"At the risk of stating the obvious, the reason Madoff was arrested so quickly is because he confessed to every element of criminal fraud — including both the underlying scheme and his criminal intent. This meant that the FBI had both that confession and highly potent, admissible evidence of guilt in the form of testimony from his adult children (who had no apparent axe to grind)."
Right, I mean, I'm not saying he's not guilty, but does anyone at this point really understand it deeply enough to file an arrest warrant? I understand the impatience emotionally, but not logically.
I was jailed for sitting on the sidewalk in front of my old high school when I was 18. The police were called on me by the vice-principal, who could see from his office that I was rolling cigarettes, and thought I was rolling joints. The police showed up, realized that the call was bad because it was obviously loose tobacco, and decided to charge me with "criminal trespassing" because it's a charge that the police can press themselves without a complainant (the vice-principal was informed by others what had happened, would have never pressed charges, and was extremely regretful about it afterwards.) I spent the night in jail, and part of the next day, until my family could raise the money to bond me out (money completely lost; a bond, not a bail.) Luckily my uncle knew a bailbondsman personally, because as a loser black punk rocker teenager no other bailbondsman would take our money. If that hadn't happened, I would have spent a week in jail waiting for my hearing. My entire relationship with my public defender took place walking down a hallway towards the courtroom, where he told me that I could take a plea bargain (i.e. plead guilty) in exchange for no time, no fine, no probation, and a removal from my record if I stayed out of any trouble for six months (and of course the opposite if sitting on the sidewalk went so badly for me again.) I took the plea bargain, which required me to admit to the crime and pay court costs.
The reason SBF isn't arrested is because the people who would have to order him to be arrested relate to him personally, and coddle people like him as they would wish to be coddled themselves.
My Mom was a judge in Oakland. Because I was a little kid, sometimes I would just have to stay in the courtroom or my Mom's chambers. It was shocking to me how different the criminal justice system was than what I saw on TV, in which it was always always roughly fair. My mother above all stressed that it was a deeply unfair system and did what she could. I think a lot of people think the police, courts and lawyers work the way they do on TV.
That’s true but what you’re describing is an example of injustice. It would probably be better if everyone were treated like SBF than if everyone were treated like you were.
Do you believe it's possible that everyone is treated like royalty? And if not, wouldn't it be better if royalty was treated like poor people instead of having a multi-tiered justice system where the fairness of the system depends on your class?
There is also a third option (or forth if you count the status quo). We could treat the rich the way we currently treat the poor and vice versa (an option I like to call eat the rich). IMO this is the only fair option, the rich have it good as is, they have an enormous amount of power that they treat with impunity, never taking the responsibility that comes with it. They have the option of abandoning their wealth (unlike the poor). It is completely fair if the justice system were to be used disproportionately against them.
For some definition of fairness, yes. I don't fully disagree since wealth makes it trivially easy to be lawful, nothing you do is because of needs, it's purely based on wants/desires. It does come with some problems, and I doubt it'll work long-term, but it would be interesting to watch.
I don’t want SBF arrested for criminal trespass, I want him arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for the crimes he committed, and I don’t want him getting off because of the need for a speedy trial, before we know what he did.
Law enforcement should not act in bad ways to more people.
That a school vice principal would call the cops on a student boggles the mind (outside of serious crimes or imminent danger). The true educator will patiently observe the ups and downs of a student through the years and will work to teach. Try and engage the student more, talk about drugs and choice in a smart way, recommend some jiu-jitsu classes or, as a last resort, talk to the parents.
A vice principal is an administrator, not an educator. The problem with schools these days (tm) is that power within the system has been given to or taken by these administrators, and there seems to be no way to reverse this.
It is easy to see how that entire chain of events could have really utterly fsckd over your life. I am sorry you had to go through that, but at least it didn't go totally sideways.
It easily could have cost you your job, then your apt, etc.
Thanks for your comment. I think a lot of people are not understanding it.
To a large extent (not completely) law enforcement and the greater justice system exist to mitigate contention in society. If the target of a law enforcement action is rich or famous, and the crime is not active or physically damaging, then it will be contentious to arrest the rich/famous criminal. If the criminal is not rich or famous, or if the crime is physical (murder, assault, etc) then the arrest will be less contentious, and the police will proceed.
Up until now, it has not been at all contentious for the police to arrest/abuse lower status persons.
In the case of a contentious arrest of a high status person, arrest will be delayed until the exact charges are known and believed to be provable.
---
I am describing the system as I see it now, not the system that I think should exist.
The faults described here are not faults of individual members of any justice system, they are faults of society and we ascribe value.
Before replying to this comment, please think about policing in feudal societies and consider the lessons of Foucault in "Discipline and Punish".
You plead guilty precisely because you didn't do anything. The probability distribution for you was: high chance of getting off, low chance of getting a large punishment. The probability distribution for SBF if he pleads not guilty will be inverted: high chance of incarceration, low chance of walking. But the odds will likely be preferable to whatever deal he ends up being offered. Modelling the cops that booked you, their goal is to throw things at the wall and see what sticks. Whichever cops are currently gathering evidence against SBF will be thinking the opposite: they need to be very careful in collecting evidence to minize the risk of SBF getting away.
I should point out that while this is unfortunate, this is all a relatively inevitable consequence of having a justice system. Since humans are deciding cases, there will always be a small chance that they screw it up (in one direction or another). You can't have arbitrary do-overs for people who feel their case was decided poorly, because everyone thinks that (or will say they do).
Argh, that is so far outside of my reality that I have trouble understanding how such evil events happen in the USA — I'm from New Zealand so I just have no frame of reference to understand.
The closest I have experienced second-hand in authoritarian Cuba under Castro while I was visiting there, where I saw some residents arrested for nothing tangible, but they were released within 8 hours and they seemed blasé about it.
I have been arrested, but the police were respectful (it helps that I am a short white guy, and I was wearing a geek identity).
If you ever visit Christchurch, contact me via HN, and I'll feed and put you up for some days, if you're keen.
Don't worry - most people in the USA have trouble understanding that such evil events happen here, too.
You've either been on the pointy end of the "justice" system, or you haven't. Paying "court fees" to directly fund the salaries of the people persecuting you is the icing on the cake.
And like, what happened to OP was pretty tame, all things considered. Nobody died. There wasn't months or years spent in prison. I don't think their life was drastically altered by it (but their personal world view certainly was). Nobody is going to the media with such a story, because it's not glaringly outrageous. Ask an attorney if OP would have a case against the police/state to rectify the injustice, and they'll just laugh. They're part of that system and above you, which is why even if you're paying them, they don't answer the phone after 5.
IMO the first step to reform happening is the system admitting it is fallible. Plea bargains should be drastically reformed - either make the case or STFU. When a victim is found innocent or charges are dropped, they should be mechanically compensated for all of their expenses and damages - legal fees, time lost in jail/court, emotional distress from the kidnapping. That money should come out of the coffers of the city paying the gang of violent thugs that abused OP, and ultimately the taxpayers funding them. If the cost of law enforcement ends up doubling, then the true cost of enforcing the laws was twice what was being paid - right now these damages are funded as a perverse reverse lottery where the unlucky just get stuck with them. This certainly won't fix everything, but correctly defining responsibility is the first step.
Alas, the disempowering mass media narrative we get is that the cops just need "more training" so perhaps they won't commit wanton second degree murder as much. Funny how the average citizen doesn't get a similar allowance.
I think part of it's because when a poor person looks vaguely associated with a crime, it's straight to jail. When it's a rich person it's all "well IDK we just can't be sure, can we?"
ah so that's why my city is so crime free, I and all the women I know are never hypervigilant taking public transport, I'm never afraid for my elderly relatives to be bashed in the head or pushed onto the tracks by 9 time offenders out on bail, and everyone working exhausting retail hours from cvs to applestore doesn't know why all these totally-prejudiced shoplifting deepfakes go viral
I'd be fine with the new surveillance state if it actually delivered some safety-dividends, but i guess lawlessness keeps the working class in line
Also, it's not like he's about to hop in a private jet and evade the jurisdiction. He's constrained in an extradition friendly country. And to the extent it's not extradition friendly (mostly if they want to press charges first), it doesn't help to file an arrest warrant.
Spending your customer deposit that are legally off-limits, and that he said were off-limit, on things like houses, properties, etc for your own self and family is not a straight-up admission of wrong doing?
Since when breaking and entering a looting a house can be defended with "well, I thought all was fine"?
He admitted numerous times doing things that are straight up illegal.
Spending your customer deposit that are legally off-limits, and that he said were off-limit, on things like houses, properties, etc for your own self and family
This isn't proven. He could have bought those houses with VC money not customer deposits.
Where did you get this impression? Even that part is potentially up for debate. FTX isn't a bank or anything like that and they say that FTX USA is actually still solvent and will payout. I have my doubts about the last one but if he actually pays all US customers back he might get away with this.
>but does anyone at this point really understand it deeply enough to file an arrest warrant?
That hasn't stopped prosecutors before. This is happening because there is no appetite to go after him, people can take a look at the public record so far and wonder why this might be the case.
Right, I mean, I'm not saying he's not guilty, but does anyone at this point really understand it deeply enough to file an arrest warrant? I understand the impatience emotionally, but not logically.