Jesus
Yes, our corporate attorney was useless. We had been under investigation for a year prior to formal charges being filed. He made a variety of changes to our contracts in an effort to make the company compliant with CA law, (mostly indemnifying us against any loss that may come as a result of a person placing their vehicles in our program.) He failed. I was sentenced to state prison.
Our "proper legal structure" mattered little in lieu of the circumstances that led to the company's (and my freedom's) demise.
Tip: In the UK, operating a fund which hedges against criminal proceedings (colloquially, a 'bust fund') is a severe criminal offence in its own right.
Do reassure me that you've made very sure nobody where you are is likely to prosecute you a second time :)
In a state where the recidivism rate is a staggering 65%, at a cost of tens of millions of dollars to taxpayers, we need something radical to turn things around. Over 40% of the prison population is incarcerated for violating the terms of their probation or parole. Custodial insurance is just crazy and disruptive enough of a concept to make a difference in reducing these obscene numbers.
We're working diligently to garner support amongst community activists, religious leaders, and most importantly politicians in hopes of easing any potential restrictions in offering custodial insurance.
Sadly there's a very real possibility that despite our noble intentions, Comeback may ultimately lead to a failed business and some very heavy fines...possibly even jail time.
Are you really ready to go to jail, yet again? That sounds quite bold, and foolish... of you. (No offense intended.)
My 2 cents: if you start getting sued again, you should just leave the country, for some place[1] with not as inane laws. Perhaps Comeback might be more viable there.
[1] Dunno where though... perhaps somewhere in Europe? They probably have low rates of recidivism to start with, though.
As a side point, I can't help but think -- a lot of the recidivism in the U.S. is somehow driven by laws and a system that continues to be upheld by the "stake holders". The stake holders here are, ofcourse those private "prison-as-a-business" corporations.
Fortune favors the bold and dances with the daring. I truly believe that.
>As a side point, I can't help but think -- a lot of the recidivism in the U.S. is somehow driven by laws and a system that continues to be upheld by the "stake holders". The stake holders here are, ofcourse those private "prison-as-a-business" corporations.
Bingo. Society has been using non-profit solutions, (i.e. government funded reentry programs) to combat a for-profit problem. It's time to fight fire with fire. Our revenue model relies on our ability to keep our policyholders out of jail. This means we're going to bust our ass to provide career training and job placement to reduce the likelihood of them returning to custody, thus reducing the likelihood of them filing a claim and us having to pay out. Our success is directly tied to the success of our policyholders. The better they do, the better we do. We're making it profitable to keep people out of jail.
How would such a rumor help him at all? It would ruin his business!
> Low enforcement
I presume you were using some voice-to-text tool?
That rumor would most likely discourage people from becoming clients in the first place.
While "getting out of the building" and talking to our assumed target demo, one of the reservations people had was the belief that we were working in concert with law enforcement.
Edit: That's not to say we have it all figured out by any means. I'd love to read some feedback from the HN community. Not so much legal advice, but in terms of the overall concept of custodial insurance, (an insurance policy that covers a person's expenses for up to a year in the event they get taken into custody.)
The CA Dept. of Corrections has a similar system called the CA Static Risk Assessment (CSRA) which they use to determine housing for inmates and eligibility for early release. Our algorithm uses far more variables than theirs to determine insurability.
>>>Were you able to find insurers willing to back this business model?<<< Our underwriter backed out at the last minute before launch several weeks ago. We're scrambling to replace them as of this writing. Surprisingly we've gotten interest from a number of different insurance companies to offer this.
Though I "only" served a year, the one thing I missed more than anything --including family, friends, and the touch of a woman-- was internet access. (I love my family, friends, and lady friends but a year away from them wasn't so bad. Fortunately I have no kids.)
I'd literally have dreams about the internet. One dream I remember in particular was winning an imaginary "Inmate of the Month" contest. My prize was an hour of unfettered access to the internet. It was absolute bliss checking my email, Google Voice, Hacker News, etc.) I remember that dream with vivid clarity to this day. It may seem innocuous, but to me it illustrates how we've become so accustomed to an information-driven existence.
While in prison I'd seen numerous sports trivia arguments that resulted in all-out brawls that could've easily been resolved with a 5 second Google search. (Dudes were getting sent to the SHU for as many as 6 months because of a fight that stemmed from an argument over which team Kobe Bryant scored 81 points against. Insane.)
So you may ask, "Why not ask the C.O.'s to look it up on their phones?" It's true, some CO's would do it for us. Others would tell us flat-out "no". But then you have to worry about the dk CO's that would pretend to look it up, then give us faulty information just to stoke the flames of discord amongst us inmates. (I've seen this happen multiple times.)
As you can imagine, there is a lot of storytelling (read: lying) that goes on in prison. Imagine not being able to call a guy out on his nonsense with a couple swipes of the screen. "Oh you're in prison for moving 100 kilos of cocaine? Says here you were convicted for felony DUI." An extreme example but you get the point. In the free world, people simply can't get away with BS when each of us is walking around with miniature super-computers in our pockets.
"Cruel punishment" indeed.