http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20101104/NEWS/101109939/1078&ParentProfile=1062
QuoteA financial manager for wealthy clients will not face felony charges for a hit-and-run because it could jeopardize his job, prosecutors said Thursday.
You see, if you have a high paying job you dont have to worry about hit and run charges.
:lulz:
American justice, just like its always been.
HAW HAW!
No words.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!
ok, I can see a prosecutor doing this.
you have two people who's lives are now fucked for the remainder of their time on the planet.
one of them is at fault and one of them has unexpected and very expensive medical bills piling up.
the one who is at fault is gainfully employed and probably makes enough to make restitution for the medical bills actually possible without being crippling and forcing bankruptcy.
so if they drop the felony charge to a lesser one, the one at fault doesn't run the risk of doing time, losing his job, and making them both doubly fucked.
there's nothing stopping the guy who got hit from filing a civil suit as well.
I know it doesn't seem that way on the face of it, but I see this as the best compromise.
eye for an eye would make them both stupid and broke.
</end> 2 cents
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 15, 2010, 11:20:11 PM
ok, I can see a prosecutor doing this.
you have two people who's lives are now fucked for the remainder of their time on the planet.
one of them is at fault and one of them has unexpected and very expensive medical bills piling up.
the one who is at fault is gainfully employed and probably makes enough to make restitution for the medical bills actually possible without being crippling and forcing bankruptcy.
so if they drop the felony charge to a lesser one, the one at fault doesn't run the risk of doing time, losing his job, and making them both doubly fucked.
there's nothing stopping the guy who got hit from filing a civil suit as well.
I know it doesn't seem that way on the face of it, but I see this as the best compromise.
eye for an eye would make them both stupid and broke.
</end> 2 cents
This does make sense. although it would be better if the prosecutor could wait to bring charges until after the civil case.
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 16, 2010, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Ok that kinda makes sense, let me address it differently
On one hand it makes less sense to keep a rich guy (who likely has investments that can be used to repay the victim) out of jail than somebody poor (who would need to work the debt off).
On the other hand, this is America, why would we deny the victim the chance to sue the guy for 10 times what his medical bills were. :lulz:
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:56:53 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 16, 2010, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Ok that kinda makes sense, let me address it differently
On one hand it makes less sense to keep a rich guy (who likely has investments that can be used to repay the victim) out of jail than somebody poor (who would need to work the debt off).
On the other hand, this is America, why would we deny the victim the chance to sue the guy for 10 times what his medical bills were. :lulz:
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 15, 2010, 11:20:11 PM
ok, I can see a prosecutor doing this.
you have two people who's lives are now fucked for the remainder of their time on the planet.
one of them is at fault and one of them has unexpected and very expensive medical bills piling up.
the one who is at fault is gainfully employed and probably makes enough to make restitution for the medical bills actually possible without being crippling and forcing bankruptcy.
so if they drop the felony charge to a lesser one, the one at fault doesn't run the risk of doing time, losing his job, and making them both doubly fucked.
there's nothing stopping the guy who got hit from filing a civil suit as well.
I know it doesn't seem that way on the face of it, but I see this as the best compromise.
eye for an eye would make them both stupid and broke.
</end> 2 cents
Okay, but do you think this kind of treatment would be given to some retail clerk who barely clears $20,000 a year? Do you think they'd drop the felony charge so he doesn't lose his job? Naw, they'd pin his ass to the wall and go for blood.
Yep they would. There'd be no chance at all that he'd ever be able to pay the restitution so there's no incentive for the prosecution to let him off.
I imagine he's trying to have the best possible situation for the victim, which would be ensuring his medical bills can be paid by the person at fault.
Like I said, it looks shady on the surface, but really is the best thing for the victim IMO.
Which is hilarious given that the victim disagrees with the prosecutor's decision.
he's angry (and rightly so) and wants his eye from the guy. cant really blame him, but I'm willing to bet it's more emotion than reason that wants this guy put in prison and to loose his job.
really not defending the guy, as anyone who runs after a hit deserves the biggest justice stick that can be found shoved up their ass.
but I'm willing to bet if the victim is STILL bed ridden, that he's going to be paying for this for the rest of his life in more ways than one. He should take the way that will put the least possible financial burden on himself and his family, even if it means not seeing the guy do 10-15 years.
again, the above is all opinion.
Kind of sends the wrong signal though. Yeah, I get the philosophy of wanting the victims to be cared for. However, a Prosecutor should also be thinking about the community. The kind of person who is involved in hit and runs is the kind of guy I don't want on the road. I've seen the tragic results of that kind of decision here in Maine. There was this guy from Northern Maine who had been in previous reckless driving incidents. Nobody really put the hammer down on him. He ended up causing a massive pile up down here in the Southern part of the State that killed people.
Now, if the Prosecutor works out a plea deal where this ass is forced to surrender his driver's license for a long-ass time, if not forever, I might be able to sign on with that. Otherwise, I think you are putting a loaded weapon back onto the street.
The rich ALWAYS get better deals. ALWAYS. EOS. And selling someone anything other than "they're buying their way out" is just selling, like beachfront property in AZ. So yeah, the DAs' offices in this case are motherfucking criminal assholes, mostly like any other DAs' offices.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on December 16, 2010, 03:36:49 PM
Kind of sends the wrong signal though. Yeah, I get the philosophy of wanting the victims to be cared for. However, a Prosecutor should also be thinking about the community. The kind of person who is involved in hit and runs is the kind of guy I don't want on the road. I've seen the tragic results of that kind of decision here in Maine. There was this guy from Northern Maine who had been in previous reckless driving incidents. Nobody really put the hammer down on him. He ended up causing a massive pile up down here in the Southern part of the State that killed people.
Now, if the Prosecutor works out a plea deal where this ass is forced to surrender his driver's license for a long-ass time, if not forever, I might be able to sign on with that. Otherwise, I think you are putting a loaded weapon back onto the street.
dont know about there, but here the DHSMV makes decisions about your license outside of the court. You're at their mercy as to when you get your license back if it's suspended and a judge can't change that. They can also place requirements on reissuing it over and above what a judge might give you. I imagine hit and run carries at least a 5-10 year suspension, and I would hope it would be a lifetime revoke but I'm not sure.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:56:53 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 16, 2010, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Ok that kinda makes sense, let me address it differently
On one hand it makes less sense to keep a rich guy (who likely has investments that can be used to repay the victim) out of jail than somebody poor (who would need to work the debt off).
On the other hand, this is America, why would we deny the victim the chance to sue the guy for 10 times what his medical bills were. :lulz:
Bullshit. The guy has insurance. He is a fucking criminal and needs to go to fucking jail. JesusFuckingChriston a fucking stick.
Quote from: Jenne on December 16, 2010, 03:40:01 PM
The rich ALWAYS get better deals. ALWAYS. EOS. And selling someone anything other than "they're buying their way out" is just selling, like beachfront property in AZ. So yeah, the DAs' offices in this case are motherfucking criminal assholes, mostly like any other DAs' offices.
All of our property is beach front, to be honest.
Lotsa beach, no ocean.
Quote from: Charley Brown on December 16, 2010, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:56:53 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 16, 2010, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Ok that kinda makes sense, let me address it differently
On one hand it makes less sense to keep a rich guy (who likely has investments that can be used to repay the victim) out of jail than somebody poor (who would need to work the debt off).
On the other hand, this is America, why would we deny the victim the chance to sue the guy for 10 times what his medical bills were. :lulz:
Bullshit. The guy has insurance. He is a fucking criminal and needs to go to fucking jail. JesusFuckingChriston a fucking stick.
Insurance probably doesn't cover Hit and Run.
IF the DMV pulls the guys license for the next 10 years, at least... AND if there is a civil lawsuit that takes all the money he'll be making for the next 20 years... then I don't see a need for jail time. If he's keeping his license or if he gets out of the civil suit... then I'd be all for tossing him into the middle of Interstate 70 like a game of Frogger for Investment Bankers.
Prison. General population. EOS.
Quote from: Ratatosk on December 16, 2010, 05:28:13 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on December 16, 2010, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:56:53 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 16, 2010, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Ok that kinda makes sense, let me address it differently
On one hand it makes less sense to keep a rich guy (who likely has investments that can be used to repay the victim) out of jail than somebody poor (who would need to work the debt off).
On the other hand, this is America, why would we deny the victim the chance to sue the guy for 10 times what his medical bills were. :lulz:
Bullshit. The guy has insurance. He is a fucking criminal and needs to go to fucking jail. JesusFuckingChriston a fucking stick.
Insurance probably doesn't cover Hit and Run.
IF the DMV pulls the guys license for the next 10 years, at least... AND if there is a civil lawsuit that takes all the money he'll be making for the next 20 years... then I don't see a need for jail time. If he's keeping his license or if he gets out of the civil suit... then I'd be all for tossing him into the middle of Interstate 70 like a game of Frogger for Investment Bankers.
Check. Jail is only for poor people.
Quote from: Charley Brown on December 16, 2010, 05:50:27 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on December 16, 2010, 05:28:13 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on December 16, 2010, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:56:53 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 16, 2010, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Ok that kinda makes sense, let me address it differently
On one hand it makes less sense to keep a rich guy (who likely has investments that can be used to repay the victim) out of jail than somebody poor (who would need to work the debt off).
On the other hand, this is America, why would we deny the victim the chance to sue the guy for 10 times what his medical bills were. :lulz:
Bullshit. The guy has insurance. He is a fucking criminal and needs to go to fucking jail. JesusFuckingChriston a fucking stick.
Insurance probably doesn't cover Hit and Run.
IF the DMV pulls the guys license for the next 10 years, at least... AND if there is a civil lawsuit that takes all the money he'll be making for the next 20 years... then I don't see a need for jail time. If he's keeping his license or if he gets out of the civil suit... then I'd be all for tossing him into the middle of Interstate 70 like a game of Frogger for Investment Bankers.
Check. Jail is only for poor people.
Nah, jail is only for people that need to be kept out of the general population.
The concept of jail in America came from the Puritan idea that people do crimes because their relationship with God is fucked up... so lots of time alone in prison will give them the time they need to get right with God.
In reality, we take people that fucked up, stick them with people that REALLY FUCKED UP and end up with more fucked up people.
If you make a habit of killing/raping/extorting/etc people, you should go to jail. If you fuck up, you should pay for it in a more useful way. Hell, I'd approve of this guy being forced to be the victim's servant for the next five years... though thats a bit medieval of me, I'm sure.
:lulz:
Quote from: Ratatosk on December 16, 2010, 06:19:45 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on December 16, 2010, 05:50:27 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on December 16, 2010, 05:28:13 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on December 16, 2010, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:56:53 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 16, 2010, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Ok that kinda makes sense, let me address it differently
On one hand it makes less sense to keep a rich guy (who likely has investments that can be used to repay the victim) out of jail than somebody poor (who would need to work the debt off).
On the other hand, this is America, why would we deny the victim the chance to sue the guy for 10 times what his medical bills were. :lulz:
Bullshit. The guy has insurance. He is a fucking criminal and needs to go to fucking jail. JesusFuckingChriston a fucking stick.
Insurance probably doesn't cover Hit and Run.
IF the DMV pulls the guys license for the next 10 years, at least... AND if there is a civil lawsuit that takes all the money he'll be making for the next 20 years... then I don't see a need for jail time. If he's keeping his license or if he gets out of the civil suit... then I'd be all for tossing him into the middle of Interstate 70 like a game of Frogger for Investment Bankers.
Check. Jail is only for poor people.
Nah, jail is only for people that need to be kept out of the general population.
The concept of jail in America came from the Puritan idea that people do crimes because their relationship with God is fucked up... so lots of time alone in prison will give them the time they need to get right with God.
In reality, we take people that fucked up, stick them with people that REALLY FUCKED UP and end up with more fucked up people.
If you make a habit of killing/raping/extorting/etc people, you should go to jail. If you fuck up, you should pay for it in a more useful way. Hell, I'd approve of this guy being forced to be the victim's servant for the next five years... though thats a bit medieval of me, I'm sure.
:lulz:
Paying for the medical bills as well as a large monetary compensation for
leaving him to die would make me happy.
Quote from: Charley Brown on December 16, 2010, 05:50:27 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on December 16, 2010, 05:28:13 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on December 16, 2010, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:56:53 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on December 16, 2010, 12:45:26 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 16, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
Uh, this is not simply an accident. The guy hit someone, then drove away without calling 911, because it wasn't worth his time to try and get medical help for someone he nearly killed.
and Im not defending that. If the guy hadn't been fucked up by it I'd say lock him away for as long as possible.
I said that locking him away and him losing his ability to repay his restitution is lose lose for the victim. he gets fucked twice.
Ok that kinda makes sense, let me address it differently
On one hand it makes less sense to keep a rich guy (who likely has investments that can be used to repay the victim) out of jail than somebody poor (who would need to work the debt off).
On the other hand, this is America, why would we deny the victim the chance to sue the guy for 10 times what his medical bills were. :lulz:
Bullshit. The guy has insurance. He is a fucking criminal and needs to go to fucking jail. JesusFuckingChriston a fucking stick.
Insurance probably doesn't cover Hit and Run.
IF the DMV pulls the guys license for the next 10 years, at least... AND if there is a civil lawsuit that takes all the money he'll be making for the next 20 years... then I don't see a need for jail time. If he's keeping his license or if he gets out of the civil suit... then I'd be all for tossing him into the middle of Interstate 70 like a game of Frogger for Investment Bankers.
Check. Jail is only for poor people.
Jail has always only been for poor people.
See Australia. :kingmeh:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 16, 2010, 05:17:37 PM
Quote from: Jenne on December 16, 2010, 03:40:01 PM
The rich ALWAYS get better deals. ALWAYS. EOS. And selling someone anything other than "they're buying their way out" is just selling, like beachfront property in AZ. So yeah, the DAs' offices in this case are motherfucking criminal assholes, mostly like any other DAs' offices.
All of our property is beach front, to be honest.
Lotsa beach, no ocean.
Sand =/= BEACH, man.
Also, repost from AT: http://goodmenproject.com/2010/12/13/study-of-the-day-rich-people-feel-less-empathy/
Everyone who presented an opinion without actually reading the article (it's painfully obvious who you are) needs to STFU and read the article.
The entire "logic" about the driver needing to stay free so he can pay for the victim's medical care etc. is spurious. The victim doesn't want him to stay free, he wants him to be convicted of a felony. The victim is a fucking transplant surgeon... no doubt with excellent medical insurance and disability coverage as well as significant assets of his own. The driver's existing assets should be quite sufficient to cover a handsome award in a civil suit if the victim decided to pursue one.
This has nothing to do with protecting the victim, and everything to do with keeping a rich man out of jail simply because he's rich. I would not be surprised if some palms were greased in the making of this decision.
Quote from: Nigel on December 17, 2010, 04:46:03 AM
This has nothing to do with protecting the victim, and everything to do with keeping a rich man out of jail simply because he's rich. I would not be surprised if some palms were greased in the making of this decision.
Me either! Well said!
Quote from: Nigel on December 17, 2010, 04:46:03 AM
Everyone who presented an opinion without actually reading the article (it's painfully obvious who you are) needs to STFU and read the article.
The entire "logic" about the driver needing to stay free so he can pay for the victim's medical care etc. is spurious. The victim doesn't want him to stay free, he wants him to be convicted of a felony. The victim is a fucking transplant surgeon... no doubt with excellent medical insurance and disability coverage as well as significant assets of his own. The driver's existing assets should be quite sufficient to cover a handsome award in a civil suit if the victim decided to pursue one.
This has nothing to do with protecting the victim, and everything to do with keeping a rich man out of jail simply because he's rich. I would not be surprised if some palms were greased in the making of this decision.
did read it. and agree with the DA.