Think some executives are finally going to get what's coming to them?

August 15, 2002 9:37 AM

Think some executives are finally going to get what's coming to them? Meet David Novak, an ex-con who was convicted of one count of mail fraud. His sentence? Club Fed (scroll down). He is now earning $125 an hour consulting for soon-to-be inmates about how to survive the enforced vacation (with 7-day furloughs to strengthen family ties!). The best part? No fences, no guard towers, nothing to keep you from escaping except the knowledge than when they catch you, you'll have to do REAL prison time. I mean, give me a break...they even have a fucking SUNBATHING BEACH. I can buy the "we don't want to waste a lot of resources [punishing people]" line, but for crying out loud...isn't that supposed to mean concrete cells and no cable?
posted by taumeson (37 comments total)

Where in the article is there anything about a sunbathing beach? The guy says people come out with nice tans because they're doing hard labour in the sun all day. Not exactly the same thing.
posted by ramakrishna at 9:45 AM on August 15, 2002

from the Forbes link:

"There is, alas, no golf course, but there is tennis, yoga, boccie, a sunbathing beach and, oh, yes, there are no fences."
posted by justlisa at 9:49 AM on August 15, 2002

You can't expect corporate offenders to do time in a maximum security prison with rapists and murderers.
posted by internook at 9:56 AM on August 15, 2002

But what about ass-pounding? Surely there has to be ass-pounding for it to count as prison.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:56 AM on August 15, 2002

Crashy, NO!

Great, here we go again...
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 9:59 AM on August 15, 2002

PST, no one reads past the first three comments any more anyway, unless the poster appends something like "So what's your favorite Federal prison?" to the main post.

But just in case, I will circle back around to the topic and say I am 100% against anyone getting their ass pounded against their will, in prison or elsewhere, and I think that these guys have better accomodations in this prison than I did in the last hotel in which I stayed.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:08 AM on August 15, 2002

You can't expect corporate offenders to do time in a maximum security prison with rapists and murderers.

Woah...of course not! But gimme a fucking break...THIS doesn't really count as prison. I mean, NO fences? A fucking 8 foot high fence with barbed wire at least gives the APPEARANCE like the taxpayers paying for it actually WANT them there.

And what's the deal with FORBES having a blurb on a prison? That took me for a loop....
posted by taumeson at 10:21 AM on August 15, 2002

Internook: Why can't we expect them to be in the same prison as others who broke the law? Certainly some laws deserve less severe punishment than others, which is why a speeding ticket will get you a fine while killing someone will put you in jail (usually). However, prison is prison and it should be equal for all convicted criminals, regardless of how much money you have.
posted by FullFrontalNerdity at 10:23 AM on August 15, 2002

I do hope no one is suggesting there exists a double standard in this great country based on socioeconomic status. How dare they intimate such a thing!! :)

"All the justice you can afford."
"How much is that judge in the window?"
"The Best Democracy Money Can Buy."

Tell me again, are you for the people or the powerful?
Can the picture of economically based injustice be painted in a more dramatic way?
posted by nofundy at 10:29 AM on August 15, 2002

You can't expect corporate offenders to do time in a maximum security prison with rapists and murderers.

Why not? Surely the effects of their crimes have a total negative effect far worse than those others.
posted by HTuttle at 10:29 AM on August 15, 2002

they can put you in the big pen for grand larceny (aka stealing over the incredibly massive amount of $250) so why not for corporate crimes that involve sums much greater?

oh that's right, they're mostly nice rich boys. can't have 'em mixing with the real criminal element. they might get their fingernails dirty.
posted by zoopraxiscope at 10:38 AM on August 15, 2002

Why not? Surely the effects of their crimes have a total negative effect far worse than those others.

That's what I was thinking. You steal a few hundred dollars from a gas station a few times and you could go to real prison. Defraud people out of millions of dollars and go to posh prison.
posted by drezdn at 10:42 AM on August 15, 2002

Plus, why should corporate offenders, who actually hurt real people (those close to retirement who had their 401(k)s wiped out) have much MUCH better facilities than non-violent drug offenders?
posted by pjgulliver at 10:44 AM on August 15, 2002

You can't expect corporate offenders to do time in a maximum security prison with rapists and murderers.

Tell that to nonviolent drug offenders doing time with rapists and murderers, as most are not so lucky to be given such a situation. And is it me, or has anyone heard about any of these special prisons for women? How does the racial make-up of these prisons compare to that of regular prisons? What role does geography play in assignment--if you're tried in Manhattan, are you better off than if you're tried in Alabama?
posted by troybob at 10:45 AM on August 15, 2002

Woah...of course not! But gimme a fucking break...THIS doesn't really count as prison. I mean, NO fences?

From what I understand, if you escape from a minimum-security prison and are caught, you are then sent to a regular Federal penitentiary.

You can't expect corporate offenders to do time in a maximum security prison with rapists and murderers.

I agree. Although white-collar crimes hurt a lot of people, perhaps many more than your standard murder or rape, white-collar criminals do not need to be physically restrained from the public like violent offenders need to be. While bad, white-collar crimes are not violent, and a white-collar offender does not pose a immediate physical threat to the general public, and thus, should not be lumped into the same group as murders, rapists, child molesters, buglers, armed robbers, etc.

One fact that if often lost, is a punishment for a white-collar crime is that offender is no longer allowed to participate in the business that he/she committee his crimes in. The white-collar offender is thus removed from the instrumentality of his crime and often the only profession he or she has known and trained for. Example: A punishment for stock fraud would be that one is no longer allowed to trade with other people’s money.
posted by Bag Man at 10:46 AM on August 15, 2002

Re: who's at Eglin...

If you read the Fast Company interview, you might have noticed Novak's comment: "I was very, very surprised that the majority of the population was made up of drug offenders. " So, it's not just your stereotypical money-grubbing CEOs convicted of white collar crimes.
posted by tippiedog at 10:48 AM on August 15, 2002

Why not? Surely the effects of their crimes have a total negative effect far worse than those others.


No one can seriously believe that prison is for protecting
the general public.

I guess one is born every minute.
posted by larry_darrell at 10:57 AM on August 15, 2002

no, they won't, and they aren't the right execs anyway. the ones i'm interested in seeing asspounded are named bush, cheney and asscroft.

and gates.

and ballmer.

and rosen.

and velenti.

and...
posted by quonsar at 10:58 AM on August 15, 2002

you mean i can hook with an internet piracy ring, make friends with the overlord, rat them out in exchange for a free 6mo-1 year stay that includes a beach, bocci, yoga lessons, 1 week vacations to visit family?!? forget my $1400/mo rent in the bay aea, where the hell do i sign up?!?
posted by omidius at 11:08 AM on August 15, 2002

For the record, prison is merely the beginning of the end; most of the hotshots will never run a company again, unless they really can bootstrap one. If they're lucky, they can get a job warning other CEOs about avoiding prison.

As I understand it, by BOP rules, if you're sentenced to minimum security (non-violent offenders without a flight risk), they can only bump you up one level, i.e. to medium security, based on availability. If you get a lenient judge, they will request a nearby prison. "Nearby" is relative, though: it could be hundreds of miles.

I happen to know a guy who's in federal prison. He's a 55-year-old lawyer who was sentenced to 18 months for helping a long-time client commit tax fraud. It's certainly not hard labor, but it's a dull, dull place. He started out working in the boiler room, where the boss told him he was learning a skill he could use "on the outside" -- until he found out he was a lawyer, then he got reassigned to the laundry. He makes something like 10 cents an hour, which he can use to buy cigarettes (which, as everyone knows, are the only real currency inside prisons). For his free time, of which there's more than most people know what to do with, he never has enough books, the magazines are old and torn, the TV sucks; he spends most of his time playing cards. He can make friends, but the turnover makes it surprisingly hard. He's only permitted phone privileges a couple of times a week, and a slate of allowed visitors no longer than 10 people. (He's lucky in that regard: people come visit him. It's six hours away.) He can't attend to his business affairs in any way, shape, or form, so his wife has to figure out for herself where to find client records (she hadn't been his secretary for nearly 20 years). He had to miss his daughter's wedding, for which he'd already had a suit fitted. He's probably going to lose his law license; I believe it's already suspended. He won't be broke when he gets out, but he'll never get his law practice back the way it was, one way or another, and while he wasn't incredibly rich, he was comfortable and winding down towards early retirement. That's all gone now. His savings went toward his defense and appeal: it turns out that a lawyer with a decent appeals record in the federal courts asks for a retainer of $500,000. They paid off and closed all but one credit card account, set up the mortgage to be paid in advance from an escrow, paid a penalty to close the lease on his car, and his wife is looking for a full-time teaching job (she spent years as a sub).

Is it breaking rocks in the hot sun? No. In fact, prison is the least of it. But he's lost friends, lost respect, lost money, lost a career he loved, and lost the future he and his wife expected.
posted by dhartung at 11:09 AM on August 15, 2002

quonsar: let me tell you a little story. Back in the middle to late 1920's, Russia was going through a period of purging enemies of the state. It was before massive work camps were built, so treasoners were usually sentenced to death and executed shortly. The trouble was that the rate of executions reached such heights that it began bothering even the most cold-blooded, hardcore chiefs of then-NKVD (led by the legendary Felix Dzershinsky). So, a temporary rule was instituted - the party commissioner who presented an accusation against a man deemed enemy of the state (sort of like a cross between a prosecution attournet and Gestapo policeman) to the "court" resulting in conviction of that man and sentencing him to execution had to carry out the execution himself. Easy as that - there is a 30 minute trial, the person on trial is predictably sentenced to death, you go outside to a special area and shoot them with your own personal weapon. Done.

The rate of convictions leading to death sentences dropped dramatically. People had to think twice about whether a given offense was worth a death sentence - beause they'd have to carry it out. Funny how that worked.

So where am I going with that? Oh yes, since you seem so adamant about having a list of people you'd like to see "asspounded", are you willing to step up to the challenge?
posted by blindcarboncopy at 11:11 AM on August 15, 2002

Contrast the Fast Company link with this New York article that claimed "Club Fed is dead, and hard time is harder than ever." Linked in this July 30 post.
posted by mediareport at 11:12 AM on August 15, 2002

This article with its accompanying MeFi post says that "Club Fed" is a myth.
posted by internal at 11:12 AM on August 15, 2002

Jinx! Buy me a coke!
posted by internal at 11:13 AM on August 15, 2002

Wow, that is quite a bit. I'm not so sure it's an entire life lost however because of a stupid and costly mistake. He may have lost some friends, and money he still has what I assume a loving wife, a atleast somewhat supportive family.

How long is it until they will be near fully recovered by something like this? 10 years?
posted by omidius at 11:16 AM on August 15, 2002

Buy me...coke!

And risk doing time at Club Fed? Hell, no!
posted by mediareport at 11:27 AM on August 15, 2002

And what's the deal with FORBES having a blurb on a prison? That took me for a loop....

Of course it makes a lot of sense with all the recent focus on high level corporate criminals, and the fact that Forbes main target audience is high level corporate management (even more so than other business mags.)

But the kicker is that the link is from April 2001. Forbes: Capitalist Tool.
posted by pitchblende at 11:35 AM on August 15, 2002

...for helping a long-time client commit tax fraud.

I'm sorry dhartung, I realize he's a friend, and I'm certainly not happy to hear of someone going through that, but c'mon, as a lawyer he had to have a rough idea of the sentence for this if he got caught. If you don't want to go to prison, don't commit fraud. That seems like a simple proposition.
posted by jalexei at 11:53 AM on August 15, 2002

the ones i'm interested in seeing asspounded are named bush, cheney and asscroft.

I am never trading porn with you sicko.
posted by thirteen at 12:21 PM on August 15, 2002

FullFrontalNerdity - However, prison is prison and it should be equal for all convicted criminals, regardless of how much money you have.

I think this is an issue of custody level, not of how much money these schmoes might have. Someone who commits corporate fraud doesn't belong across a narrow hall from someone who has been busted 4 times for armed robbery. They pose a different threat to society.

These white collar criminals are real jerks and they deserve their time, but they are still human beings. What do I care if they have some simple priveleges to help get them through the succession of long and boring days?
posted by internook at 12:22 PM on August 15, 2002

No one can seriously believe that prison is for protecting
the general public.

larry_darrell, I hope you understand that a very important purpose of punishment is to restrain people from the general public. Will I believe your innuendo or B.S. ? Or will I believe in the long established “purpose of punishment” that is backed by centuries of the Anglo-American judicial system?

But really, who do you think is more like to physically hurt a person? A murder? Or some guy who trades stock? It's irrelevant if prisoners are used for labor. Why not? Besides while-collar criminals are used for labor too. How’s that for equal treatment.

Treating non-violent offenders as violent offenders, talk about your double standards.
posted by Bag Man at 12:33 PM on August 15, 2002

You know, minimum security prison is no picnic. I had a client in there once. He said the trick is kick someone's ass the first day, or become somebody's bitch. Then everything will be alright.
posted by NortonDC at 12:43 PM on August 15, 2002

should not be lumped into the same group as murders, rapists, child molesters, buglers, armed robbers, etc.

Hey now, Bag Man, what do you have against buglers? I know they wake you up and everything, but certainly they don't deserve...oh wait, never mind.
posted by Ty Webb at 12:55 PM on August 15, 2002

Or will I believe in the long established ?purpose of punishment? that is backed by centuries of the Anglo-American judicial system?

Tradition is important ,no doubt, overrated though.

But really, who do you think is more like to physically hurt a person? A murder? Or some guy who trades stock

By defintion a murderer has already hurt a person so
it's not really a fair comparison. I get your point though.
I'm sure guys in suits are far less likely to beat their wives
than say, grubby, construction workers.
posted by larry_darrell at 1:28 PM on August 15, 2002

blindcarboncopy: no.
1) it ain't 1920
2) i ain't felix
3) asspounding ain't part of the punishment, its an add-on humiliation.
4) there are people who do that sort of thing already in prison, i ain't in prison, and wouldn't want to take their only pleasure from them.
posted by quonsar at 2:03 PM on August 15, 2002

jalexei: Don't put words in my mouth.

First, I do happen to believe that he was not that dishonest; this was the only result of a federal fishing expedition against this guy's cousin, who provided evidence that I am certain was fraudulent (thus avoiding charges himself), but which was admitted (and cross-examined) anyway. The guy went into the trial thinking he was a slam-dunk acquittal. So be it; I wasn't there in either the original transaction or the courtroom.

Second, it wasn't my point that he doesn't deserve this, and I did not say that. If he did intentionally and knowledgeably do the crime, I certainly agree. In the end none of that was my point, and I tried to present it as a factual case that even a white-collar crime can result in a significant sentence and even a minimum-security federal prison is not a fun place. Those points do not require debating the merits of the crime or the sentence.

I forgot one more thing. He used to use one of those prescription heartburn medications, but because it's not deemed "medically necessary", he only got to use what he came to prison with, which is gone.

Message: PRISON SUCKS. Okay? That pass muster with you?
posted by dhartung at 3:59 PM on August 15, 2002

Oops, missed the Forbes link argh.

Anyway, Bag Man and internook: tell ya what. The day they stop throwing drug offenders (including traffickers) -- or even burglars, who are also not committing a violent crime -- in with the violent criminals, then I'll agree that white-collar criminals shouldn't be placed with the violent ones. Until then, the execs should enjoy the company of murderers and rapists like all the other non-violent criminals do.
posted by ramakrishna at 7:58 PM on August 15, 2002