[HN Gopher] Ghosn's daring escape cost his extraction crew their...
___________________________________________________________________
Ghosn's daring escape cost his extraction crew their freedom
Author : JumpCrisscross
Score : 51 points
Date : 2022-12-12 10:23 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bloomberg.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bloomberg.com)
| DoingIsLearning wrote:
| I am a little bit out of the loop. A several years back Ghosn was
| a fairly respected business figure in both France and Japan,
| which is even more extraordinary for a non-japanese exec.
|
| What happened from there, was there actual corruption or did he
| piss off the wrong people in Japanese business?
| mitchbob wrote:
| Here's a good overview: https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-
| paper/v44/n02/james-lasdun/fishing...
| DoingIsLearning wrote:
| This paints a very clear picture. Thanks.
| cheriot wrote:
| There's a whole Netflix doc on it
| constantcrying wrote:
| What were they thinking? Am I supposed to feel bad? They helped
| an alleged criminal to escape from his prosecution. Then they
| returned to a country which basically has no incentives not to
| extradite them to their ally. What were they expecting?
| notch656a wrote:
| I feel bad for them. They helped Ghosn escape an unfair justice
| system.
| klyrs wrote:
| If you're trying to frame this as civil disobedience, the
| path forward is jail time, to get your day in court to
| protest some unfairness of the law. But these were lackeys of
| an ultra-wealthy guy accused of securities fraud and
| embezzlement. The deck is stacked in Ghosn's favor, and he
| threw his henchfolk under the bus. He knows well enough to
| stay out of reach of extradition: this was not just
| foreseeable, it was forseen. They took money to knowingly
| engage in conspiracy to a crime. Womp, womp.
| notch656a wrote:
| If someone can't have a fair judicial process the "path
| forward" is for them to have "jail time"? Fuck that, I
| praise Ghosn's actions.
| curiousgal wrote:
| Would you felt the same if someone helped Meng Wanzhou
| escape? A Chinese citizen arrested in Canada for violating US
| sanctions on Iran sounds very unfair to me.
| byroot wrote:
| Is France justice system unfair too? Because it seems like
| he's not really eager to face it either.
| BrentOzar wrote:
| VincentEvans wrote:
| "They betrayed us" - Michael Taylor on both Trump and Biden
| administrations for unwillingness to shield him and his son from
| extradition to Japan to face criminal system there for
| orchestrating, successfully executing, and profiting from an
| escape of wealthy criminal from Japan.
|
| I am struggling to understand what part of that description is
| supposed to elicit my sympathy for the victims of the alleged
| betrayal? The way I see it - "they served public interest" is
| what I would have said.
|
| Personally I'd like criminals, especially if they happen to be
| wealthy, to face justice just the same. And those who commit
| crime in an effort to help them avoid that fate in exchange for a
| share of that wealth - to face justice doubly so. Strange how Mr.
| Taylor doesn't see it the same way.
|
| I'd be interested to hear him present his moral argument to
| understand how _he_ interprets this situation.
| akadruid1 wrote:
| https://archive.vn/VvzOE
| kylec wrote:
| Sounds like the Taylors need to hire another father-son team to
| smuggle them out of Japan too
| Tozen wrote:
| Based on the article, it appears that Ghosn wants to pay them
| additional money (3 million dollars at least) as compensation for
| their troubles over the last 2 years. Seems like they will be
| well compensated, totaling over 4 million dollars in payments,
| not to mention any TV appearance fees or book and movie deals.
| jollyllama wrote:
| In the USA, you're supposed to be banned from profiting from
| any crimes you did ("Son of Sam law"). I wonder if that would
| apply in this case, given that they were presumably convicted
| outside of US jurisdiction.
| gnicholas wrote:
| Looks like some of these laws have been struck down (for
| violating the freedom of speech clause of the First
| Amendment). [1]
|
| It seems that some of the enforcement mechanisms of
| surviving/new laws revolve around notifying the families of
| the victims when a convict receives a large sum of money,
| from any source. The goal is to give the family a chance to
| sue in civil court.
|
| 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_Sam_law
| xoa wrote:
| > _you 're supposed to be banned from profiting from any
| crimes you did ("Son of Sam law")_
|
| Not sure where you got this from? AFAIK that's a purely state
| level thing, and the first law that tried that in a broad way
| was unanimously struck down by SCOTUS as an unconstitutional
| violation of the 1A. And for good reason, when you step back
| and remember that "crime" itself can be very broad. It wasn't
| that long ago that homosexual acts could still be a felony in
| the US. There is a strong public interest in certain
| criminals sharing details of what they did with journalists
| after the fact too. New much more limited laws have passed
| that I think is still up, but the ones I can think of at
| least are specifically about compensating victims. IIRC the
| mechanism is to notify and then let them sue in civil court
| for a longer window. I don't think any of that would apply to
| purely government criminal action though for somebody who has
| already served their sentence and paid any fines.
|
| You might be confusing those laws with conditions attached to
| federal plea bargains in certain kinds of serious cases
| (national security stuff like terrorism). Since those are
| individualized "voluntary agreements" [0] specific to a given
| case they can include things the government couldn't do as
| blanket laws or even necessarily win as penalties in court at
| all, and I know there have been agreements that included
| turning over any and all profits from publishing deals to the
| US government. But those AFAIK are the exception, not the
| rule. And they wouldn't have any applicability here either.
|
| Also, there doesn't need to be any special law for victims
| who have successfully sued in civil court and won a damages
| award to then go after whatever assets the criminal has or
| gets down the road to cover it. This might as a practical
| matter "eliminate profits": if a family of a murder victim
| won $10m, defendant could only pay $1m, and then the
| defendant gets a $7m movie deal later, court may award all of
| the defendant's interest to the family to help satisfy the
| original judgement. But again, I don't think the Japanese
| government has any such cause here.
|
| ----
|
| 0: scare quotes around voluntary agreements since there is a
| lot of reasonable debate about overuse/abuse of plea bargains
| by US prosecutors. But at least legally they're pretty wide
| open for now.
| pavon wrote:
| I think this would go beyond Son of Sam laws to flat out
| Criminal Asset Forfeiture. It is the difference between money
| earned from a movie/book about your crime, and being paid to
| perform a crime. I would expect most countries to to have
| laws about the latter, and that the US would cooperate in
| seizing the money.
| pedalpete wrote:
| IANAL but my impression is that there are fairly easy ways
| around this law, and I doubt it would apply to crimes outside
| of US jurisdiction.
| jasonhansel wrote:
| They helped someone escape house arrest in Japan. Then they
| returned to the US. The US and Japan are close allies with an
| extradition treaty.
|
| What did they expect to happen?
|
| With the situations reversed: if a Japanese citizen helped break
| an American out of house arrest before fleeing back to Japan, I
| would be shocked if America _didn 't_ pursue extradition.
| LarsAlereon wrote:
| From an ethical perspective, it matters that the Japanese
| criminal system has a 100% conviction rate and even the judge
| thinking the defendant is innocent won't result in an
| acquittal.
| chollida1 wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_justice_system_of_Jap.
| ...
|
| Not really what most people would expect when you say 100%
|
| > According to them, Japanese prosecutors will prosecute only
| the very few cases in which they are most likely to be guilty
| and not many others.[2][3][4] According to Ryo Ogiso, a
| professor at Chuo University, prosecutors suspend prosecution
| for 60% of cases they receive, and end prosecution for the
| remaining 30% through a simplified judicial process. Only
| about 8% of cases are actually prosecuted, and this low
| prosecution rate is the reason for Japan's high conviction
| rate.[3][5]
| cbracken wrote:
| Quoting from Wikipedia [1]:
|
| The conviction rate is 99.3%. By only stating this high
| conviction rate it is often misunderstood as too high--
| however, this high conviction rate drops significantly when
| accounting for the fact that Japanese prosecutors drop
| roughly half the cases they are given. If measured in the
| same way, the United States' conviction rate would be
| 99.8%.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate#Japan
| [deleted]
| timoth3y wrote:
| For reference the US federal government has a 99% conviction
| rate.
|
| https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
| tank/2019/06/11/only-2-of-f...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-12 23:01 UTC)