|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Darren New <dne### [at] san rr com> wrote:
> I think the point is that it was willful infringement. That is, they told
> her to stop, she said "bite me", so the fine includes punishment as well as
> restitution.
You mean robbery is not "willful infringement" unless the shop owner
specifically tells the robber to not to do that?
I don't think that argument makes any sense. I have never heard that
a fine is grown several orders of magnitude just because the property
owner told the criminal to stop. I can't even believe there's such a law
in the US or anywhere.
And again, the punishment was in no way proportional to the crime, no
matter how "willfully" the criminal did it.
What next? A child steals a candy from a store and he is given a fine
of a couple million dollars? What do we need a sense of proportion in
criminal law?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |