NPR : Morning Edition - Degenerate Gambler - Monday , May 17, 2004 "A New Jersey man pled guilty to concocting a bogus investment scheme and faces up to 20 years in prison. But instead of showing up for sentencing, Brian Strahl faxed the judge a letter saying he was playing in the world series of poker in Las Vegas -- an effort, he claimed, to win funds to pay back victims. The judge rescheduled the sentencing and denounced Strahl as a "degenerate gambler.""
I bet he'll lose some bets in prison.
I was a close and personal friend of strahls until he broke the law.........however,if you were robbed for a couple hundred thousand and they caught the guy who did it,,,,,,wouldnt you rather he stay out of jail at least until you got your money back? there was alot of upset victims with that sentencing him being in jail does not get restitution paid now does it???
Posted by Sammy | Sunday 23 January 2005 2:30AM
I would definitely not rather a criminal swindler stay out of jail until he paid the money back, because I know he likely never would, especially if he were let out loose. Where would be the incentive to pay the money back anyway if he were allowed loose until such time he paid his victims back? He could just make more excuses indefinitely, and never go to jail for his crimes?
I mean, he thought he could pay the victims back by gambling in Vegas!!
My 'bet' is that he couldn't pay back the victims he'd swindled, because he'd already lost their money in a previous gambling spree. Because if he could really make the money to pay them back gambling, he could've gambled for the money in the first place instead of swindling people.
My 'bet' is that the people would never get their money back from such a swindler, no matter what. He'd likely wind up losing more money gambling trying to win it back, and then decide to swindle more victims to make up for it.
I think the judge was accurate in his denouncement, and in the enforcement of the law.
I think the best society could hope for in a situation like this is that:
A) The guy is locked up and prevented from swindling more victims at least for some while;
B) The guy is kept in at least a somewhat controlled environment for awhile where he can't dig his own hole much deeper for himself;
C) Maybe experiencing some consequences will wake him up to this problem of his that led to criminal & irresponsible behaviour like swindling to acquire money and shirking legal obligations in order to gamble;
D) Maybe these people out their money will learn from the experience, and won't be duped again.
I'm sorry to be blunt, but the idea of a victim of his swindle believing that he could & would gamble the money back and make restitution makes it very easy to understand how that victim was swindled in the first place.
I might of course grant leeway, on a first time dupe, to family members and personal friends, if he was at one time reliable before this "degeneration" into criminal swindling and irresponsible gambling...
But as the saying goes... "Fool me once, shame on you; Fool me twice, shame on me."
Posted by Chloe | Sunday 23 January 2005 11:28PM
Comment Avatar icons by Gravatar.
E-mail addresses are required, but not displayed nor shared.
Please post comments relevant to this page only. For off-topic comments, questions, and discussion, please use this site's Message Board Forum. All comments posted that are spam, abusive, use phoney e-mail, or that do not relate directly to the page, will be removed.
Thank you for respecting this site, author & readers, and for helping stem the flow of ridiculously inaccurate hits from search engines.
superficiality >>If the facade is what's important to you, all you wind up with is an illusion. Disillusionment is the gift of substance.
-- Chloe<<
(more)
I was a close and personal friend of strahls until he broke the law.........however,if you were robbed for a couple hundred thousand and they caught the guy who did it,,,,,,wouldnt you rather he stay out of jail at least until you got your money back? there was alot of upset victims with that sentencing him being in jail does not get restitution paid now does it???
I would definitely not rather a criminal swindler stay out of jail until he paid the money back, because I know he likely never would, especially if he were let out loose. Where would be the incentive to pay the money back anyway if he were allowed loose until such time he paid his victims back? He could just make more excuses indefinitely, and never go to jail for his crimes?
