• Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nah, make the rich afraid again. We can talk red rose pacifism once the ultrawealthy are out of the picture.

    • underwire212@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think there are certainly crimes that deserve the death penalty (think CP type crimes). Just get those people out of society tbh, but this is just my opinion.

      The only problem I have is with 100% certainly. You would have to be certain, or very very close to absolute certainty, that you have the right person who committed the crime.

        • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          People in maximum security prisons can, and do, escape. Sometimes the commit more violent crimes once they escape. A malicious governor can, in most states, pardon any person they want, and there’s no legal recourse. (In my state, the governor does not have the legal power to pardon a person until they’ve served at least 6 (?) years, and have been recommended by the parole board.)

          On the other hand, people don’t get raised from the dead, no one gets resurrected, and there’s no reincarnation. Dead is dead, and is as safe to society as is possible.

          The death penalty is certainly over-used, and applied in cases where it’s not likely necessary, but I absolutely, 100% believe that people like e.g., Gary Ridgeway should be executed as quickly as is possible.

            • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Remember that people did escape from Alcatraz. And Devil’s Island, IIRC. Never underestimate the ingenuity of prisoners that really, really don’t want to be prisoners.

              I think that the death penalty should be used in extremely limited cases, cases where there’s not even a shadow of a doubt about guilt, and where the person has committed multiple heinous crimes spanning a period of time (say, >1 year). So a simple mass murderer wouldn’t be eligible, but a serial child rapist would be. You’d also need to have forensic evidence that at a minimum cleared the Daubert standard, and you’d have to exclude forensic evidence that relied on standards that hadn’t been published and peer-reviewed. So DNA and fingerprints would be in, but forensic bite impression analysis would be very definitely out.

              I think the evidentiary bar should be extremely high for death penalty cases. I think that it’s currently mostly applied to people that don’t have enough money to get better legal counsel.

              I would also say that convicted people should be able to request the death penalty rather than life without parole. I can’t speak for anyone else, but if I had the choice between decades in prison, or being summarily executed, I’d take execution.

          • xthexder@l.sw0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The risk of me getting wrongfully convicted of something and getting a death sentence is higher than the chance of some dangerous murder escaping prison and hurting me.

            Unfortunately being absolutely 100% certain is not a luxury we have in the majority of cases. People are framed, new evidence comes up, things like lie detectors and blood splatter analysis turn out to be junk science. Life in prison can get overturned and corrected if mistakes were made, death can’t.

            • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think that you can make it much, much more difficult to get a wrongful conviction in a case that’s eligible for the death penalty though. I think that, for starters, all interactions with police should require video and audio, so that suspects can’t be coercively questioned for 16 hours without an attorney before signing a “confession”. I think any claimed evidence should have to have standards that were published, peer-reviewed, and repeatable before they could use it. And I think that crimes eligible for an imposed death penalty should have to take place over a period of time, rather than a single event. E.g., a robbery/murder shouldn’t get the death penalty, but (per an earlier comment I made) a serial child rapist should. I would even say that you should be absolutely required to have forensic evidence in order to get a death penalty conviction; I believe that most exonerations were for convictions that relied on witness testimony, official misconduct, and coerced confessions, usually combined with an overworked and ineffective defense attorney.

              I dunno; even the possibility of someone like Ed Kemper ever getting out–like if he ever tells the parole board that he thinks he’s finally safe–is terrifying.

        • shiveyarbles@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is a deterrent. For instance, we wouldn’t have insurrectionists working in the highest levels of government if we actually had effective laws and enforcement.

          • lenz@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            It has been found that the greatest deterrent is “likelihood of getting caught”, and not the actual penalty. Think of the war on drugs. No matter how harsh they made the consequences, the drug trade continued. It’s like this: how likely are you to return a wallet you found to a lost and found if a cop was watching you, versus if you were out in the middle of the woods when you found the wallet?

            It doesn’t matter if the penalty for not returning the wallet is death. If the likelihood of you getting caught is tiny enough, you will feel less terrified of playing those odds. Or at least, the average person will.

            The death penalty isn’t a deterrent if you’re certain it will never apply to you.

            • shiveyarbles@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think your logic is flawed. Obviously the death penalty is a serious deterrent. It’s not going to stop everybody, but it will most certainly stop many people.

              • lenz@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                I disagree that the deterrence would be significant enough to justify the death penalty. But I don’t think our disagreement matters. Even assuming what you say is true, it’s not worth the lives of the innocent people who will be found guilty and executed, in my opinion. I also think it’s a bad idea to give the government the power to kill its own citizens. So even if you are correct, I have other objections that outweigh the potential deterrence factor.

                • shiveyarbles@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m just talking about deterrence, it was obvious that you were reaching tenuous conclusions based on your dislike of the death penalty.

  • Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The 67-year-old chair of the real estate company Van Thinh Phat was formally charged with fraud amounting to $12.5 billion — nearly 3% of the country’s 2022 GDP.

    Wow, when your fraud starts being measured in “percentage of GDP” you know you got too greedy.

  • vikinghoarder@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t believe these things happen because of great work or investigations, she must have stepped on someone else’s toes or something, that’s the only way influential people go down…

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s your answer:

      Her actions “not only violate the property management rights of individuals and organizations but also push SCB (Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank) into a state of special control; eroding people’s trust in the leadership of the Party and State,”

      • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Is this stepping on someone’s toes? “If we don’t hold rich people accountable, people will think we don’t hold rich people accountable”.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          And this scream of, we’ll make a barbaric and extreme example out them for violating our god, money, and nobody will question our resolve and ability to catch the 99.99% of those who get away with it.

          • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            What are you talking about? The money is the combined output of the workers of Vietnam. It’s people’s money, they have the right to protect it from parasites. The people’s government went after a capitalist to protect the people’s livelihood.

            I don’t think the death penalty is ever right, but acting like this person wasn’t the worst type of criminal, and that the legal system didn’t enact the will of the people here is wrong.

            • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Liars are not the worst kind of crininals, by a wide margin, and this particular type of liar was enabled by the greed of others as well as that of the state. Nobody loses “percentages of the gdp” on their own. This barbarism has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with the butchers of the state trying to save face and fulfill their promess of infinite vengeance against those who would embarrass it.

              The Earth needs cleansing from the statism infection, today’s most wretched mental illness.

              • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Not liars, criminals with tens of thousands of victims. If you don’t want the state of Vietnam to conduct executions then they need to fall out of favour with the people. This is an issue of societal values. If instead just the state felt embarrassed, then carrying out a punishment abhorred by the people would only embarrass them more.

                • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s a killer state, the people will have to do what it says. Or else… The state is only embarrassed to have its deadly coercive deterrence disrespected.

                  The solution to that is easy, state sanctionned executions. What better way to keep tge population in line and trust your the one and only strong man they crave so much.

  • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I read the article and I know her fraud was extensive but - anyone else feel like the death penalty for fraud is a bit over the top?

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s not just “fraud.” She cost people’s livelihood, broke up families, and made people homeless directly through her actions. Even speaking as a marxist, banking isn’t all intangible made up stuff. There are real individuals suffering consequences, and most of them aren’t just rich people doing rich people things.

    • davel@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Whether the death penalty should exist at all is a separate question, but Marxists generally recognize Engels’ conception of social murder.

      When one individual inflicts bodily injury upon another such that death results, we call the deed manslaughter; when the assailant knew in advance that the injury would be fatal, we call his deed murder. But when society places hundreds of proletarians in such a position that they inevitably meet a too early and an unnatural death, one which is quite as much a death by violence as that by the sword or bullet; when it deprives thousands of the necessaries of life, places them under conditions in which they cannot live – forces them, through the strong arm of the law, to remain in such conditions until that death ensues which is the inevitable consequence – knows that these thousands of victims must perish, and yet permits these conditions to remain, its deed is murder just as surely as the deed of the single individual; disguised, malicious murder, murder against which none can defend himself, which does not seem what it is, because no man sees the murderer, because the death of the victim seems a natural one, since the offence is more one of omission than of commission. But murder it remains.

      • antidote101@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Just seemed to have no logical end point. Like stop, you’ve got yours, retire from the game before you die… Well, now she’s going to die early. That’s heavy but it’s the path she chose.

    • Match!!@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think anyone should suffer the death penalty, but I also think that there must exist some amount of generalized damage that is enough to cause surplus deaths

    • Olhonestjim@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just about the only thing I agree with for the death penalty. Everything else can be reformed or quarantined. Wealth and power are cancerous. Doesn’t matter where they are, they will never stop trying to take over, and total destruction is the only way to ensure they never get loose to wreak havoc on millions of us ever again.

    • bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      A death sentence is always excessive.

      Fraud should be punished heavily though. Someone or several someones probably already died as a consequence of that money missing in the system. I’m not sure if a long jail sentence would be much better, with her being 67 it’s a death sentence either way.

      In my opinion they ought to follow the money. It’s impossible for these amounts to just disappear or to have been used by her. It would make sense to keep her alive if there’s any chance of recovering more of that lost money. But maybe that’s the point.