Ernie gets probation
- Thread starter Mr. Bond
- Start date
I think this was the right thing to do all the way around. Thank goodness no jail time for this. Rep for the update, Mr. Bond.
I agree! Let's not forget he out almost a hundred grand PLUS whatever the lawyer got him for ! But strictly speaking to the punishment, the government got exactly what they wanted. They got to make an example out of someone to get the word out on their new agenda. Also, think about how bad they would look if they were to imprison a 75 year old man for some damn 100 year old dead animal parts! I am VERY happy though Earnie will not have to go to the clink though!!!
Totally agree with this. Government made there point & no way should Ernie end up behind bars.
Thank God, It would have been terrible for Ernie to have to do time just to make an example out of him.
He did pay a big price $$ so it's not like he's getting off with anything.
He did pay a big price $$ so it's not like he's getting off with anything.
That is decent news, better than it could have been.
Any news on the rest of those involved?
Any news on the rest of those involved?
Probably the best outcome Ernie could have hoped for, given the circumstances.
Lou Figueroa
And not one elephant will be saved.
Over 90% of prosecutions end up with a plea of guilty because of the threats of long jail times for going to trial and daring to question the state's charges.
http://law.jrank.org/pages/848/Criminal-Justice-Process-Plea-bargaining.html
Extortion has replaced justice for most cases. What did any of Ernie's victims have to say about it? Oops, there are none to say anything.
Jeff Livingston
Over 90% of prosecutions end up with a plea of guilty because of the threats of long jail times for going to trial and daring to question the state's charges.
http://law.jrank.org/pages/848/Criminal-Justice-Process-Plea-bargaining.html
Extortion has replaced justice for most cases. What did any of Ernie's victims have to say about it? Oops, there are none to say anything.
Jeff Livingston
The Ivory trade is an atrocious practice/market. It is completely justified and necessary to prosecute those engaged in it, regardless of how old or kind or talented they are. I can't imagine anyone objecting to this on rational grounds. There's no one-to-one correlation between this sentence and any number of elephants saved, in the same way there's not one-to-one correlation between the $10 I gave to cancer research last month, and the number of cancer patients saved. That's just not a useful way to look at it.
That being said, you are completely correct about the issue of plea bargains often being the result of a broken system. In my view the U.S. does not really have a "justice" system, but rather a "penal" system. It does not function in the interest of justice most of the time, as far too many aspects of the system, big and small, are corrupted by campaigning and profit taking.
Thanks for your response.
I disagree that such prosecutions are necessary or even helpful. Again, where is any victim to be made whole by justice? None exist.
Property rights would protect elephant species moreso than govt mandates and trials. Notice that no one is being prosecuted for harvesting cow leather for cue tips and notice there are millions upon millions of cattle, with more coming everyday to replace those used for food and stuff. That's because cows are owned, have a market, and those who own and trade are protected by the law, not abused by it. Big difference and THE difference.
Jeff Livingston
That's interesting. Would Elephants stop being hunted if they were the property of a private organization? that's interesting, but I doubt it. How would these rights be enforced? Farm animals are concentrated and easily protected, Elephants are not. Would private security drive off poachers? Would police? The ivory market would still exist, hence the incentive to poach would still exist. The fact that the Elephants would be "owned" by xyz.inc wouldn't change that. Or are you saying Elephants should be raised for Ivory privately? (Is that economically viable? Ivory prices would probably go so far through the roof as to be impractical. You have to raise an elephant to harvest it's ivory one time. What's the cost & return on that? Seems to me if it were viable, people would be doing it already.)
I think you kind of made my point at the end of your post. When you pointed out that property has the protection on the law. So what's the difference then? How do you punish people who violate the law (stealing somebody's else's Ivory?). With fines and jail and so forth. It would be no different. You prosecute offenders, which is exactly what is happening.
(Edit: About there not being a "victim" to be made whole. Consider a person who kills a hermit, with no friends or family. Someone who was totally off grid in every sense, including social. Is that person still guilty of murder? Of course, the fact that there is no victim to be made whole (and there isn't), doesn't matter. What matter is "was there a victim" in the first place.)
Last edited:
Pretty much sums up my feelings about this as well.
(with tongue firmly in cheek)...Is this a great country...or what?
Last edited:
You feel the function of government is to "fix things" and "make lives better"? I feel you will always be disappointed. :wink:
Anyway, I am glad to see some reasonable resolution in this case. :thumbup:
.
Do we know that Ernie didn't get (or had to return) the money he received from the buyers? I'm not saying you are wrong, I just don't remember that being out there.
No, I didn't read that anywhere. But being it was direct proceeds from the act in which he was arrested and convicted it is considered I'll gotten gains and I can't imagine them not taking it - especially the Feds. So much money / property is seized each year it would blow your mind.