Way off topic

Same as you- he violated trust of office position, & screwed his buddies/ co-craft workers over. Not easy for sure, last statement sentence correct attitude.

I don't know him or how remorseful he has been. He didn't steal any of my money either. A few days in jail, 100 hours of community service, an extra fine and court costs, and a rehab program for gamblers and I might consider that to be a light sentence for good behavior. Note: I am not a judge or authority and am just guestimating here.

If you're stealing, you're just like any other common thief. Some thieves are only remorseful if caught. If she was a ROB in a strip club that just stole 300 bucks from you but the manager caught her before she left the club and made her repay you, would you say, "oh, it's no big deal"?

Having worked in the gaming business for for almost 14 years, I have seen gamblers with problems. I emphathize with them, it can be readily addicted, especially if you begin with winning from the casinos. It gets into your blood and think you can't lose, then you go deeper in debt to try and recoup your losses.

Casinos are required to keep records of wins and losses, especially over $10,000, because they have to report those to IRS, if won or lost within a 24 hour period.

My suggestion is to try and verify if he does have a gaming problem. If so, then give him morale support, especially if he will seek professional help, and since he has repaid all that he stole.

I don't know what 'chitownlawyer' might say, but since this dude has repaid what he has embezzeled, the judge would probably take this in account on his sentencing.

Like Michael Vick, your man only admitted to stealing when he was caught. Had he confessed prior to being discovered in the audit I would probably be more sympathetic. He should be treated as any other thief. Also there are many people with a "gambling problem" who do not resort to stealing.

Easy! Had he NOT been discovered, your union would still be out the $160K and perhaps more! Being "nice", family, "friend", whatever does not change, a thief, is a thief, is a thief!

bones: the company actually paid him for 2 weeks off at a rehab for gamblers. I didn't even know that there was such a thing. I still don't buy it. But what a great company to work for.

SC-- maybe a great company to work for- but probably want to watch out for your 401k-- lol.

I think whether the guy has a gambling problem or not is irrelevant, he definately has a problem of some kind. If we excused everyone who has a problem, we'd be excusing everyone who does something illegal, there's always a reason why the guy did it. I would try to forgive the guy in my heart but I'm not sure I'd want to plead for a lenient sentence, those are two very different things.

We don't just send people to jail to punish them, a large part of the purpose of jail is to discourage others from doing something similar. And as a general rule I think we're much too lenient with white-collar criminals. Frankly I have a lot more sympathy for a criminal who is poor and uneducated than I do for one who is fairly well off. And yet the poor almost always receive longer sentences for far lesser offences.

I'm not saying we should excuse the dude who stole 160K at all.

All I'm saying is that if I were a judge, found this to be the dude's first felony, no other criminal records, having a gaming problem & was sent to rehab, paid the money back, I would show leniency in sentancing. Being a "felony" class crime, any jail time would have to exceed 12 months. I would place him on 3-5 years probabion; 500 community hours of work; and a fine of $16,000 (10% of what he embezzeled).

chitownlawyer........... give me a hand here would ya' please?

It's all fine to say a thief is a thief is a thief. You can't judge a book by it's cover. He may never steal again. Then again, he may. How can we judge something like that? That's like saying: A smoker is a smoker and always will be a smoker!

Bones7599,

I will stand by my "a thief is...". We, as humans, make choices. Those choices we make are based on what we wish to do. If one choose to steal or smoke, they have demonstrated they have the propensity to steal or smoke. From that point on, they are a thief or smoker. That said, can one control their propensity? Perhaps some do, but my bet would be that most don't. Example: I am overweight. I loose, I gain, I loose, I gain... You get the picture, and I think most follow that trend.

Bones, how can say it's his first feloney? Sounds to me like he embezzled regularly over a long period of time, so he's probably committed dozens or even hundreds of felonies, it's just that he only got caught once, and that's when he suddenly felt remorse. Seems to me he's no different from a drug addict who keeps breaking into homes and stealing things to support his habit until he's finally caught. Would you feel equal sympathy for him?

FONDL - I'm presuming it is his first felony. Where did you get the info that he embezzled regularly? I didn't detect that in shadowcat's opening thread at all. Did I miss something?

But, if I were a presiding judge and knew he had previous counts of embezzlement or thefts, sure I would throw the book at him also. But, as a judge, I wouldn't accept or allow "hearsay" testimony without eye witnesses testifying that he had stolen before.

All I am stating is that there is ALWAYS a possibility that if a person steals once, he/she may never do it again.

Sort of like, there is ALWAYS a possibility that if a person doesn't steal , he/she may sometime do it once.

Man or man clubber, I sure pity any defendants that might have a court haring while you are on jury duty.

You are convinced that once a person sins, he'll be a sinner all his life.

Are you more of an pessimistic thinker than optimistic thinker?

pes·si·mism - 1) A tendency to stress the negative or unfavorable or to take the gloomiest possible view; 2) The doctrine or belief that this is the worst of all possible worlds and that all things ultimately tend toward evil; 3) The doctrine or belief that the evil in the world outweighs the good.

optimism - 1) A tendency to expect the best possible outcome or dwell on the most hopeful aspects of a situation; 2) The doctrine, asserted by Leibnitz, that this world is the best of all possible worlds; 3) The belief that the universe is improving and that good will ultimately triumph over evil.

Update: They guy has officially resigned from the company. Effective tomorrow. A 30 year career down the shitter. I am sure that his attorney told him to sell his assets (house) and repay the money, to resign as union treasurer and apologize to the membership. This might have prevented an indictment but it didn't. There has just been too much white collar crime lately. His resignation had been prepared in advance of the indictment but held back until it actually happened. A last ditch effort to persuade the judge give him some compassion.

Bones, in any case I have ever read about where a large amount of money was embezzled by an insider like this one, the person did it a little bit at a time over an extended period. He didn't just steal once, he kept stealing again and again, which is how they usually get caught. I assumed that this case was similar. I feel really sorry for this guy, but I also think this kind of thing happens way too often and we need to get tougher with the people who do it.

FONDL: you are totally correct. This happened over a period of months/years.

Bones7599,

I never said one couldn't stop stealing, but after one time, they ARE a thief. As shadowcat states, it wasn't a one time thing! I rest my case!

clubber - I might be missing something. I read, and re-read shadowcats threads on this guy, and nowhere did I find shadowcat ever stating "it wasn't a one time thing".

Two above you last post...

Way off topic 08/31/07 18:55 Posted by: shadowcat [ ignore ] FONDL: you are totally correct. This happened over a period of months/years.

Bones: Bro, you know that I love you like a brother but you are way off on this one. This is a small union. We don't have a multi million dollar strike fund. $160,000 taken all at one time would have stood out like a sore thumb. It was a $1000 here and $5000 there. I think that most of it was fake payments for legal costs to lawyers. None of us suspected him. It took an audit by the Labor Dept. to uncover it. I have to wonder what he spent it on. Strippers?

OK, I missed that thread. My apologies. But, embezzlement does not always occur at a one-time increment.

What I am saying is that, a cashier at a Wal-Mart might steal from his/her cash drawer time and time again, until caught. Once they have been caught, they may not 'steal' again.

Shadowcat: I ain't saying this guy steals everything from everyone. All I'm saying is that NOW he got caught sifting from the funds, might he attempt something like this again in the future? Maybe, maybe not, but rest assured, with this on his record, he'll probably never get a chance to steal again, as who would put him in place of responsibility or access to money? NOONE!

The question of whether or not he might steal again is irrelevant. Incarceration isn't just to punish the micreant or to protect society from a possible repeat, it's to discourage other people from doing the same thing. The more severe the sentence, the stronger the message.

I totally agree. A lot of first offenders get no jail time, especially on white collar type crimes. Our prisons are so over-crowded as it is with more serious felons for more severe crimes. I can see this dude going "IN" for a short while to teach him, and the only thing he learns is how to SPREAD them wide!

Of course, the old saying "Think, before you act" (on committing a crime) applies. How many times have many of us "acted before thinking" at a club and licked a bare pussy or stuck our 'unprotected' dicks up a pussy? LOL

Bones, you say "Our prisons are so over-crowded as it is with more serious felons for more severe crimes." That isn't true, our prisons are overcrowded primarily because of the large numbers of drug offenders who are locked up, many of whom have committed no serious crimes unless you think possession of minor amounts of drugs is a serious crime. If we had more sane drug laws we could in fact put the serious criminals in jail for longer.