SR37: I sorry - Progressive Rock Music Forum

colorofmoney91 wrote:

I'm feelin' like crap after studying for nearly 12 hours.

I wish I could study for 12 hours. But my planned heroic cramming always turns into 10 hours on the internet and one hour studying.

if you own a sodastream i hate you

Andyman1125 wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

Andyman1125 wrote:

rushfan4 wrote:

Andyman1125 wrote:

NecronCommander wrote:

Something is wrong here.

It's called the American legal justice system.

The main difference of course is that the perpetrator of the bank robbery issued a threat of violence if the money wasn't turned over. That and he probably couldn't afford an attorney to defend him.

He never issued a threat of violence. Of course he couldn't afford an attorney. But what's ridiculous is that even without a lawyer he got sentenced 15 years for something he barely did (aka he returned the money, cooperated, and apologized) while the CEO had a lawyer (probably a number of them) and even after stealing $3 billion, he was only sentenced 3 years. wtf.

What do you think that he intended to do with the hand under his jacket???? "Give me the money or I will tickle you."

I don't disagree that the sentencing difference is outrageous, but I think that the threat of violence is one reason for the difference in sentences. I also assume that this was not a first offense for the homeless man, but that isn't provided within the article. I'm not naive though. I am also quite sure that both attorneys and race were also factors in the sentencing.

The fact that the guy only stole $100 (ignoring that he returned the money) also would make his crime a misdemeanor, wouldn't it? I'm not sure if it is the threat of violence, or that robbing a bank causes it to be a felony.

Sadly true. Sometimes this country seems pathetic to me, although the above case occurs in other countries, I'm sure.

On the other hand, I think that the real crime is that the mortgage CEO didn't get sentenced to more time. But I also wonder if he had to make any reparation payments? I suspect that he might have. Not sure if he could be charged criminal penalties on that or if maybe he would be subject to civil penalties.