‘Robbers’ benefit from lenient standard

Citizens Against Violent Acts gets held up (with a pen), robbed of $25,000. The criminal is sentenced to one year, conditional discharge and pay restitution.

Cape Vincent, April 2009 to September 2010, (different pen) robbed of $30,000, five-year probation/restitution, sentenced Jan. 20.

CAVA gets hit again (another pen); $16,000 in bad checks (case still pending).

Pitcairn (somewhere south of Gouverneur), robbed Jan. 1, 2008, to Dec. 31, 2009, (another pen) $35,000. Yet to be charged?

Bank (no pen or any other weapon) March 5, 2011, robbed of $2,100, one-to-three-years in prison/restitution, sentenced Jan. 20.

Seeing the original ox (monies) had been slaughtered (spent), justice says five oxen (five times the monies) shall be returned: $125,000 to CAVA; $150,000 to the people of Cape Vincent; $80,000 more to CAVA; Pitcairn, $175,000 and bank, $10,500.

I don’t know much about clubs, but there seems to be a pattern. Public trust?

Our handlers at these levels are held to a different sword.

What of the ones who are higher on their food chain?

The New York State Bar Association supports a proposed change in state law that will allow judges to seal the criminal records (up to three misdemeanors or one low-level nonviolent felony of “some people” to help them recover from their mistakes.

Will the bank robber benefit?

Ethics, like despicable, is in the eyes of the beholder.

Equality before the law.

Patrick J. Green

Lisbon