That really sucks for your dad and this may be hard for you to answer objectively given your proximity to the situation but imagine if the guy who robbed your dad got tossed into this place with $100k + court fees and maybe child support if he had kids.

At minimum wage pay, with ~20% of his earnings going to pay down the debt that's effectively a life sentence. My question to you is, does that seem fair for what is essentially a white collar, non-violent crime?

Where does it say they have to make minimum wage? If someone was stupid enough to hire the guy again as an accountant, he could make whatever he made before. Hell, like most of the geniuses in this story, he could embezzle from the next guy to pay the last one!

Edit: I do think the system they have going on is absolutely ridiculous, especially considering the infrastructure costs when it's only being used for "more than 200 people" (which I'm assuming means less than 300). But some of the responses here from bleeding hearts are insane.

> does that seem fair

It seems the very definition of equitable.

(That said, I do think that the restitution amount can be adjusted, and courts do that. I object to the idea that 0% is appropriate.)

In genereal I find the wording "debt to society" very misleading. Does one have the right to commit a crime in exchange for punishment? I would say no. Punishment should serve as deterrant and as rehabilitation where possible, otherwise to keep society safe.