Desertopa
Not Actually Indie
Since: Jan, 2001
Not Actually Indie
#2: Nov 8th 2010 at 5:43:16 PM
It's not for his sake though, but for the people he needs to pay restitution to. The point is that the judge is worried about punishing the victims by taking away his ability to pay them back.
...eventually, we will reach a maximum entropy state where nobody has their own socks or underwear, or knows who to ask to get them back.
pvtnum11
OMG NO NOSECONES
from Kerbin low orbit
Since: Nov, 2009
Relationship Status: We finish each other's sandwiches
OMG NO NOSECONES
#3: Nov 8th 2010 at 5:51:07 PM
...so if I was charged with a felony, and had to pay restitution, how does that work? I'm not a wealthy banker, do I get slammed with the felony charge?
Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.
DeMarquis
Since: Feb, 2010
#4: Nov 8th 2010 at 6:03:53 PM
Well, you could always steal the money...
breadloaf
Since: Oct, 2010
#5: Nov 8th 2010 at 10:06:48 PM
You're poor so you get a criminal record. I don't see what's wrong.
...
Ha.
scratching at .8, just hopin'
SomeSortOfTroper
Since: Jan, 2001
#7: Nov 9th 2010 at 1:36:52 AM
The statement also said that the two misdeamours may add up to an actual greater punishment than the felony.
Total posts: 7
Because it might hurt his career.
"Felony convictions have some pretty serious job implications for someone in Mr. Erzinger's profession, and that entered into it," Hurlbert told the paper. "When you're talking about restitution, you don't want to take away his ability to pay."
Erzinger reportedly manages more than $1 billion in assets and would have to publicly disclose any felony charge under the North American Securities Dealers regulations.
Discuss.