Quirk in Pa. restitution law protects thieves

In 2016, the Pa. Superior Court decided only a “person” may be reimbursed for losses from a crime.

What would $832,000 buy for the taxpayers of Bethlehem Township?

How would the First Presbyterian Church of Easton use a $362,000 infusion of cash?

These aren’t hypothetical questions. Those amounts represent documented thefts of money from the township and the church, and although justice has been served in one sense — the responsible parties were convicted and sent to jail — Bethlehem Township and First Presbyterian could still lose out on court-ordered restitution.

According to recent a recent state court ruling, they have no legal standing to recoup their losses.

In 2016 the Pennsylvania Superior Court decided that only a “person” may be reimbursed for losses resulting from a crime.

That narrow interpretation of the law not only cheats government entities and potentially nonprofit organizations victimized by thieves and embezzlers, but erases a critical part of one’s “debt to society” — making good on what you took.

The Superior Court ruling gave a free pass to former House Whip Michael Veon, a Democrat who defrauded state agencies of $136,000 in the Bonusgate scandal.

A similar ruling wiped out the $1 million payback imposed on Republican operative Brian Preski, convicted of using taxpayer money for GOP campaign business in the Computergate scandal.

Do government pilferers deserve longer prison sentences? No argument here.

Should nonprofits do a better job of protecting their bank accounts? Undoubtedly, in many cases.

Still, this problem needs a legislative fix. Charitable organizations and tax-supported agencies are no less victimized than individuals when they are defrauded and sucked dry.

The Pennsylvania Legislature is sitting on a reform measure at the moment. We join Northampton County District Attorney John Morganelli in asking why.

Why is a relatively easy remedy — a phrase in the restitution law — lingering in a committee?

It’s a given that a small percentage of people in positions of trust will steal money, simply because they can. If the worst fate that befalls them is a jail term measured in months — with no payback — where’s the deterrence? And the idea that their victims should, whenever possible, be made whole? — Easton Express Times, The Associated Press