Prosecutors are recomending a 6 year sentence for this?

[Liberal_in_LA]

what he did was wrong but 6 years for 1 count of theft? I get it's grand theft but he took advantage of a company's mistake.

Man took pay from NJ company he never worked for

Monday, October 26, 2009

(10-26) 18:24 PDT Somerville, N.J. (AP) --

An Illinois man has admitted banking more than $470,000 in paychecks from a New Jersey company he never worked for. Anthony Armatys, 35, of Palatine, Ill., pleaded guilty Monday in New Jersey Superior Court to one count of theft as part of a plea bargain.

Prosecutors say Armatys accepted a job with Basking Ridge, N.J.-based telecommunications company Avaya Inc. in September 2002, then changed his mind. But the company's computer system never removed his name from the payroll.

Paychecks were deposited into his bank account until February 2007, when Avaya auditors discovered the mistake.

Prosecutors are recommending a six-year prison term and restitution. Sentencing is scheduled for Jan. 8.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/10/26/national/a154226D19.DTL&tsp=1#ixzz0V6B2aV6u

[dsc]

1. He stole over 100k a year

sorry but that is theft.

[Orrex]

2. If they were biweekly paychecks, then it's more like 27 counts of theft

Did he learn nothing from Superman III and Office Space?

[REP]

6. He's lucky if he doesn't get sent to Federal Pound You in the Ass Prison

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

3. He pled guilty I'm sure he was aware of the sentencing recommendation.

[Liberal_in_LA]

5. Ok

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. It is GRAND THEFT.

[Orrex]

8. Too bad for him that it wasn't Grand Theft Auto

Then he could evade the cops just by getting his car painted.

[imdjh]

7. He deserves the sentence because he was STUPID.

If a company in NJ is depositing money in your account every two weeks, you move someplace where you can't get arrested for having that money transferred to an account they can't get to. Hello Cayman Islands.

[Angry Dragon]

9. You tell me how it can be theft

The people in congress get all kinds of money from corporations every day and they and the corporations always say that nothing is expected for that pay. So this man got paid to do nothing. What is the difference between taking money to do nothing by this man and taking money to do nothing by congress??

[Uben]

10. He took something that wasn't his to take

...that makes him a criminal. I hate criminals. He knew it was wrong yet did it anyway. No different than a bank robber. I think six years was too light. TWenty years hard labor would be my choice. As long as crime pays, there will be criminals.

[WillyT]

11. Um... It's A Little Different Than A Bank Robber...

http://images.bimedia.net/images/NCB+1.jpg



Jesus Christ... people have absolutely no perspective anymore.

:wtf:

[Angry Dragon]

13. The intent was

to equate the money that congress gets from corporations and what this man did. It is assumed that corporations give money to politicians to work for the corporation. If the politician does not do that does the corporation come back and ask for their money?? The answer to that is no.

So one could assume that the politicians do do the work of the corporations.

[The_Casual_Observer]

12. If someone sends you a check with your name on it, deposit the check.

Later on, if it was a mistake & they want their money back, you give it back, less the interest you have earned. At least this is how I understood the system, as taught by an accounting professor in MBA school.

[TexasObserver]

14. He should have spent some of it on a better lawyer.

Six years?! On a deal?!

Sorry, but a good lawyer should be able to hang that jury up.

A deal is what you expect from a guy who can't afford to put on a good defense.

[Liberal_in_LA]

15. agreed. Rapists get lighter sentences than that.

[Greyhound]

17. Yeah but rapist only hurt people, hurting business is far more serious in Amerika. n/t

[TexasObserver]

18. You're right. This only happens if the business pushes for a pound of flesh.

They must have really wanted this guy.

If he'd had a decent lawyer, he'd have cut a deal and made restitution to extent possible. He should have gone on the offensive, and sued the business in civil court, where he could have the ability to run discovery on them and find things that would likely help him, things that might compel the business to let him off easier. For example, how accurate can their records be if they allowed this to happen?

[Hubert Flottz]

16. He should "Opt Out"

Like the people on Wall Street.