--- begin forwarded text Posted-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:54:06 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:54:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li> X-Sender: unicorn@polaris.mindport.net To: Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com> Subject: Re: Just wondering... MIME-Version: 1.0 On Mon, 15 Apr 1996, Lucky Green wrote:
Uni, Just from past experience: if the judge realizes after putting you into the slammer for a month and levying a $10k fine for contempt that you don't have the information he is trying to coerce out of you, do you usually get your money back? What about income lost while incarcerated?
The former I have seen happen, the latter never. In the former case a tax document was "lost" by the witness's accountant who was in Moldavia and could not be located. The judge, reasonably, thought the witness was full of it. He imposed a per day fine, and after a time incarcerated the witness before the accountant was (finally) located and testified (by long distance telephone and intrepreter) that the documents have been lost in a fire at the national administration building, proof of which was entered in the form of newpaper articles. A motion to quash the fine was granted. The court apologized for the incarceration. Fines that are large and seem reasonable in the heat of court are more likely to get quashed when a judge who wasn't there later reviews it. Still, this is rare. As to the latter, that doesn't mean it won't, but seems unlikely. You don't usually get paid for the time you lose in court either, unless you sue for wrongful prosecution or costs which require malicious and wrongful prosecution. (Unlikely, extremely hard to prove or get a court to enforce). Pay your own costs tends to include opportunity cost of time in court.
TIA,
-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
Feel free to repost this to the list. I don't forward private mail without explicit permission, but I think the list, and Mr. Finney might like to see it. --- My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell@pacifier.com --- end forwarded text -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.