The New Zealand Herald carried an article about 16 year jail sentences given to two executives, as a result of 3000 asbestos related deaths of workers and neighbours of the factory.
Note that the executives didn’t bother to attend the trial and I guess might not care to attend the jail either?

I was struck by the similarity between the numbers of deaths, to the rough number of suicides that may be linked to the new style of familycaught operation, introduced in 1980? Delivering suicide triggers Judge Dale Green
When the relationship between the actions and the outcomes is difficult to link and prove, then time delays become a problem, for workable accountability.

An Italian court has handed two company executives 16-year jail terms for the asbestos-related deaths of more than 3000 people.

Swiss billionaire Stephan Schmidheiny, 64, and Baron Louis de Cartier de Marchienne, 90, the former heads of the Eternit cement company, were found guilty of failing to ensure adequate safety measures at two asbestos-cement plants active in Italy until the 1980s.

Prosecutors in Turin said the deaths occurred from asbestos-linked tumours among Eternit staff, their families and people living near the factories.

Many hundreds more are ill with terminal mesothelioma cancer caused by the substance.

Health Minister Renato Balduzzi said after the verdicts: “It’s a sentence that you can call truly historic for its social aspects and for its technical and legal ones.”

Defence lawyers denied the accused had direct responsibility for the Italian company, and the pair have been absent from court throughout.

Some relatives of victims burst into tears in court when the sentence was read for the world’s largest-ever trial into asbestos-related deaths and illnesses.

– Independent

By Michael Day

Accountability can be one off, as in the example above.
Accountability is more effective, when it comes home immediately, as any parenting book will tell you, eg Toddler Taming.
Accountability should be by each case.
Judges should be assessed on the quality of their performance for each case and paid by the litigants on the basis of the quality of the results delivered.
If we don’t operate a constructive system of incentives, in the way that we pay “judges”, then chances are that the incentives we give by default will work against us.
If you don’t plan to succeed, then you are planning to FAIL.
You see, if the principal doesn’t manage the incentives, then the “worker” can manipulate the incentives, so that they become incentives to rort the principal. One example is featherbedding, where workers deliberately go slow, to maximise returns under pay by the hour.
Besides, if judges work slowly and inefficiently, then we should pay them more than accordingly.
If they produce pieces of paper that are valueless in the real world, they should be paid with toilet paper stamped with $10, to pay their wages, they are not worth more! Kay Skelton’s behaviour not managed by familycourt
Judge’s decision will not have effect as wife and children out of NZ
In this instance, it seems unlikely that the executives will be incarcerated, so is there much value in the hearing and sentencing?
Has the hearing made the world a safer place, for citizens and workers?
You be the judge!
You should make your judgement, before you pay them each time.
MurrayBacon boring axe-murderer.