... where I was a DA (Orange) and the one in which I now live (Marin), this case would not have resulted in a probationary plea (unless done by the judge over the DA's objection).

>> You would agree that the relative strentgh of
>> the case has to be considered by a prosecutor
>> in evaluating a plea deal.

In some cases, that's true. In others, the DA just has to bite the bullet and try the case, even if there's a chance he won't win. This would be one of those cases. Besides, employee theft (embezzlement) cases are among the easiest to prove (especially where, as apparently happened here, the defendant admits the crime to the employer).

>> You also don't know what position the victim
>> took in this regard. If the Victim (the
>> Casino) tells the prosecutor that they don't
>> want to see the defendant go to prison that
>> also is a factor you would have to consider.

The desires of the victim in a case like this are secondary to the best interests of society generally. Furthermore, it has always been my opinion that the "desires" of a corporate victim carry less weight than those of an individual victim. Finally, as a prosecutor, I would not allow the desire of a victim to "go easy" on a defendant to sway me to agree to probation for a defendant who deserves to go to prison.

>> Of course our prisons are full of people
>> convicted of drug offenses which are much less
>> serious offenses, but the prisons are filled
>> primarily with repeat offenders.
>> Few people go to prison for their first conviction.

Generally true, of course, Pete. But, in California, an alcoholic could get sent to prison for committing three instances of shoplifting bottles of booze (three strikes; charge each offense as a commercial burglary, which is not only permissible but a common prosecutorial ploy in certain kinds of cases). Not only could this happen, it has.

I just get SO angry when I see white collar crooks like this guy getting off easy while poor slobs get slammed for less serious crimes.

----- jim o\-S