Justice and the E.F. Hutton Case

Trott argues at length in support of the government’s arrangement with E.F. Hutton after the company had been charged with 2,000 felony counts of intentional mail and wire fraud. Trott notes that the victims of the fraud--banks--are to reimbursed, and the company heavily fined. Trott is obviously pleased that so much “immediate benefit flows to the victims.” No criminal prosecution was undertaken. “Justice was done,” insists the assistant attorney general.

My understanding of justice is that it is a process fairly carried out regardless of the social status or economic position of the offender. Burglars and armed robbers are not allowed to pay a fine and reimburse their victims--however much the victims might appreciate such a gesture--and thereby escape a prison sentence.

Justice was not done in the Hutton case. What was accomplished was that company officials, by drawing upon Hutton’s economic resources, were able to buy their way out of paying the appropriate price for their criminal behavior.

GILBERT GEIS

Irvine