White Collar / Blue Collar

Shea O'Meara

This chap swindled over a three year period;

Suspended sentence for IT specialist who defrauded bank
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/suspended-sentence-for-it-specialist-who-defrauded-bank-432198.html

While this guy;
Two years for criminal who attempted to sell stolen motorbike to gardaí http://news.eircom.net/breakingnews/16742774/

was jailed, locked up. Fair enough, but which one of the two caused a greater blight on society?

Just curious what people think.

seamus

The second guy is a known piece of **** with a criminal record and no remorse of his crimes and every intention of doing it again.

The first guy caused little or no harm through his actions (most of the money was recovered), which ultimately had honourable intentions, and is clearly not going to be doing anything like that again.

Is this a rhetorical question or are you trying to say that the scumbag was treated harshly?

Dob74

Shea O'Meara wrote: »

This chap swindled over a three year period;

Suspended sentence for IT specialist who defrauded bank
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/suspended-sentence-for-it-specialist-who-defrauded-bank-432198.html

While this guy;
Two years for criminal who attempted to sell stolen motorbike to gardaí http://news.eircom.net/breakingnews/16742774/

was jailed, locked up. Fair enough, but which one of the two caused a greater blight on society?

Just curious what people think.

Sums up our justice system nicely.
When a defence barrister says his father was a bank manager. Doesnt that make the crime alot worse since he is from a comfortable back ground.
He should be given a few months in jail at least.

bmaxi

seamus wrote: »

The second guy is a known piece of **** with a criminal record and no remorse of his crimes and every intention of doing it again.

The first guy caused little or no harm through his actions (most of the money was recovered), which ultimately had honourable intentions, and is clearly not going to be doing anything like that again.

Is this a rhetorical question or are you trying to say that the scumbag was treated harshly?

I agree that Hutch was a poor example to pick but it doesn't alter the fact that white collar crime is generally viewed in a more lenient light. Were it not, then certain members of the oligarchy would not see the light of day for several lifetimes and that would never do.

mark renton

seamus wrote: »

The second guy is a known piece of **** with a criminal record and no remorse of his crimes and every intention of doing it again.

The first guy caused little or no harm through his actions (most of the money was recovered), which ultimately had honourable intentions, and is clearly not going to be doing anything like that again.

Is this a rhetorical question or are you trying to say that the scumbag was treated harshly?

Since when do you know about the first guys intentions??


and that the second guy wasnt lying?

seamus

seamus wrote: »

The second guy is a known piece of **** with a criminal record and no remorse of his crimes and every intention of doing it again.

The first guy caused little or no harm through his actions (most of the money was recovered), which ultimately had honourable intentions, and is clearly not going to be doing anything like that again.

Is this a rhetorical question or are you trying to say that the scumbag was treated harshly?

Sums it up nicely.


lol in advance at all the fools who'll try stick up for the scumbag. They'll miss the irony when they post in a few weeks/months about how some "****ing Scumbag" stole their "Wallet/ipod/laptop" etc and how they deserve to be castrated etc..

seamus

john47832 wrote: »

Since when do you know about the first guys intentions??

His 11 other arrests which he hasn't yet been up in court for.

and that the second guy wasnt lying?

What makes you think he was? There's no evidence to suggest that he had ulterior motives, the entire story adds up.

I don't understand the idea that people from good backgrounds should be punished more harshly "because they should know better". Your background is irrelevant. What's relevant is why you did it, what the effect was, how sorry you are and whether it'll happen again. It shouldn't make a difference whether your father was a bank manager or blind, one-legged cross-dressing prostitute heroin addict.

bmaxi

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Sums it up nicely.


lol in advance at all the fools who'll try stick up for the scumbag. They'll miss the irony when they post in a few weeks/months about how some "****ing Scumbag" stole their "Wallet/ipod/laptop" etc and how they deserve to be castrated etc..

What about the scumbags who may, albeit indirectly, have stolen their home and their livelihood?

mark renton

Its actually typical of what you have just done - you have divided the 2 straight away

In one case you have seen a name and a history and placed it into a box, summizing his intentions as if this comes as a given

in the other you have believed anothers intentions by the fact that money was recovered (seems only because he didnt get time to spend it) and placed him into a different box partly due to the story

typical of a rash judgement - story read and categorized

bmaxi

bmaxi wrote: »

What about the scumbags who may, albeit indirectly, have stolen their home and their livelihood?

Oh believe me I've been out protesting over said people and I definitely believe there should be harsh punishments for people who have acted illegally in putting us into this mess we are in at the moment. The suffering is already apparent and will only get worse in the next few years.

The IT guy from the top story isn't one of those people. He got a suspended sentence and probably wont be able to get another job for a long time and his life will change exponentially from what it is now.. Which is probably more punishment than the second guy who gets to go into daycare with his mates for the next few months

ei.sdraob

did you not get the propaganda ministry memo?

its all about "green collar" jobs nowadays

bmaxi

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Oh believe me I've been out protesting over said people and I definitely believe there should be harsh punishments for people who have acted illegally in putting us into this mess we are in at the moment. The suffering is already apparent and will only get worse in the next few years.

The IT guy from the top story isn't one of those people. He got a suspended sentence and probably wont be able to get another job for a long time and his life will change exponentially from what it is now.. Which is probably more punishment than the second guy who gets to go into daycare with his mates for the next few months

There are few white collar crimes that are not premeditated.
It is not unreasonable to suppose that he had his girlfriend open an account at his bank in order to commit the crime, he continued to repeat his crime over a period, he presumably would still be committing the crime had he not been caught.
All these are similar to the offences committed by the guy who stole the motorbike.
I reiterate that I am not excusing the crimes committed by Hutch, rather that those charged with administering our legal system do not view them in the same light.
If I was cynical, I might suggest it's because this is the type of crime they are likely to commit, but I'm not.

MrMicra

If you are asking the question : why are blue collar criminals treated more harshly than white collar criminals the answer is twofold.

Ireland on independence inherited the British legal system as it was then. This was the descendant of the 'bloody code' of the early 19th century and was designed to keep the foot of those who held property on the neck of those who did not. The law as it was applied in the 19th century was savage. I have a book at home called 'the larceny act 1916 an annotated casebook' which is full of the most extraordinary examples of legal savagery. There is a case in it literally of more than one person hanged for stealing a sheep (that was in England by the way so it just the Irish poor who were mistreated).

Over the course of the 20th century penalties altered (largely because judges altered) and in the UK the legislature created new categories of crime.

Ireland does not have a legislature. We have a functioning executive branch of government and a functioning judicial system but effectively no legislature. As a consequence the prosecution of white collar crime in Ireland tends to come from 2 sources. The first is the extension of existing criminal acts to new causes of crime. The second is the EU.

A minor reason is the lack of a 'white collar prison' I am aware that it is unfair to have a white collar prison in the American sense, however if one existed then judges would be more willing to send white collar criminals to jail. Prison is of course a place of punishment generally only recidivists and violent criminals go to jail white collar criminals are non violent by definition and though generally recidivists have generally only been caught one; because a white collar criminal can steal so much money by the time he is charged I believe that a white collar prison is needed.

That's a sideshow though.

(Shelton Abbey is not a white collar prison it is a place of rehabilitation for people who are in the process of redemption).