« Obama's Vacation: A Test for Hawaii's Governor? - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com | rational's Blog | Seeds for Newspapers Rebirth »
Different Law for Rich
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2008/12/29/news/news-us-madoff-trustee-bank.html?_r=1
This story raises a couple of questions.
1) Why isn't he in a holding cell?
2) Why haven't all his accounts been seized?
3) Why do I even ask?
The law can seize everything a poor person has just on the suspicion of drug violation and dare you to prove the negative but this guy has confessed to running a huge can game and he still has a bank account? And is still walking the streets?
No wonder people have given up on this country,
We have sunk to third world status where we need the Chinese to protect our shipping, their is no law for the rich and politically powerful and the only thing we seem to be able to do is field a bunch of uniformed thugs to murder the innocent. Hell we have to hire mercenary's to protect our diplomats because our own forces are obviously incompetent at anything but mass slaughter.
But gee lets not worry about looking backwards and convicting these criminals it is more important to start on a clean slate and move forward with the criminals keeping their ill gotten gains, govt. pensions, social acceptance and immunity for crimes.
We are a bush league country and unless we build a lot more prisons and start filling them with people like Madoff, Rumsfield, Cheney, Enron executives etc with the same gusto that we chase down a guy who MAY have some marijuana there is no hope.
And since the new administration has already made it clear that playing nice with the existing corrupt structure is more important then justice there truly is only a down ward spiral to look forward to.
Advertisement
1) Because he posted bail. You can certainly argue this should have been denied.
2) Because nobody knows yet where all the accounts are. Hence the judges request for a full accounting post haste.
3) I don't know.
December 30, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are you complaining about? Cox at the SEC had 500 staff whose job it was to monitor something like nine trillion dollars in transactions every year. How many 'staff' are hunting down weed traffic?
I do not have the site handy but the forces that be at the FBI have used RICO and have confiscated a lot of property. They are looking for off shore accounts.
But, F.Lee Bailey was disbarred and imprisoned for taking a $600,000 retainer from a crook. It is against the law for attorneys to take "tainted" retainers.
So my question is, from whence did Madoff's attorneys find their retainers?
December 30, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rec'd for the righteous anger; however, I don't quite agree with your last paragraph.
December 30, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I second Lis on this. The last paragraph is over reach for me.
December 30, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto on the above comments, though I take exception to the second to the last paragraph as well. We already have way too many prisons, though the right people aren't being held in them in most cases.
December 30, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
First
Why does the Lawyers need "approval" from the Bank or anyone else to simply seize these ill gotten gains.
If we can hold innocents for an indefinite amount of time because of suspicions why can't we hold this guy who would seem to be the epitome of a flight risk.
I will agree about the prisons lets start swapping out beds from Marijuana prosecutions to members of the ending criminal regime.
Biden has already stated that he wants to move forward not look backwards and doesn't see the incoming administration investigating the past criminal actions of the present regime.
December 30, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree rational. Drug monies and scam monies are not any different in the eyes of the law.
However, Biden, much as I love him, says a lot of things. There will be an independent commission WITH subpoena power. Congress will stick it to them as they say.
There will be plenty of investigations.
December 30, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink