Hacker News Reader

Comment by memish | Hacker News Reader

Should either be in jail at all? They aren't a physical threat and anything Elizabeth does now will be watched like a hawk.

Same with SBF.

Just garnish their income for life or until they make their victims whole.

View on HN

This stance is absolutely baffling to me. Just goes to show how our attitudes towards white collar crime (which is orders of magnitude more lucrative than most petty crime) are grossly out of proportion to the harm they cause compared to, say, a car thief.

It's about reoffense, so it's specific to the type. Elizabeth Holmes and SBF needed people to give them a lot of money. They won't be able to do that again without some serious redemption arc.

Also their activity would be watched closely and income garnished.

> aren't a physical threat and anything Elizabeth does now will be watched like a hawk

Wasn't she trying to raise money for a start-up while on trial?

> Same with SBF

Isn't he trying to raise money right now?

The punishment is only partially about Holmes, and largely about the message it sends to the potential future Holmeses of the world.

There has to be some punishment. If I steal $100 from you and the risk is I get caught and all I would have to do is give it back then there would be a lot more white collar crime.

Exactly - taking away freedom is really the only penalty you can apply to white collar crime, or the risk/reward would be grossly in favor of committing the crime - even income garnishments can't push you to absolute zero.

Before modern bankruptcy laws, it was common for people who owe a lot of money to go to debtor's prison (and this still happens in some parts of the world with more archaic legal systems). At a glance it may seem contradictory since locking someone up would probably preclude any chance the debtor might have to make money towards the debt but the optics of getting punished for wrongdoing is clearly more important here.

I agree that in contrast to regular crime, there is no need for prison for incapacitation purpose of punishment, some record forbidding any kind of entrepreneurship or managerial posts would be enough. For reparation purpose of punishment, garnishing the income would be enough.

But there is still deterrence purpose of punishment - if you remove prison from considerations, it significantly changes risk calculations for white collar crime making it much more profitable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com