[JumpCrisscross]

> I would want justice (ie. jail time) not money

Retribution not restitution [1]. “Justice” in this context is ambiguous.

[1] https://open.lib.umn.edu/criminallaw/chapter/1-5-the-purpose...

[1024core]

What's the point of "restitution" if it came from the victims anyways? The Sacklers would have kept all of their ill-gotten gains under this settlement. The amount they'd be paying is practically just the interest from their earnings.

[JumpCrisscross]

> What's the point of "restitution" if it came from the victims anyways?

The difference between having money and not.

> amount they'd be paying is practically just the interest from their earnings

Not disputing, the majority almost admits as much, but source?

[a2dam]

Restoring what was taken from the victims is literally the definition of restitution.

[FireBeyond]

Except if all you have is restitution, there's no punishment.

"Hey, I stole this money from you but since I gave it back - after a court ordered me to - we're all square, right?"

[1024core]

Exactly. If they're just returning the money (sans interest), where's the punishment?

If you steal $100 from a bank, you spend more time in jail than these scumbags ever will.

[tunesmith]

I have a hard time with the concept of retribution alone, but I think if it is phrased in terms of modeling societal standards and demonstrating to others that this behavior is unacceptable, it is still valuable to society. I guess you can mark that under "deterrence", but it's less about sending a signal to future would-be criminals, and more about communicating and demonstrating societal standards to the entire society at large.