Repaying Debts?

Many corporate fraudsters will never repay the debt they've been deemed to owe their victims. The responsibility to enforce fines and restitution in federal cases rests with financial litigation units. Prosecutors face many obstacles in trying to turn restitution judgments into actual cash for victims, according to information gathered from court filings, congressional studies, and discussions with about 30 lawyers and victims involved in white-collar fraud cases. Some white-collar defendants don't actually have much money, particularly those convicted of operating sham companies or Ponzi schemes [investment scams]. Of those who do, some take advantage of the time it takes to investigate and prosecute corporate fraud by transferring and hiding assets in the meantime. No matter how much restitution—or how little—the government may ultimately collect from a criminal, first it has to calculate the size of the award and who should receive it. In a corporate fraud case, victims are typically identified by investigating agencies. After a conviction, a probation officer presents the court with a presentence report, which includes a summary of the criminal's finances and a collection of statements from victims about the financial and emotional impact of the crime. In some cases, judges order restitution as a lump sum payable at sentencing, plus a monthly amount to be paid after release from prison. In other cases, the whole amount comes due in full at judgment. But still in some cases there are people that do not pay all the debt that they owe. Also like it said that some people take advantage of the time and hide their money. Shouldn't they be continued to be followed up until they repay all the money? Why do they not have the harsh conditions of repaying the debt that most people have to go through?

Todd, Ross. "White-Collar Criminals Rarely Repay Their Debts." American Lawyer 29 (Nov. 2007): S68-S72. Rpt. in White-Collar Crime. Ed. Kelly Wand. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 5 Jan. 2011.