What is it in America, that makes us think by sticking it to society a second time to pay for the punishment of the one who stuck it to us the first time, assuming s/he is not an immediate safety threat is the best approach to justice?
Everyone wants Bernie Madoff to rot in jail. But do we really? We'll come back to his case in a moment, but first, consider the case of Kwame Kilpatrick.
Madoff Kilpatrick
The former Mayor and (Dis) Honorable Kwame Kilpatrick was recently sentenced to four months in jail as part of a negotiated deal that also required him to resign his office and pay a one million dollar fine. Mr. Kilpatrick had lied under oath about an affair he was carrying on with an aide, and allowed or directed the city to spend great sums of money to help him perpetuate the coverup.
In her comments after the court hearing, the prosecutor on the case emphasized that jail time had to be part of the deal because of the cost of the Mayor's crimes to the city. Now there's logic for you. The man has already cost the city great sums of money for misconduct, now the prosecutor wants him to let the state spend thousand dollars a week on the guy for four months, just because the prosecutor needs to prove a point.
How many times recently have we heard of similar cases, where the offense, whatever it is, is not something that suggests anyone will be in any physical danger around the culprit, or even in much danger of loss of assets of any kind, yet the convicted offender is sent to jail. These are old numbers, but if it costs somewhere north of $50,000 to house an inmate in state or federal prison, why does society choose to be a victim twice.
In a case like this, justice is best served if the convict doesn't spend a day in jail but instead is responsible for 100% of his or her own support, plus a large restitution judgment that compensates the state and any direct victims of this person's actions for losses related to the crime, as much as a dollar value can be assigned to such losses.
How many times do you hear the phrase, "He must be punished?" in reference to some criminal or crime, and the punishment is the justification for incarceration. But punishment is a negative strategy. It has a ring of vengeance to it. And as is usually the case with vengeance, it hurts the avenger and the avengee more or less equally.
Now back to Mr.
Madoff. The clamour for him to be sent to jail with the key being
jettisoned into outer space is deafening. But is that justice? It may
feed our anger, but does it heal our wounds, or repay society in any
small or larger degree for the damage this man has caused? The man has
tremendous financial skills and expertise. No doubt he could serve
society with that expertise, helping in some way to undo some of the
mess he and people like him have created. So here is our proposed
justice for Mr. Madoff.
His million dollar apartment in New York should be made available to his victims as free accomodations in the Big Apple with maid and custodial service provided by Mr. Madoff. Mr. Madoff, on the other hand, should be housed in a homeless shelter. He would have to do side jobs at the shelter to pay for his room and board. His day job would be helping the government fix the financial crisis, with 100% of his top government pay-scale salary going to repay his victims. When his victims aren't using the Madoff apartment, it could be rented out at the highest possible luxury rate to tourists, and again, Mr. Madoff would provide the maid service. This scheme would cost the government nothing. It would provide financial and non-financial reparations to his victims. And it would provide a fitting social and socio-economic consequence to the offender by requiring him to live the rest of his life as a servant, while earning the salary of a titan.
-jwh-
Delving deeper: A case study