if you are rich you walk free and have access to healthcare so that you can live longer to screw even more people over

of equality before the law.

In the courtroom of honor, the judge pounded his gavel
To show that all's equal and that the courts are on the level
And that the strings in the books ain't pulled and persuaded
And that even the nobles get properly handled
Once that the cops have chased after and caught 'em
And that ladder of law has no top and no bottom
Stared at the person who killed for no reason
Who just happened to be feeling that way without warning
And he spoke through his cloak, most deep and distinguished
And handed out strongly, for penalty and repentance
William Zanzinger with a six-month sentence
— Bob Dylan

_______________________________________________________________

"In the netherlands most of us do not ware a helmet. Also most of us do not have a gun. Still we get very old." - jojo

This guy has probably already amassed a fortune. Therefore, they could just take a chunk of it, say 25M, and give it to the victim before he is unable to find another job due to the felony conviction.

got past the headline. As I constantly complain about teabaggers who use their emotions to make voting decisions instead of their brains, the same goes both ways. Sometimes the emotional needs to be taken out of the practice of justice and replaced with the rational.

^{Bad decisions make good stories.}

just because he claims culpability and agrees to pay does not change that he committed a felony and left the guy to die. Would a poor person get a break if he admits culpability and says he would pay if he could?

%&(* @&^! I'm sorely tempted to tell you what I think, so that you could ban me for it and then explain to me what "justice" is. But then I wouldn't get to reply :)
Thrasymachus has always been right.
argue against that, but don't be insulting.

They know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

The courts are not in place to find the "optimal outcome" for the victim. They're there to do what is just. And when a crime is committed, there is no "these kind of personal injury cases." What the District Attorney decided was about not prosecuting what is clearly a felony. What the District Attorney has to say about possible tort litigation is immaterial to whether the felon should be prosecuted by the District Attorney for a felony that the felon committed. Which is the District Attorney's job. Prosecuting. Felons. Because they committed. Felonies.

Now granted, the guy probably didn't mean to hit the doctor with his Mercedes. But he DID mean to drive away, a felony. At what point does his behavior rise to a sufficient degree of seriousness in order for someone in authority to do something? What if he didn't run the guy over, giving him internal brain hemorrhaging and a broken spine. What if he put his penis in the guy. Hey! That's not so serious! It's not like he's permanently damaged! And besides, in these kinds of "personal injury cases" it doesn't matter because prosecuting felony rape is not "optimal" against rich guys. Felony rape, felony schmape. Felony negligent homicide. Felony negligent schmomishide.

At what point does the felony become serious enough for you? How about this. What if instead of raping the doctor, it was raping the doctor's 12 year old daughter? After all, she has an entire life to live! Not serious enough? Is he still too rich for "these kinds of personal injury cases?"

Okay, not serious enough. What could wake us from our mammon-worshipping let's-let-the-marketplace-find-justice-which-should-go-to-the-highest-bidder moral turpitude? What injustice caused by a rich white person possibly rise to a degree of seriousness to prick your moral conscience? What if he were a sadistic serial killer and rapist of photogenic blond girls? Would that not be okay with you? What if one of those girls were the DA's daughters? What price would he put on her head? How much are their lives worth, in dollars and cents, if not justice?

Where do you draw the line? Which felony would that be, specifically?

this is strictly a criminal matter at this point. The DA's only job is to decide whether criminal prosecution is warranted for felony hit and run, or whatever it's called in Colorado. In Texas, it's called failure to stop and render aid, and can be a felony depending on the amount of bodily injury. The DA's stated reasons for declining to prosecute this as a felony are just not ringing true here...surely they understand that it really doesn't matter who this guy is, it's the conduct that needs punishing, and there are many avenues within felony prosecution to make an outcome that fits the particular circumstances (like felony probation, for example).

_______________________________________________________________________
The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.
Anatole France

One of the most emotionally charged scenes in A Tale of Two Cities recounts a nobleman's carriage driving over and killing a poor child. The nobleman throws some money to the parents to make it all right. The reader is not left wondering about the justice of the revolution.

If the courts could insure that all of Erzinger's income beyond what he would make as minimum wage would go for restitution, there might be some sense that restitution could be a decent priority, since he would in fact pay a price in his own life that would fit the twin aims of acknowledging the value of what he destroyed in a meaningful way and deterring other careless drivers. But as long as a pampered rich man can carelessly hurt others and continue to be pampered albeit with some inconvenience, it fails the tests of justice.

I don't think the courts have ruled yet. This is a decision by the District Attorney not to pursue felony charges which is a travesty. No doubt, there will also be a civil suit with significant monetary demands.

Erzinger fled the scene. Never turned himself in. You want this guy getting off with a slap on the wrist? Why is the money in the prosecutor's interest moreso than in the victim's?

Dr Milo told Hurlbert that the case 'has always been about responsibility, not money'.

'Mr Erzinger struck me, fled and left me for dead on the highway,' he wrote. 'Neither his financial prominence nor my financial situation should be factors in your prosecution of this case.'
But the prosecutor insisted that the case is, in part, about the money. 'The money has never been a priority for them. It is for us,' he said.

Do prosecutor's in CO get a cut? Or just future campaign contributions? It only took him 3 months to bring charges, 3 weeks to drop the felony charge, and 1 day to notify the victim's attorney.

Hurlbert said it took more than three months to file charges because the district attorney's office has been talking with the victim, Steven Milo, and his attorney, as well as Erzinger and his attorney, about “issues related to the defendant,” Hurlbert said.

The issues are related to the potential impacts on Erzinger's job as a financial advisor and investment banker — impacts that are typically considered in cases that involve high restitution, or payments to victims for harm caused.

Milo suffered serious injuries in the accident.

“In a case where there's a lot of restitution, that certainly is a consideration,” Hurlbert said. “Generally not a consideration for charging, but for plea bargains.”

http://www.vaildaily.com/ARTICLE/20101013/NEWS/101019922/-1/RSS

Milo and his attorney, Harold Haddon, are livid about the prosecution's decision to drop the felony charge. They filed their objection Wednesday afternoon, the day after prosecutors notified Haddon's office by fax of their decision.

Haddon and Milo say this is a victim's rights case, that Erzinger's alleged actions constituted a felony, and that one day is not enough notice.

“The proposed disposition is not appropriate given the shocking nature of of the defendant's conduct and the debilitating injuries which Dr. Milo has suffered,” Haddon wrote.

As for the one-day notice, Haddon wrote, “One business day is not sufficient notice to allow him to meaningfully participate in this criminal action.”
............

The original complaint included a felony count against Erzinger for causing serious bodily injury. Deputy DA Mark Brostrom is prosecuting the case and Milo says in court documents that Brostrom called Erzinger's July 3 actions “egregious.” Prosecutors pleaded the case down to a misdemeanor later in the summer, then in August told Milo and his attorneys that Erzinger would face a felony charge, Haddon wrote.

But on Sept. 7, Brostrom told County Court Judge Katharine Sullivan that the case would be pleaded as a misdemeanor. That's the first time Milo or his attorneys had heard of it, Haddon wrote, and they protested “in the strongest possible terms,” Haddon wrote.

http://www.vaildaily.com/ARTICLE/20101104/NEWS/101109939/-1/RSS

Why is it that the poor slob who can't pay restitution to the insurance company has to go to jail? Colorado ought to just set up a penal colony in Wyoming for the deadbeats.
Colorado Hit and Run Law

of course being a felon doesn't effect there job opportunities at all or voting rights

the dissenting opinions here come from bond traders does not surprise me.

The banker is admitting culpability now. Six weeks or six months from now? Maybe not so much.

And - correct me if I'm wrong - but doesn't being convicted of only a misdemeanor crime in a criminal court lesson the chances of a large award in civil court?

The one silver lining here is that the statute of limitations does not run out for some time. Presumably if this bankster starts trying to stall past that period, the DA has the option of going ahead and pressing felony charges.

then he can't be retried for that crime - no double jeopardy...

But these would not in fact be retrying him on old charges. Even the DA doesn't have the power to say that fleeing the scene of an accident is a misdemeanor; he can only decide whether or not to pursue that charge.

A kind of probation which occurs without a conviction or finding of guilt. If the accused successfully completes probation, officially the case is dismissed. It's frequently alleged in the media that such persons have their record "wiped clean" or "cleared" when in fact that is not actually the case...in Texas, no one can get an expunction (that is, a complete destruction of record relating to the charge) after having been on deferred adjudication of a class B misdmeanor or above. Other states laws are probably similar, but not necessarily the same. The fact that the person was accused, and pled guilty or no contest to the felony charge, and completed deferred adjudication, would still remain on that person's record. Hope this clears things up.

_______________________________________________________________________
The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.
Anatole France