Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Crime Government The Almighty Buck IT Technology Your Rights Online

Arrest In $740M NYC Time and Attendance System Case 97

theodp writes "Mayor Bloomberg's perception of money, opines Gothamist's Christopher Robbins, is somewhat different than most non-billionaires. Just hours before the leader in the city's $740 million CityTime web-based time and attendance boondoggle was arrested for allegedly taking $5M in kickbacks, Bloomberg said on his weekly radio program that 'we actually did a pretty good job here, in retrospect.' Overshooting the projected $68M it would cost, adds Robbins, 'pretty much sounds like the exact opposite of a 'pretty good job'.' A US Attorney said SAIC Project Manager Gerald Denault was charged with accepting more than $5M in kickbacks laundered through international shell companies while steering more than $450M of city funds to the tech company behind the kickbacks. In December, CityTime consultants were charged with stealing $80 million."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Arrest In $740M NYC Time and Attendance System Case

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Seize the $450M (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 29, 2011 @01:47PM (#36280364)

    I'll talk to my state representative about that.

    You better accompany that talk with a million or two. Otherwise he'll laugh you out the door.

  • by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Sunday May 29, 2011 @04:39PM (#36281558) Homepage Journal

    Will that lead to a reduction in crime?
    Or is it perhaps not a reduction in crime you're after, but base revenge?

    The problem isn't the severity of the punishment (except that it's too hard for other crimes - there's a strong correlation between severity of punishment and recidivism), but the feeling these people have that they can get away with it, and not face a court at all. Because most of the time, they can, and don't.

    Let's put it this way: Would you pick up a suitcase full of money if there was a 1% risk of getting caught? Would it change your decision if the penalty was increased from 2 years in jail to 10 years? Nah, didn't think so. But what if the risk of getting caught was much higher, say 25%? Would that change it?

    Strip away all protections companies have that were meant for individuals only. And have any investment that balloons to more than, say, 125% of the inflation adjusted original be automatically subject to federal investigation. Yes, it will require more people. Some of the unemployed would welcome that. And it would save money.

Trap full -- please empty.