Law professor Brandon L. Garrett, author of a recent book wrote about the following story in his book, “Too Big to Jail”. Garrett wrote that after analyzing over 303 nonprosecution and deferred prosecution agreements with corporations from 2001 to 2014. Individuals were charged in only 34 percent of the cases that involved all types of white-collar and corporate crimes. Only 42 percent of those charged received any jail time. This is even though companies paid huge fines and admitted criminal culpability; for example, Siemens paid over $1.6 billion for bribery, Pfizer paid $2.3 billion for bribing doctors, and Tyson Foods paid a $4 million fine for bribery. Prosecutors explain that they would like to prosecute executives, but it is harder to prove cases of individual culpability. Critics argue that top executives are unlikely to be prosecuted because of other reasons.
Pollock, Joycelyn M. Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice (p. 54). Cengage Learning.
After reading the above article, in an essay write the strategy you would propose to your newly elected to the county office, whose campaign speech was “White collar and corporate crimes must pay now bargains and jail time.” Is this a fair resolution for corporate executives? Do you believe you can get any corporate executives to do jail time?
Initial discussion posts should be no less than 2-3 paragraphs and must include two (2) academic references that support your position or argument. Each peer response should be a minimum of 1-2 paragraphs, with at least (1) academic reference.
please do reply to these two peer submission
1)-I do believe that I could have corporate executives to do time in prison because of the rise of corporate crime happening around the nation. According to an article, it discusses why many of these crimes that are committed are too often unpunished. Prosecutors often attempt to skip the trial and directly go to negotiating a plea bargain which involves unclear promises and fines to correct corporate behavior, but too little of the actual consequences to the company or it’s executives. Due to collateral consequences, can result to thousands of innocent employees losing their jobs because of aggressive prosecution. To avoid collateral consequences, the U.S. government has come into contact with deferred-protection agreements by which the offending company would pay a fine and promise to improve their behavior to acknowledge what they did wrong. With the help of forensic accountants, they push forward for a greater transparency in financial practices and wider society in ethics. From their perspective, they focus on building a substantial amount of evidence increasing the case against the specific suspects of crime.
In an other article, it talks about the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) using a “carrots and sticks” approach to go against corporate crime by motivating companies to reporting and preventing misconduct while improving penalties for repeat offenders. During an event at New York University, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco discussed that the DOJ will make it more difficult for companies to engage into multiple settlements that postpone prosecutions and would attempt to reward companies that would go against executive reimbursement after learning of misconduct. This change would help the problem of corporate financial penalties from stockholders. Companies that do report misconduct and cooperate with investigators, are not required to plead guilty in most cases which spares them of significant fines. In October, the DOJ issues a new set of rules that requires companies to name all of the individuals who are involved in misconduct to receive credit for their cooperation and requires prosecutors to contemplate a company’s complete record before deciding how to resolve a probe. According to the new policy regarding on settlements, the DOJ leadership has to approve a second non-prosecution agreement or deferred prosecution agreement from any company. With these agreements, it lets companies escape criminal prosecution in exchange for promises of better behavior and fines.
2) White-collar and corporate crimes are never taken into serious consideration. A lot of times, they have a fine to pay and then they’re good as new. I feel that it is not right for just a fine to be paid when they’re doing illegal activities. White-collar and corporate crimes should be given jail time and a fine to pay. An illegal act needs jail time not just a fine to be paid. I think the speech of “White collar and corporate crimes must pay now bargains and jail time” is a fair resolution for corporate executives because even though white collar or corporate crimes are not considered a huge deal, it is.
A strategy that I would propose to my newly elected county office would be to have monthly checkups on all corporates about what is going on or if anything is not looking legal. It will help reduce white-collar and corporate crimes by having those monthly checkups. I believe that any type of crime should have jail time even if that’s white-collar or corporate crimes because everyone needs to learn that abusing a power is not okay. They’re causing financial loss and causing a bad reputation to the point where the public won’t have trust. I do believe that we can get any corporate executive to do jail time because if there is more than enough evidence that they’re not doing something legal, then they should be given jail time. It will also restore trust in the public because the public will be able to see that they’re getting justice for an illegal act that was done.
