Here's the bad news; a drug kingpin, sentenced to twelve and one-half years for his crimes, left in his wake four money launderers who were assisting him. The particulars of their sentences:

• The twenty-one year old daughter of the kingpin: 12 months' imprisonment.

• The twenty-three year old son of the criminal: 10 months in prison.

• A 48-year old man: 10 months.

• A 49-year old man:  9 months

• A 48-year old man was sentenced to 8 months, but his sentence was suspended. Do you believe it?
  

These mild sentences do not serve as a deterrent to criminal actions by others. In truth and in fact, where sentences are overly lenient, criminals regard them as the mere cost of doing business. So long as they can keep their criminal profits, they will assume the risks of arrest and imprisonment, knowing that they will leave prison and enjoy the fruits of their crimes.

Are not Crown prosecutors aware of this? Please, let the punishment fit the crime. When I was sentenced to prison for money launderer (4 years), the Court declared from the bench that, if not for money launderers like me, criminals would have no way to dispose of their illicit profits. He was absolutely right.

Whilst I do not wish Draconian sentences to be visited upon convicted money launderers, fair and firm punishment:

• Takes the offender out of the financial community for a period. (Incapacitation)

• Denies him freedom of movement (Incarceration)

• Gives him or her sufficient time to regret prior acts, and to resolve to return to legal business (Rehabilitation).

Please, no more ten month sentences for money laundering.