I am overseas at the moment and have just caught up on the coverage of Judge Amy St Eve’s decision yesterday to send my old boss (and now NRO colleague) Conrad Black back to jail. Following the Supreme Court’s overturning of the “honest services” basis of his conviction, Conrad was released from prison in Florida, after serving two years, to await re-sentencing. Given that he was, in effect, improperly convicted on the majority of charges, a civilized and humane justice system would have concluded that it was both absurd and vindictive to return him to his cell for the one shred of the United States government’s case that has not been tossed out along the way in Conrad’s seven year battle.
But the Department of Justice is not civilized and humane. As I wrote here:
The federal justice system is a bit like one of those unmanned drones President Obama is so fond of using on the unfortunate villagers of Waziristan. Once it’s locked on to you and your coordinates are in the system, it’s hard to get it called off. Three years ago, during his trial in Chicago, I suggested to the defendant he’d be better off saving his gazillions in legal fees and instead climbing under the tarp in the bed of my truck and letting me drive him over the minimally enforced Pittsburg-La Patrie border crossing to Quebec and thence by fishing boat to a remote landing strip on Miquelon where a waiting plane could spirit him somewhere beyond the reach of the U.S. Attorney. Estimated cost: about a thousandth of what he’d spent on lawyers to date. P’shaw, scoffed Conrad, or ejaculations to that effect. He was not a fugitive but an innocent man, and eventually he would be vindicated by the justice system of this great republic.
But that’s not possible – because, with a system that relies on multiple charges and an ability to pressure everybody else in the case to switch sides, you can win (as Conrad did) nineteen-twentieths of the battles and still lose the war. He’s a wealthy businessman, and nobody has any sympathy for those. But it’s even worse if you’re a nobody. A New Hampshire neighbor of mine had the misfortune to attract the attention of federal prosecutors for one of those white-collar “crimes” no one can explain in English. The jury acquitted him in a couple of hours. Great news! The system worked! Not really. By then, the feds had spent a half-decade demolishing his life, exhausting his savings, wrecking his marriage, and driving him to attempt suicide. He’s not a big scary businessman like Conrad, just a small-town nobody. And he’ll never get his life back. Because, regardless of the verdict, the process is the punishment — which is the hallmark of unjust justice systems around the world.
As to white-collar crime, what about the one type of white-collar crime that goes entirely unpunished? For an accounting fraud of $567 million, Enron’s executives went to jail, and its head guy died there. For an accounting fraud ten times that size, the two Democrat hacks who headed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Franklin Raines and Jamie Gorelick, walked away with a combined taxpayer-funded payout of $116.4 million. Fannie and Freddie are two of the largest businesses in America, but they’re exempt from SEC disclosure rules and Sarbanes-Oxley “corporate governance” burdens, and so in 2008, unlike Enron, WorldCom or any of the other reviled private-sector bogeymen, they came close to taking down the entire global economy. Yes, yes, I know two wrongs don’t make a right (unless you’re Jamie Gorelick), but what then is the point of the SEC?
Judge St Eve’s decision is appalling. In my weekend column, I write about “nation-building” at home and abroad. Federal justice shares with those subjects what is the defining characteristic of US Government in the early 21st century — grotesque excess and an utter lack of proportion.
Seeing the US transform itself from a country based on freedom and the rule of law to a bureaucracy dominated, corrupt police state is one the greatest disappointments of my life. Having spent an extensive amount of time studying the Soviet Union it is appalling to see the same type of system taking over here. As Kaganovich said upon hearing of the fall of the Berlin Wall...... "It's a catastrophe."
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Because, regardless of the verdict, the process is the punishment – which is the hallmark of unjust justice systems around the world."
Executives accused of some fraud related offense are deliberately also charged with a laundry list of other offenses. This encourages juries to think that surely the defendant is guilty of something even though no proof is provided. It also makes it nearly impossible for the accused to defend himself. It would be like trying to fend off a swarm of New Hampshire black flies with a fly swatter.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSuccessful prosecution of business executives is also a career enhancement for assistant district attorneys. We often see political adds that tout a candidates former successful prosecutions of this or that "bad guy".
In contrast, prosecuting a politician or executive with high level political ties can be career suicide for a DA. The DA's party won't like it and will withdraw support for any candidacy, and highly placed political friends of the defendants will make further career advancement impossible.
There is liberty and justice for all who have enough money or know the right people. That is a damning indictment of our justice system. It has become a soft tyranny.
That 'shred of a case' is the theft of $600,000.
I don't understand how the same folks who have no sympathy for people sent to prison on third-strike convictions for stealing packs of chewing gum, or those serving life sentences for non-violent drug convictions, can be so torn up about someone being sent to prison for a measley 3.5 years for such a massive theft.
For some, if you are in the ruling class, you should be allowed to cheat and steal all you want. It's this same mentality--that Conrad Black can steal and defraud all he like and there should be no consequences, because he is an ubermensch. And unfortunately, it is too often true (as in the Fannie and Freddie examples that Steyn mentions). But I am glad that in this case, Black will suffer some--however small--consequences for his criminal actions.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRegardless of the charges against Mr Black, let's drop the nonsense about people going to prison for life for stealing a pack of chewing gum - that's bulls__t and you know it. Three-strike laws pertain to felonies - and in many jurisdictions, they are *violent* felonies.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou are incorrect. Petty theft is a felony in many jurisdictions.
Jerry Dewayne Williams was sent to prison for life for stealing a piece of pizza. And don't forget the man who almost got a life sentence for refusing to pay for a $120 repair he found unsatisfactory (that was in Texas).
In some jurisdictions, it's limited to violent felonies, but in many places, it isn't. And 'felony' isn't always what some would consider a violent crime. Cashing an unemployment check if you got a job between the time the check was mailed and the time you receive the check is a felony. So is bouncing a check in many places.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHolder and his guys only drop charges on the New Black Panthers and sweep Fast and Furious under the rug.
It's just about what side you're on.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is heart-wrenching. Go now, Conrad, to Belize or Jamaica or some such place. It is not shameful for an innocent man to flee persecution.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEven if the feds don't come after you, any two-bit punk can find a lawyer to work on contingency to drain your resources and make your life a living hell for a year or two. A relative of mine was tied up in court for ten years by a man who was well-known for making his living filing nuisance lawsuits.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHaving grown up in the Soviet Union and having come to this country over 30 years ago as a refugee from that system, I see what this country is slowly (or not so) becoming and it feels my heart with profound sadness... Group "rights" instead of individual liberties, newspeak instead of English, confiscatory taxes, socialized medicine and unjust courts... I am not yet sure that the damage done is irreparable, but I am fast running out of optimism.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI have to agree. Another immigrant noted a similarity in some recent comments by Obama supporters to his parents' lament, "If only Comrade Stalin knew of this..."
Conrad Black was the "great white defendant" for Patrick FitzGerald, the Inspector Javert of the modern era.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI figured I'd best everyone here with a little honesty. I have no idea why Conrad Black was convicted -and in fact no idea of what the charges mean. I am against what happened to him for one reason. I trust Mark Steyn. Anyone wanting to explain the charges and the verdict(s)in say 6 sentences will be my friend for life.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCheers.
This is the end result of all those mandatory minimum policies and mindlessly populist "tough-on-crime" messages that conservative politicians just loved to push. Also these white collar punishments pale in comparison to some of the federal drug sentences that get handed out to people who had a very minor role (if any) in drug conspiracies. Just google ('FAMM Profiles of Injustice').
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThen liberals got in on the act when they realized it made for great politics, and started to target their own bogymen. And now we've got a mess where A) a drug informant can point the finger at you and with no other evidence you could be facing 15 to 20 years in prison and the forfeiture of all your assets or B) you import shrimp in plastic garbage bags instead of wooden crates in violation of some obscure regulation and you're facing 8 years in prison.
This stuff started under Reagan and then escalated under Bush I and Clinton. The poster below who compared the situation to the USSR is not far off. One situation implemented through dictatorship, the other through democracy. And "law and order" populism needs to take a large share of the blame.
"...these white collar punishments pale in comparison to some of the federal drug sentences that get handed out to people who had a very minor role (if any) in drug conspiracies."
If you don't understand the essence of conspiracy law, then educate yourself. If you do, then you're being willfully deceptive. Everyone in a conspiracy gets the same charges - that's the point of conspiracy law. So some dirtbag can't say "I din know nuttin'! I just drove the car." Because he was involved in the crime, he gets the full force of the law applied to him, as well. Ideally, if no one turned state's evidence, everyone also receives the same sentence for that conspiracy.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell that sounds great on paper, but put that into practice and you can see how easily it can be used to ensnare people in serious crimes in which they had no part.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt also benefits the person at the top of the conspiracy because he knows the most about the operation and can thus give the most information about the others. This person is usually the dirtbag that needs to be most removed from the street.
Now you're right that I dont know much about law, because im not a lawyer Im an engineer. But looking at the justice system from the perspective of my profession, I see a hit-or-miss, inefficient, overly-bureaucratic system that rewards lying and cheating from all parties and too often has no sense of proportion to the crime or ensnares innocent people. As far as the economic cost of mass incarceration (to say nothing of the moral one) vs. the protection of the public, it is beyond inefficient. But alas, too many lawyers have their legalistic blinders on and ignore the spirit of the law or the justice system.
hear hear!
I say with all sincerity I'll trust an engineer speaking on the subject of law a million times more than I will a lawyer on the subject of engineering. And, truth be told, I'll trust an engineer speaking on the subject of law more than I'll trust a lawyer speaking on the subject of law.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseInnocent? The man was a thief. He got caught. He even said: "I accept that a reasonable person could conclude that I am guilty."
It is time for the apologists of the white collar criminals to realize that the threat to the rule of law is their own perverted view of how the law should work for their pals and how it should work differently for the rest of us. I note this even with the supposed "neighbor" story. Just a tad too convenient.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMark, what do you expect, given that he is (a) a white man and (b) wealthy? As such, he is a member of the Justice Dept's target audience for law-enforcement.
Don't you know that in today's America, after 40 years of deafening political correctness, the populace has internalized, and the politicians have set as policy, the notion that only white people can do wrong, and that they can only do wrong?
Conrad's original sin is to have come (legally) into this country from the north. Had he come (illegally) from the south, he would now be able to commit crimes in addition to his trespassing without even being deported (see the Justice Dept's recent evisceration of Secure Communities).
In today's America, the special ethnic privileges given to politically favored minorities mean that Someone Else has to get convicted. And that Someone Else is the evil white people who had the temerity to be, on balance, somewhat successful over the years. How dare they, and how dare Conrad!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseInnocent? The man was a thief. He got caught. He even said: "I accept that a reasonable person could conclude that I am guilty."
It is time for the apologists of the white collar criminals to realize that the threat to the rule of law is their own perverted view of how the law should work for their pals and how it should work differently for the rest of us. I note this even with the supposed "neighbor" story. Just a tad too convenient.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat's the point of the SEC? Same as the point of the entire "government". Make sure Goldman Sachs wins every time and everyone else loses every time.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePoints well taken re the justice system's actions in this case, but why the focus on the prosecutors alone? Should you not have some comment on the INDIVIDUAL who issued yesterday's ruling: Amy St. Eve? Of course the prosecutors wanted Black sent to prison, that's what they do! But the justice system didn't send Black back to prison, Judge St. Eve did. And I agree, to use your term, that it is an 'inhumane' decision.
So how about pondering whether what I know you know about Judge St. Eve might explain such inhumanity.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse