Judges are allowed to make considerations when it comes to sentencing, and there are (I’m assuming) rare instances where a judge will suspend or decided against a prison sentence when a woman is pregnant:
Obviously I can’t imagine this would apply in a case where someone is facing an 11-year stretch - it’s not like an edge case where it’s a small sentence vs a fine or something.
And similarly, I can’t imagine any one is going to actively try to get pregnant on the basis that it might help them down the line. These cases are where the convicted person is already pregnant.
Is it really “triggering” that many people? Outside of this thread I haven’t seen that much about it - certainly as not as much as I have about the Sam Bankman-Fried debacle. I’m pretty sure people would say that don’t trust him.
Usually this forum is pretty anti prison and pro “everyone should be able to do what they want with their body” but this one woman seems to be the exception to some people here.
I don’t think that’s the prevailing opinion for all cases, though certainly some users hold it. I’d be surprised if a lot of people didn’t think that white collar crimes that have impacted lots of people shouldn’t lead to jail time, whether that’s her or Sam Bankman-Fried
Don’t think anyone’s suggesting that she shouldn’t go to jail - she absolutely should. Was more the ‘she cynically got pregnant in an attempt to avoid jail / get a lighter sentence’ angle that people are objecting to
Well I took from your comment that people are focussing on her crime more because she is a woman, which I disagreed with and provided an example of a similar case in which people have similar opinions on this board.
I’m on vacation and yesterday was my birthday and don’t feel like spending it arguing with people on the internet. Absolutely do not defend or believe Johnny Depp, cannot remember exactly what my posts were about that but I did not know anything about the case at the time and think I was asking questions. Whatever the case if it did seem in defense that’s not the case now.
I know this might seem upsetting but I can’t help but feel like “bad people” are probably completely natural and the failure is from society on many levels. As long as you are looking at bad people as the source of the problem you aren’t actually solving anything. If punishment is meant to be a disincentive then surely it’s the disincentive you actually want so you need to look past the individual. Things won’t really ever change until we accept collective responsibility (and no that doesn’t mean collective punishment)
Without wanting to derail the thread, how would someone who committed massive fraud be held accountable without prison? (This is not a rhetorical question or an argument in favour of prisons)
probably means shifting focus from their accountability beyond whatever needs to be done to prevent them from continuing to cause this problem to the structures that allow it to take place, checks and balances in the scientific and medical community, no such thing as private investment and private healthcare etc
If an individual can’t or won’t accept fault then there is no such thing as accountability for them anyway.
I’m not an educated man but maybe give them the best medical/psychological checks to understand the person followed by bankruptcy, legislating background checks before money is allowed to be invested in stuff, getting people to understand that she can’t be in a position of responsibility etc. I know it’s more complicated and probably expensive than prison and that’s probably the argument people have for why prisons should exist because we can’t do all this other stuff or it’s too complicated.
