Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

JUSTICE: Embezzler’s sentence seems excessive

Letter by D.S. Helland, Lakewood on March 28, 2012 at 3:21 pm with 12 Comments »
March 28, 2012 3:27 pm

Regarding the sentence given the 63-year-old woman for embezzlement (TNT, 3-24):

As serious as this crime was, and as serious as I am about enforcing our laws, the 16-year sentence given this woman, considering her age, seems extreme. If memory serves, some violent crimes committed in the past have received lesser sentences than this nonviolent, first-time offense.

I would think that a much shorter sentence combined with restitution and community service would have much better served the concept of justice. I will pray that this 16- year sentence is reviewed with this in mind.

Tags:
Leave a comment Comments → 12
  1. Theefrinker says:

    It’s a money crime. Why do you think drug crimes get the sentences they do? It has nothing to do with the drugs, and everything to do with the money.

  2. If restitution is ordered,What will the chances be that order would be ignored?If all the people that believe that restitution would really happen,explain where would that 1.4 million would come from?I think that money is gone and not a dime will be paid back, regardless of what the court says.I feel that money has disappeared down a rathole,never to be seen again.

  3. reality476 says:

    I believe questions need to be asked when one individual receives 16 years for a violent first-degree rape, robbery case, a Tacoma East side Gang member receives 16 years for vicious murder, another suspect receives a ten year sentence for human trafficking and Acosta receives 16 years for theft.

    I question why the Rapist, Murderer, and human trafficker received such light sentences in comparison.

    No one has every stated Linda Acosta should not have been punished or receive prison time. She committed a crime and should be held accountable, although, this sentence by Superior Court Vickie Hogan appears to be based on emotion, nature of the “victim,” and excessive punishment rather than what “protects and serves society.”

    Judge Hogan has used her personal emotions on numerous occasions to overrule common sense. This appears to be another incident at a time the Washington State Department of corrections is over 100% capacity and seeking room for violent offenders.
    #476

  4. tree_guy says:

    Maybe the lengthy sentence will cause other would-be embezzlers, even thosewho hide behind a grandmotherly veneer, to think twice.

  5. harleyrider1 says:

    Just because some liberal judge was soft on crime and gave someone days, weeks, months, or a few years is no reason to condemn a sentence by Judge Hogan.

    People for too long in Pierce County have been given such lenient sentences for stealing money from others, it has actually worked out to be a pretty good annual wage spread out over the time they got. None of those that have stolen such large sums have ever paid them back. These people do not have the resources.

    If one knew they were going to lose everything they had for taking everything away from someone else, they might be deterred or branch out into a different crime.

    As Mrs. Hokold lay dying and need the money for the best medical she can afford, guess what? Good ‘ol Linda stole it all. Olivia Hokold worked all her life to be able to take care of herself when she was older and good ‘ol Linda Acosta stole her money.

    I have no sympathy for Linda Acosta, but I do have praise for Judge Hogan.

  6. Her age should not be considered a factor in the sentencing…if she was of sound mind enough to figure out how to steal the money then she is young enough to do the time. I did think it was a long sentence when compared to violent crimes but she did the crime and now must pay the price. I hope others considering stealing from their bosses, or anyone else for that matter, pay attention and choose to do otherwise.

  7. Pecksbadboy says:

    You do the crime, you do the time.
    Looks like she did not learn anything over the long years of being alive.

  8. 63 year old women going to jail, lets save some money and just put her to death and save some of my tax money. She led a good life, had over 1 million to play with while free.

  9. gowenray says:

    Don’t be making silly emotion comparisons of the sentenance this woman received. On a case by case basis her perverted sense of her own significance was to take what not only didn’t belong to her, but to take what was actually placed in her trust.
    She has earned her life-long solitude with the other dregs of society.

  10. She embezzled $1.6 million while receiving $85K annually. 16 years is great…..now let’s get those Banksters on Wall St. who crashed the economy…..

    Off with their heads!

  11. Re-checked the story – make that $1.4 million. Oh…and her boss gave her bonuses on top of her regular salary too.

    Her crime was ongoing – 140 checks over 7 years.

    She did offer to pay restitution – out of her Social Security checks.

    She deserves every year.

  12. spungamy says:

    My understanding when I read about the case was that part of her sentence was due to the fact that she was embezzling over a number of years and so committed multiple crimes during that time period. Just as a child molester would get more prison time for molesting multiple children than for molesting just one, or a serial killer would serve more time than a one-time murderer, she in effect was being punished for repeat offending.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0