Infuriating

[Eden]

I agree with Badger - this guy probably has lots of assets that could be sold to cover damages.....If he gets charged with a felony (not convicted just charged) he has to disclose it to either his clients or the regulatory board (I don't remember the article being completely clear on this point). That would likely would lose him clients if not his job - but really *so what*... the question is would the DA have made this concession if the hit and run driver had been, lets say, a minimum wage earning landscaper? If the answer is no, then throw the book at the guy - the big heavy one that says felony. I don't think money should be able to buy a person out facing their crimes...

[sfa]

I agree with Badger - this guy probably has lots of assets that could be sold to cover damages.....If he gets charged with a felony (not convicted just charged) he has to disclose it to either his clients or the regulatory board (I don't remember the article being completely clear on this point). That would likely would lose him clients if not his job - but really *so what*... the question is would the DA have made this concession if the hit and run driver had been, lets say, a minimum wage earning landscaper? If the answer is no, then throw the book at the guy - the big heavy one that says felony. I don't think money should be able to buy a person out facing their crimes...

The answer may well be yes, however. The one time I was in court (traffic court) another case that was being considered that day was of a guy who was a professional cab driver with enough points on his record that the speeding charge against him that day would cause him to lose his license and thus his profession. The judge decided to lower the charge so he wouldn't get any points but raise the fine, thus making it possible for the man to keep working (which would allow him to be able to pay the fine).

Now you could argue that someone with that many points on his record should probably not be driving people around in a cab, and I'd tend to agree with that. OTOH, the guy probably didn't have many skills to fall back on and losing his license could have a longer term negative effect on a greater number of people (job loss leading to loss of home, reliance on welfare, fall into poverty for himself and anyone dependent on him, possible increase in crime, etc.). I'm not sure I agreed with the judge's decision that day, but I can't say I entirely disagreed with it either. In either case, it's clear that the earning power of the person charged IS being considered in these cases, regardless if the person charged is rich or relatively poor. It's entirely possible that these sorts of decisions are made every day and we just don't hear about them.

I'm not saying I agree with the DA's decision in THIS case (in fact, I don't); I'm just saying that the decision wasn't unique.