>"club fed" prisons. > >They only wear orange jump suits when they travel someplace (like >court or being transferred to another prison). Have you ever >actually been *in* a Federal prison, or just seen it on TV and the >movies? > >-sw Yes Steve I have been. That is why I stated those "that I have seen". Pan Ohco |
Does Martha Deserve it?
> Dave Smith wrote:
> >But what about the honest people who lost a substantial portion of their hard >earned savings because of her crooked dealings? There have been a >significant >number of crooked stock deals. People have invested their savings under the >belief that properly invested money will grow and provide them with financial >security, and at the same time, helping the national economy to grow. >Meanwhile, shifty CEOs and major investors are working out crooked deals to >grab a quick profit at the expense of the legitimate investors. Nothing less than a more sophisticated version of fiefdom; land barons own everything and serfs get to do a bit of sharecropping... Mothra and her ilk even steal the serf's puny share of the crop. I truly believe Mothra's crime is the worst of crimes, _and it is a violent crime_, wreaks havoc on entire familys, many familys, that will leave a scar for generations... what she really deserves aside from paying back all the dollars she stole, plus punitive and interest, is a public flogging... anyone feeling the least bit sorry for that low life, no class creep has got to be batty. ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Pan Ohco > wrote:
> Every Federal prisoner, that I have seen, wore the orange jump suit. > Of course there may be some that wear normal cloths, possibly at the > "club fed" prisons. There's a state prison near where I live in New Jersey. I live across from a park and at least once each spring, I see the prisoners out picking up trash and they're dressed in all orange attire. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
Pat Rabideau > wrote:
> The insider trading charges were dismissed, so my question is, how can > Martha be charged with obstruction of justice and lying about something > (insider trading) that she didn't do? Seems like the dismissal of the > first charge makes the others a moot point. The insider trading charges were dismissed due to a lack of evidence on the part of the prosecutors. That does not mean Martha did not commit insider trading, only that it could not be proven. Perhaps if Martha had not lied to the SEC, she would have gotten convicted on the insider trading charge. |
Does Martha Deserve it?
|
Does Martha Deserve it?
>From: Dave Smith
>But what about the honest people who lost a substantial portion of their hard >earned savings because of her crooked dealings? Hmmm...I was always under the impression that playing the stocks was a gamble to begin with. If one invests their life's savings solely into a stock such as this one to begin with, I'd say that person was a fool and deserved what they got. Ellen |
Does Martha Deserve it?
>From: Dave Smith
>But what about the honest people who lost a substantial portion of their hard >earned savings because of her crooked dealings? Hmmm...I was always under the impression that playing the stocks was a gamble to begin with. If one invests their life's savings solely into a stock such as this one to begin with, I'd say that person was a fool and deserved what they got. Ellen |
Does Martha Deserve it?
On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 03:16:46 GMT, notbob > wrote:
> >Has justice been served? Not till Ken Lay is a bitch! Hear, Hear!!! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter