UL editorial needs a response

[KBCraig]

When I first read of this, I cheered this judge for allowing this, not to mention the defendant for requesting it. It shows what is wrong with civil fines: they reward the government, but they don't remunerate the actual victim.

I'll note that the judge didn't direct the fine; he accepted the defense proposal, and held the "official" fine in abeyance unless/until the same amount is paid directly to a victim of bad driving.

The notion that fines are to pay for the court system's time is obviously ludicrous: A ticket for speeding 41mph over the limit takes the same amount of court time as speeding 10mph over the limit.

This editorial begs for an LTE in response, but I'm in the middle of working 10 days straight (including an institution emergency), and my brain just isn't firing on all cylinders. If you feel up to responding about how fines shouldn't support the court system, but should recompense victims, just follow the email link at the bottom.

Feel free to lift my points and re-arrange them into a good LTE.

Kevin

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Nice%2c+but+improper%3a+Judges+can%27t+give+away+your+cash&articleId=d32c9b19-dc1a-4112-890e-fcf35a207608


Nice, but improper: Judges can't give away your cash

District Court Judge William H. Lyons had his heart in the right place on Wednesday when he allowed a speeder to donate to an injured Manchester boy rather than pay his court fine. His head, however, should have told him not to agree to the deal.

Ryan Drake, 30, of 40 Putnam St., Apt. 2, in Manchester, pleaded guilty to traveling 71 mph on Manchester's Notre Dame Bridge. The speed limit there is 30. Let's ignore for the moment whether Drake should get away with a slap on the wrist for traveling at an Interstate highway speed in central Manchester.

Drake was to be fined $300, plus a 20 percent penalty, for a total of $360. He asked that he be allowed to give the money instead to the TJ Donation Fund, established to help pay the medical bills of 7-year-old Thomas DeFrancesco Jr. of Manchester, who was hit by a car last week. DeFrancesco Jr. remains in critical condition in Children's Hospital Boston.

Judge Lyons suspended the fine on the condition that Drake pay $360 to the TJ Donation Fund. It sounds wonderful. But it sets a bad precedent.

Court fines go to pay for the operation of our court system, which in New Hampshire is funded as much as possible through fines instead of general taxes.

If judges start allowing people to donate their fines to charities, the courts will lose revenue they need to operate. Just as importantly, judges ought to be prohibited from using their power to divert public money to causes they deem worthy. If legislators vote to take money from the courts and send it to charities, the voters can hold them accountable. Judges are accountable to no one.

Not only is the court system out $360, but Drake may get a tax write-off for his charitable donation.

Despite its most worthy beneficiary, the arrangement was improper. How to spend public funds is a decision that belongs to elected legislators.

What's your opinion? E-mail us at letters@unionleader.com.

[aries]

Draft 1 - please correct anything I've said wrong or edit for me. I'm also tired

RE: Judges can't give away your cash

Courts routinely suspend fines on certain conditions, such as a driving course, or even an apology. This isn't much different from an apology, he even gets to put his money towards saying sorry. I don't see how the judge did anything wrong in letting Drake help pay for the boy's injuries, in fact, it should happen more often! When someone steals money, the court orders them to pay it back to the person they stole it from, not pay the state for breaking the law. The money that the boy and his family are now able to use to pay for his treatment has never belonged to the state, it went directly from Mr. Drake to the boy in the form of restitution, something that he would have been ordered to pay in a criminal suit anyway. That is, it was paid in lieu of a fine. It doesn't just sound wonderful, it is wonderful, that in our American system of criminal justice, the government does not seize money, only to spend it as 90% of government funds do anyway, uselessly. It can allow for civil fines to be put towards constructive goals such as restitution. Allowing Mr. Drake to donate to the boy in lieu of paying a fine is not a dangerous precedent, it is a practice that should be used more often. It is better for everyone involved.