Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

> Just to use Martha as an example, just how do you punish a
> multi-millionaire? With a fine equal to the ill gotten goods? That is
> laughable. 20 years in jail? No that is too harsh.

As has been mentioned here before, in Norway they do
hand out punishments based on the personal wealth of
the perpetrator, but we don't do that here. Our hands
are tied in that regard.

Hence the possibility of 20 years, or some other
sentence that might seem too harsh. We haven't got
any other tools for handing out justice.

I think torture or humiliation would be a great idea.
It would spare the taxpayers the expense of
incarceration, and it would satisfy the strange sort
of blood-lust in the air about Martha these days.
(A blood-lust that seems to be as much fueled by
her image and style, as opposed to any actual
wrongdoing she may have committed.)
But again, our hands are tied. We haven't used
whipping or the stocks in a long time, and there
would be an international outcry if we did.
We get enough enough abuse from other
countries for continuing to practice the death
penalty.

If Martha gets 5, 10, or 20 years, it might not
seem fair or the most appropriate punishment
for her, but that's the way it has to be.