Garlic Scam
- Thread starter DerKaiser
- Start date
Yeah that's way to run your justice system. I don't remember the uproar when the guy was given 12 years for social welfare fraud. What's the difference?
By the way the 12 year sentence was only reduced to 9 years.
[broken link removed]
+1 It's time to stamp this out for once and for all. I just hope that any former bankers under investigation will receive heavier sentences if and when they are tried.
I'm glad he got a custodial sentence. Until company directors perceive a real risk of jail time for corporate wrongdoings, they will keep running the risk of being caught because the upside is attractive and there is no personal downside - fines are not enough of a deterrant for white collar crimes where a fine (which will end up being paid by the company anyway) is not enough of a downside to prevent the crime being undertaken. Any fine is preferable to seeing the inside of a prison.
That said, any prison sentence is enough of a deterrant for most white collar criminals - 12/18 months would have been enough to send a strong message to him and others.
That said, any prison sentence is enough of a deterrant for most white collar criminals - 12/18 months would have been enough to send a strong message to him and others.
Exactly.
The one Sunny refers to seems extreme also, though that is for a string of offences as opposed to a first time offender of good character doing his best to make the situation right.
I think many people in this case believe that the guy could have been genuinely naive with respect to how serious his crime would be treated. Also, there is the element of one mistake absolutely ruining your life. Finally, I would have been unaware that a non-violent crime could attract such a harsh sentence.
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,251
I just hope that any former bankers under investigation don't use comments like the above to escape heavy sentences if and when they are tried.
Not sure I know what you mean...I don't think any defence would say "your honour, this is exactly what Firefly from Askaboutmoney.com was hoping for"
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,251
There have been incidents in the past where public comments have been cited as reasons/excuses why a trial would be prejudiced and therefore should not go ahead, eg 'Jail the Corrupt Politicians' posters, in relation to the late CJ Haughey.
thats 1 way to shut down free speech!
In that case, I hope that those bankers under investigation get away scot free
If they do, we know who to blame!
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,251
Interesting story in today's news.
Some people made large settlements to revenue last year for failure to pay tax. A dentist from Carlow made the biggest settlement at €1.7 million.
It doesn't mention if anyone got jail time for it.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0313/revenue-business.html
Some people made large settlements to revenue last year for failure to pay tax. A dentist from Carlow made the biggest settlement at €1.7 million.
It doesn't mention if anyone got jail time for it.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0313/revenue-business.html
Yes but this guy falsified documents/ asked the Chinese to do so. It is more complex than the typical tax settlements you mention.
All tax cheats falsify documents in so much as they deliberately make false written statements to the Revenue. I suspect that many, like the dentist mentioned above, were doing so for ages- 1.7m settlement must have been for several years of false declarations.
( Obviously, all of the posters who think this guy got what he deserved have always insisted on a full receipt with VAT from a plumber, electrician, window-cleaner, or any odd-job person. And never brought in more than the duty-free allowance after ,say, a trip to USA ).
( Obviously, all of the posters who think this guy got what he deserved have always insisted on a full receipt with VAT from a plumber, electrician, window-cleaner, or any odd-job person. And never brought in more than the duty-free allowance after ,say, a trip to USA ).
That is a fair point. Usually, but not always, the "settlements" include a significant portion of interest and penalties, so the amount of evaded tax is a lot less than the settlement amount.
But, in the case of Garlic Man, the amount evaded was the 1.6 million. As I understand it, from what I read, he showed little or no remorse or regret, and his defence consisted of "Ah, well, the duty rate on garlic is too high anyway, your Honour".