Now which part of that do you think justifies a $573,000 fine?

The part where when he was cited 8 years ago and told that the fine was $250/day for non compliance.

It’s about 90k per year.

You didn't justify it, you enumerated it. Explain why you believe fining someone $573,000 for having cars in their back yard working on them is reasonable and justifiable.

Because there was presumably no or minimal fine for violating this civil ordinance, should he have complied with mitigating the violation.

There are then penalties for continuing the violation.

So should the state have just given up? At what point? If there were a maximum, what would it be?

Personally, maybe $5000, but that might be too much. The guy is 83 years old, probably living on a fixed income (social security) making side money on fixing cars, or just has cars in his back yard. The amount fined is way higher than appropriate for such a "crime." You shouldn't beat people into compliance for minor transgressions, wether that be as a police officer with a baton/taser/fist/knee, or a clerk issuing fines. When we live under a government with no empathy, as shown by this example, we're doomed.

I don’t know why I keep coming back to this - maybe because he reminds me of people in my life that have had similar problems.

He was 75 when he was first cited, not 83.

He was given a chance to mitigate the code violation and he refused, which incurred a 250 per day penalty which he refused to pay.

He dragged it out for 7 years by being his own lawyer and and presumably has also not rectified the code violation.

As an aside, if he had actually fixed these cars they would not be in his back yard. He’s a hoarder.

I’d be willing to bet that he could settle this for less than the full amount.

There’s just something about this mindset of (a) he’s too old to be held accountable (b) free will/it’s his property to do what he wants with it (c) he’s just a hacker and we should be encouraging people to ignore civil law when it’s inconvenient.

It’s also likely that his dragging this through the court system for so many years has probably cost more than he owes - and when he dies or abandons the property the state will likely have to pay to clean up after him.

Sorry, bad mood rant today. All that being said, I have no skin in this game, it just touched a raw nerve.

Maybe they should just execute him for not respecting the state's authority. Would that satisfy your lust for a pound of flesh? Sound extreme? So does $573K, that's my point. I don't care that he dared to test the constitutionality of what the state was doing to him (we should thank him for trying), it's excessive and stupid and makes us all look like an uncivilized backwater nation that has no concept of justice or money. They should have at least put a stay on it while it was under judicial review, or capped it. Nope, gotta have our pound of flesh.

Is the cruelty of our state a reflection of our own cruelty, or do you think it's the other way around? Perhaps cruelty feeds cruelty. Maybe if we weren't so cruel all this horrible shit on the news would stop happening so much.

There's not an insignificant chance he will catch a warrant then be jailed for inability to pay the fine and if that happens, he'll probably die in prison. I guess we get to execute him after all, just not so directly. That'll teach him?