Well-written, balanced piece that raises important questions about “double indemnity.” The bind of making restitution without adequate income is very discouraging to those who have served their time, desire to make realistic amends and move on having “paid the price for their crimes.”
Of course, victims should be compensated, but there must be a more equitable solution because you “can’t get blood from a stone.”
Thank you for the shout out John. And for your intrepid writing about the realities of life in going through the white collar criminal justice system. It’s true, every sentence is a life sentence. But we’re working on it. More info at prisonist.org.
Well-written, balanced piece that raises important questions about “double indemnity.” The bind of making restitution without adequate income is very discouraging to those who have served their time, desire to make realistic amends and move on having “paid the price for their crimes.”
Of course, victims should be compensated, but there must be a more equitable solution because you “can’t get blood from a stone.”
Thank you, Mary. I appreciate the feedback. That’s what we’re hoping for.
A truly illogical - and unjust - system.
This is the truth. I thought I had an income based order, the FLU thinks different from what the judge has ordered and there is no recourse.
So true, other than more legal fees we usually can’t afford.
Thank you for the shout out John. And for your intrepid writing about the realities of life in going through the white collar criminal justice system. It’s true, every sentence is a life sentence. But we’re working on it. More info at prisonist.org.
Thank YOU, Jeff, for the great work you do!