Media pack the sidewalks for the sentencing hearing for convicted swindler Bernard Madoff outside the courthouse in lower Manhattan Monday.
(Mike Segar/REUTERS)Photos (1 of 1)
Madoff gets 150 years for ‘extraordinarily evil’ crime
The harsh sentence is meant to send a message, but is that necessary?
By Alexandra Marks | Staff writer/ June 29, 2009 edition
New York
The 150-year sentence handed down to Bernard Madoff – mastermind of the largest Ponzi scheme in modern history – is the third-largest in the annals of US financial fraud.
Mr. Madoff’s sentence, delivered by a federal court in New York, is six times longer than what was meted out to the top executives of WorldCom and Enron Corp. – two of the notable recent financial scandals.
Some lawyers praise Judge Denny Chin’s decision Monday as an important symbolic show of justice. Others criticize it as “absurd” given Madoff’s advanced age. But many of his victims simply welcomed it as a relief.
“I cried when I heard it, I felt justice had been done,” says Karen Audet, a retired school teacher from Ft. Lauderdale,Fla., who lost her $225,000 pension in an investment fund organized by a member of her church, who had invested it with Madoff’s company.
In March, the New York and Palm Beach-based swindler pleaded guilty to a laundry list of fraud charges in what could amount to a $65 billion swindle of wealthy friends and associates, other investment firms, and some internationally-known philanthropies.
At Madoff’s sentencing Monday, Judge Chin said “symbolism” was important to “deter future crimes” but also as “retribution.”
“The message must be sent that Mr. Madoff’s crimes were extraordinarily evil, and that this kind of manipulation of the system is not just a bloodless crime that takes place on paper, but one instead that takes a staggering toll,” Chin told the courtroom. Madoff showed no emotion, but had earlier told some of his victims gathered in the court room that he lived “in a tormented state now, knowing all the pain and suffering I’ve created.”
After the sentencing, his wife Ruth issued a statement saying, “I am embarrassed and ashamed. Like everyone else, I feel betrayed and confused. The man who committed this horrible fraud is not the man whom I have known for all these years.”
Some lawyers say the judge went too far with the 150-year sentence, as Madoff is already 71.
“It’s absurd. On several levels, 150 years is well deserved, if you measure the effect on so many people, including charitable institutions,” says James Cohen, a criminal law professor at Fordham Law School in New York. “But this guy isn’t going to live 150 years. So what is the point? Give him 30 years if you want to make a point that you’ll die in jail if you’re going to engage in this kind of conduct.”
The criminal justice system should not be used for “symbolism,” he added. But other lawyers applaud the judge’s decision, saying a “symbolic message” was warranted.
“[A]ny sentence would effectively amount to a life sentence for him, so it doesn’t matter if the judge imposed 20 years or 200 years” says Robert Mintz, former state prosecutor and a partner at McCarter & English in Newark, N.J. The sentence was “a symbolic gesture to put the crime into context – to make sure that the sentence reflected the judge’s sense that this was a crime of unprecedented proportions, and thus didn’t warrant a sentence similar to other financial frauds.”
The sentence reflects the court’s function as “teacher,” not just an arbiter of law, say others. The symbolism of the punishment “is an attempt to create proportionality … with the extraordinary depths of the economic hardship that he’s done to so many people,” says Robert Muldoon, a partner with Sherin & Lodgen in Boston. “Judges often use this kind of thing as an educational tool. It wasn’t just vengeance.”
Ms. Audet, the retired school teacher, is helping to raise one of her grandchildren and has a son with a serious medical condition who needs help. As a result of her loss, her husband has had to put off retirement.
But she says she will do her best to forgive Madoff, despite the anguish she feels “each time I have to write a check.”
“I can forgive, I will have to forgive because of my faith,” she says. “I can’t keep holding on to this thing. I have very strong faith that God will provide.”
• Information from the AP was used in this report.
( More stories )
Comments
2. Edward G. | 06.29.09
But symbolism in the sentencing is a legitimate factor. The four goals of criminal justice are retribution, rehabilitation, deterence and punishment.
The symbolism goes toward deterence.
3. Marc | 06.29.09
Judge Chin’s decision was excellent! But it’s too bad that he couldn’t have put the entire Federal Reserve Board in jail also, because they made it possible for madoff to work his scam. By lowering interest rates to ridiculously low depths, they made safe investments like bank CDs unuseable. So to get any sort of return, people were forced to turn to con jobs like madoff’s.
4. Vilhelm Nilsson | 06.29.09
I feel so much sorrow when I hear about how we are still praising and using a system of punishment to change peoples behaviour. That we cheer when another person, who is already suffering, will suffer even more.
I wonder where we are putting our own hearts when we miss how much Madoff, too, must be suffering, and perhaps has been all his life in order to do something that seperates him even more from others.
I feel it’s time we learned a lot more about compassion, empathy and healing our wounds than continue punishing eachother for doing things we ourselves do everyday. I think that if we want to avoid a world in which things like this occur, we need to deal with the roots of the issues and see that we are all products of this society and mirror it’s behaviour and values. Madoff might already feel that his whole life has been a prison of trying to earn love, achieve greatness through materialism and accept himself only when others accept him. So to keep on punishing eachother like we do will never heal our hurts, help us repair that which is broken or build new trust between us.
5. Bonnie | 06.30.09
Well I agree totally this guy should be in prison for ever and ever. But…tell me why we let crimes like murderers and rapists out and they live in our communities. Laws need to be changed immediately. I’m sorry this is a joke compared to an abused child or a person murdered.
6. Known Enigma | 06.30.09
Such unbelievable BS from the quoted “experts.” Saddling this man with 150 years annihilates hope for him. Give him 30 years and he would hope to be out in five, given his connections. It also dissuades the 30-year-old who is tempted to try the crime. Finally, it provides the greatest available satisfaction to victims. Good on the judge, and I’m glad those quoted were not making the sentencing decision.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Wai L. Chui | 06.29.09
How can you even ask “if the harsh sentence necessary”? Of course it is necessary. This man must NEVER get out of prison. Just because he was successful in hiding the fraud for so long, so that the crime came to light when he is old, is not a reason for a short sentence. We also must remember that this man has not repent. He has not cooperated with the authority. He admited his guilt because he could not escape. Other people are also involved in the fraud and he is still trying to protect them by not tell anything.