Felicity Huffman sentencing today

[Anonymous]

Prosecutors recommend one month in jail, a year of probation, and a $20,000 fine. (For a $15,000 SAT scam).

Huffman's lawyers want no jail time, $20,000 fine, and some probation.

What do you she'll get? I'm thinking 5 days in jail with it really being 2 days and the full fine.

[Anonymous]

I think she should get the full month in jail and the fine. Followed by probation. She won't though - it will be a symbolic few days in jail at most.

[Anonymous]

I think she may get a month but will serve a day or two because of overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

I don't think she should get jail time. I don't see the point of that. Financial restitution and community service.

[Anonymous]

I think 1 month and a bigger fine are appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think she should get jail time. I don't see the point of that. Financial restitution and community service.

The point is deterrence. This is a high publicity case. What is the message if she does not get any jail time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think she should get jail time. I don't see the point of that. Financial restitution and community service.

The point is deterrence. This is a high publicity case. What is the message if she does not get any jail time?

I think the high publicity aspect always is problematic for justice. I don't think she should receive a harsher sentence because she is famous or has publicity. she should get a similar sentence as someone else with her wealth / attorney skills who committed a fraud type crime in the $15000 range for personal gain (eg. victimless - in that she didn't steal from someone). I am never a fan of using the justice system as a means to make an example of people.

Deterrence is really not effective. The next person will do it differently / think they won't get caught. There were many non celebrities in this group - we hear nothing about them. Most regular folks who aren't celebrities won't take anything from this. Celebrities will continue to find ways to buy their way around a system - they will just pay more to have someone do it better.

[Anonymous]

She could get home detention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She could get home detention.

Which I feel like is nice and relaxing for rich people. They can stay in their mansion, maybe work on some house projects, maybe redesign the craft room, and any work that has to get done people will just come to them. The yoga instructor can come to the house, the chef can come to the house, etc etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think she should get jail time. I don't see the point of that. Financial restitution and community service.

The point is deterrence. This is a high publicity case. What is the message if she does not get any jail time?

I think the high publicity aspect always is problematic for justice. I don't think she should receive a harsher sentence because she is famous or has publicity. she should get a similar sentence as someone else with her wealth / attorney skills who committed a fraud type crime in the $15000 range for personal gain (eg. victimless - in that she didn't steal from someone). I am never a fan of using the justice system as a means to make an example of people.

Deterrence is really not effective. The next person will do it differently / think they won't get caught. There were many non celebrities in this group - we hear nothing about them. Most regular folks who aren't celebrities won't take anything from this. Celebrities will continue to find ways to buy their way around a system - they will just pay more to have someone do it better.

It’s not a victimless crime though. Through fraud, she stole a spot for her child that should have gone to someone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think she should get jail time. I don't see the point of that. Financial restitution and community service.

The point is deterrence. This is a high publicity case. What is the message if she does not get any jail time?

I think the high publicity aspect always is problematic for justice. I don't think she should receive a harsher sentence because she is famous or has publicity. she should get a similar sentence as someone else with her wealth / attorney skills who committed a fraud type crime in the $15000 range for personal gain (eg. victimless - in that she didn't steal from someone). I am never a fan of using the justice system as a means to make an example of people.

Deterrence is really not effective. The next person will do it differently / think they won't get caught. There were many non celebrities in this group - we hear nothing about them. Most regular folks who aren't celebrities won't take anything from this. Celebrities will continue to find ways to buy their way around a system - they will just pay more to have someone do it better.

It’s not a victimless crime though. Through fraud, she stole a spot for her child that should have gone to someone else.

This and you're assuming she's receiving a harsher sentence because of publicity. I'd argue that's not the case and their are 30+ other parents waiting to be sentenced who will also receive equal merit in from the law who aren't famous like she is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She could get home detention.

Which I feel like is nice and relaxing for rich people. They can stay in their mansion, maybe work on some house projects, maybe redesign the craft room, and any work that has to get done people will just come to them. The yoga instructor can come to the house, the chef can come to the house, etc etc.

True but they pay a much much higher price in terms of the public nature of the discussion of their crime. They get followed, photographed, talked about on TV, news, and internet. The personal and professional impact is much greater in the sense that everyone knows and judges. There were 33 parents arrested / charged. How many of them do you know their name and picture. How many have had hundreds / thousands of news articles about them? How many of them are having their every work and action dissected by the public?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She could get home detention.

Which I feel like is nice and relaxing for rich people. They can stay in their mansion, maybe work on some house projects, maybe redesign the craft room, and any work that has to get done people will just come to them. The yoga instructor can come to the house, the chef can come to the house, etc etc.

True but they pay a much much higher price in terms of the public nature of the discussion of their crime. They get followed, photographed, talked about on TV, news, and internet. The personal and professional impact is much greater in the sense that everyone knows and judges. There were 33 parents arrested / charged. How many of them do you know their name and picture. How many have had hundreds / thousands of news articles about them? How many of them are having their every work and action dissected by the public?

And?

That's their job. They were perfectly happy being followed, discussing every aspect of their lives for the cameras, and even lying about 'how hard' their kids worked on TV before this. Now the truth comes out and the cameras are a burden?

Skip to 1:20 and 2:10.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She could get home detention.

Which I feel like is nice and relaxing for rich people. They can stay in their mansion, maybe work on some house projects, maybe redesign the craft room, and any work that has to get done people will just come to them. The yoga instructor can come to the house, the chef can come to the house, etc etc.

+1

Oh no, you mean I can't leave my house? I guess I'll chillax for the rest of the day next to my infinity pool after my personal trainer session and then have my gourmet chef make me a protein smooth. What a punishment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think she should get jail time. I don't see the point of that. Financial restitution and community service.

The point is deterrence. This is a high publicity case. What is the message if she does not get any jail time?

I think the high publicity aspect always is problematic for justice. I don't think she should receive a harsher sentence because she is famous or has publicity. she should get a similar sentence as someone else with her wealth / attorney skills who committed a fraud type crime in the $15000 range for personal gain (eg. victimless - in that she didn't steal from someone). I am never a fan of using the justice system as a means to make an example of people.

Deterrence is really not effective. The next person will do it differently / think they won't get caught. There were many non celebrities in this group - we hear nothing about them. Most regular folks who aren't celebrities won't take anything from this. Celebrities will continue to find ways to buy their way around a system - they will just pay more to have someone do it better.

It’s not a victimless crime though. Through fraud, she stole a spot for her child that should have gone to someone else.

You mean somebody that paid money to the school instead of a testing facility.