While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
The above quote from the lead is technically unsourced, but I have no doubt that newspapers have run something similar. The problem is that the 20 years is the maximum statutory limit for the wire fraud charges, but in no way a realistic estimate of the sentence (should the prosecution secure a conviction).
I would suggest to remove it, unless someone can find a reliable source that did an estimate under the United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines. (Yes, the guidelines are advisory; but they are still followed in 90%+ of cases, and when they deviate it is usually downwards.)
For "fun" I did my own (WP:OR) calculation based on the 2021 manual as follows: §2B1.1 applies, offense level is 7 (base) + 16 (loss greater than $1.5m, 1) + 2 (more than 10 victims, 2A) + 2 ("sophisticated means", 10C) + 4 (violation of security laws by an officer of a publicly traded company, 20A, I am not sure if it applies) = 31. Criminal history category is 0 (no previous relevant conviction, I think?). Assuming no reduction applies (surely a competent lawyer could find arguments (acceptance etc.) or cut a deal with the prosecution to plead guilty if they think the trial goes south), that gives us a range of 108-135 months, around 10 years. I also found some rando on reddit that reaches the same range with a slightly different calculation. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact)17:00, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Băng Tỏa: Your attempt is appreciated, but I feel you missed my point. I do not contest the statement itself, which is a simple true fact (so much that sourcing to the DOJ is ok even though it is not a neutral party in the dispute). My problem is that we are giving prominence to a meaningless number (the statutory maximum sentence) which bears no relationship to the actual likely sentence (under the USSG).
Yes, she could be sentenced to twenty years of jail time, but that is quite a remote possibility. She could also die of cardiovascular disease during the trial and therefore escape sentencing but we are not putting this (true) fact in the lead. We should not mechanically copy the media narrative of "up to [some big number]". Newspapers do this because (1) the bigger the number, the better-sold the paper, and (2) it is easier to look up the statutory maximum than do the USSG math. On Wikipedia, (1) does not apply and we can fix (2) by not mentioning anything at all if the guideline calculation has not been done. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact)10:26, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article says the remaining counts "may be retried at the discretion of the plaintiff or prosecution". Is the plaintiff in this case someone different from the prosecution? If so, who is the plaintiff? — BarrelProof (talk) 18:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
