Architect Keith Foster in deep trouble

[Ari Techner]

 while he was a member of ASGCA. 
   

Speaking oTBf that, did he quit?  Or is he barred because of this case?

He resigned 5 years ago. Not sure why.why

Maybe he didn't like the blazers?


Or perhaps he did a cost/benefit analysis?


As to the crime and punishment issues here, the WSJ ran an article recently by a Barry Latzer noting that 23% of felons convicted for violent crimes in the U.S. are sentenced to NO incarceration.  A stuffed owl, some turtle shells, maybe a few antique items containing something that a bureaucrat years later deemed "endangered" are equivalent offenses as "peddling heroin and gun running"?     I wonder what is driving 75 in a 50 akin to?  Or in UT tonight, a woman targeted by the DUI warriors after having a typical gin and tonic with dinner, what punishment is "fair" to the righteous?   

Should we all just cease to follow the law then?  I'm as big a fan of Keith's work as anyone but breaking the law and being on tape admitting to doing it knowingly is not a good look. 

[BHoover]

I would find it easier to feel sympathy for Mr. Foster if he didn’t admit on tape and to an undercover federal agent that he (a) knew what he was doing was illegal, and (b) would continue to engage in said activity. This isn’t really that difficult.

[Joe Hancock]

So, how(and who) gets to say what is OK or not, if we introduce situational ethics, based on our own perspective, into everything? Is there a right and a wrong any more? Or should we all just decide, based on our mood or some other affect, to consider what is right and wrong in society?


The above has nothing to do with mercy, or forgiveness, or any other act of grace. I just don’t know any more if today’s society has any room for right and wrong.


I’m sorry that a nice guy did something illegal...he’s not the first, nor the last. Comparing what he did to any other criminal, or criminal act is irrelevant. Did he break the law? That’s the only situation that needs to be addressed between himself and the justice system, and only them.

[Tim Martin]

So, how(and who) gets to say what is OK or not, if we introduce situational ethics, based on our own perspective, into everything? Is there a right and a wrong any more? Or should we all just decide, based on our mood or some other affect, to consider what is right and wrong in society?


The above has nothing to do with mercy, or forgiveness, or any other act of grace. I just don’t know any more if today’s society has any room for right and wrong.


I’m sorry that a nice guy did something illegal...he’s not the first, nor the last. Comparing what he did to any other criminal, or criminal act is irrelevant. Did he break the law? That’s the only situation that needs to be addressed between himself and the justice system, and only them.

Joe-In the running for post of the year with all but a few hours remaining. It’s great when common sense rules the day.

[Pat Burke]

So, how(and who) gets to say what is OK or not, if we introduce situational ethics, based on our own perspective, into everything? Is there a right and a wrong any more? Or should we all just decide, based on our mood or some other affect, to consider what is right and wrong in society?


The above has nothing to do with mercy, or forgiveness, or any other act of grace. I just don’t know any more if today’s society has any room for right and wrong.


I’m sorry that a nice guy did something illegal...he’s not the first, nor the last. Comparing what he did to any other criminal, or criminal act is irrelevant. Did he break the law? That’s the only situation that needs to be addressed between himself and the justice system, and only them.

Now, this seems an enormous amount of common sense

[Lou_Duran]

Should we all just cease to follow the law then?  I'm as big a fan of Keith's work as anyone but breaking the law and being on tape admitting to doing it knowingly is not a good look.

The vast majority of people selectively violate laws, very often knowingly (e.g. speeders, drug and alcohol abusers, polluters, trespassers, social justice activists, taxpayers, government officials using private servers to transact government business, etc.) and at times innocently (buying stolen items on eBay, taking classified pictures inside of a nuclear submarine, disposing of some low-grade waste materials with normal trash, a small person driving a car shortly after having two average alcoholic drinks in UT today, filling in a stock tank during site preparation/clearing without first obtaining approvals from the COE or area environmental authority, etc.).


It is not a matter of whether we should follow the law.  We should.  It is not a matter of situational ethics as Joe Hancock suggests- I tend to agree that the moral landscape has changed greatly in the last 50 years, mostly to society's detriment IMO- but of applying laws reasonably and broadly/equally.


I am saying that Keith Foster did screw up, royally.  With the encouragement/egging of law enforcement, he gave them a clear path to bring the hammer down on him.  He has paid a six figure fine, lost two side businesses, and will likely lose most if not all of his main source of earnings.  His very good reputation has suffered great damage.  Does he need to go to jail as well? 


The range of punishments for a variety of crimes is very much relevant here.  Is it common sense to put Keith in jail for five years while nearly a quarter of those convicted of committing violent crimes are sentenced to NO incarceration?  Do we really want to equate what he did with pushing heroin or running guns?   If so, in pursuit of this type of common sense and moral righteousness, we better start building a lot more jails. 

[Craig Sweet]

John Kavanaugh...There is a HUGE difference between an "oopsie" and knowingly breaking the law. Surely you know the difference?

[Ken Moum]

If I were betting I would be these items we are discussing here are antique upholstery etc. 

None of us, obviously, know all the details about this case, but for the record, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species allows licensing for importing of stuff that can be proven to have originated before the ban was in effect.


Legitimate antiques over 100 years old are usually exempt.


But the licensing process isn't simple, and it's on the importer to apply.  From the quotes, it sounds like Foster knew he was in violation, and wasn't worried about it. That's never a good approach with LEOs.


K

[Erik J. Barzeski]

The range of punishments for a variety of crimes is very much relevant here.  Is it common sense to put Keith in jail for five years while nearly a quarter of those convicted of committing violent crimes are sentenced to NO incarceration?  Do we really want to equate what he did with pushing heroin or running guns?   If so, in pursuit of this type of common sense and moral righteousness, we better start building a lot more jails. 

You keep bringing up that statistic, but I imagine a good percentage of those "violent" crimes might be cases like "two guys got in a bar fight and both were charged with assault." They spend the night in jail, pay a fine, do community service, have a mark on their record… whatever. But do they deserve to spend time in jail? Is there room for them in jail? Would they go to the same jail as a white collar criminal?

I don't know, and as I'm not a juror or a lawmaker, I don't pretend to know.

All I know is a guy committed a crime, was busted, and is due a range of penalties and things. So in my opinion, as long as his punishment is within the established guidelines, so be it. I don't think anyone here knows the specifics, so to judge the legal system without knowledge seems foolish to me.

I said before the guy doesn't need my forgiveness because I haven't judged him. I don't know the dude at all. Some of you obviously do, but even those can look at the facts here and not judge.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Lou,


I agree he probably doesn't need max time, and I doubt blue collar stuff like this gets it.  However, it is, in effect, his second or third offense, which tends to lengthen things.


The other factor is the general tendency to amp up penalties for the issue du jour, to discourage wanton breaking of enviro laws.  So, sometimes, you get more penalty for something like this than some "run of the mill" crime, even if that involves violence or theft.  Doesn't always make sense to conservative, old school "law and order" types, but it is what it is.  I don't think the legal system has ever been 100% consistent, although in general, I think they try.


Also to consider is that many enviro laws came into being from the 1960's-2000 era where no President/Senator/Congressman could get elected unless he was "tough on crime." I think sentencing guidelines for those "new" laws tended to be tougher.  Others in the legal profession could wax more eloquently and precisely on this, but it was only in the Obama era when we started to question why our prisons were so overcrowded (compared to other countries) and took a closer look at penalties in different communities.  I will say, I have seen it in my distant family - young guys committing a crime and (in Texas at least) it making it hard to recover and ever get back in the mainstream.  I know they aren't terrible people, but the system doesn't allow for that at the moment.  And make no mistake, whether its Texas needing the fines from marijuana use to fund the system, of Dept of Fisah and Wildlife needing to fund their next investigation, they system does make decisions based as much on financial need as "fairness.


Lastly, we are slowly transitioning into an era where big guy crimes like this are viewed more harshly than say, a poor guy doing drugs.  Trump is doing nothing to slow down that trend!


No doubt that doing the "right thing" is far more relative now than it may have been just after WWII when people didn't question authority as much.  As someone said, it largely depends now on who is doing the judging.  We all tend to want to have stiff penalties until it comes to someone we know, then we tend to see why there could be exceptions made.


Long and short of it, we can discuss all we want, wish for the best, I doubt our thoughts get considered by those tasked with setting his punishment.

[Tom_Doak]

Lastly, we are slowly transitioning into an era where big guy crimes like this are viewed more harshly than say, a poor guy doing drugs. 

"Big guy crimes" may be viewed more harshly by the public at large than "a poor guy doing drugs," and may make the news more often, but that's not how the court system works.  Our jails sure aren't full of white collar criminals.[size=78%]  [/size]

[Ari Techner]

Should we all just cease to follow the law then?  I'm as big a fan of Keith's work as anyone but breaking the law and being on tape admitting to doing it knowingly is not a good look.

The vast majority of people selectively violate laws, very often knowingly (e.g. speeders, drug and alcohol abusers, polluters, trespassers, social justice activists, taxpayers, government officials using private servers to transact government business, etc.) and at times innocently (buying stolen items on eBay, taking classified pictures inside of a nuclear submarine, disposing of some low-grade waste materials with normal trash, a small person driving a car shortly after having two average alcoholic drinks in UT today, filling in a stock tank during site preparation/clearing without first obtaining approvals from the COE or area environmental authority, etc.).


It is not a matter of whether we should follow the law.  We should.  It is not a matter of situational ethics as Joe Hancock suggests- I tend to agree that the moral landscape has changed greatly in the last 50 years, mostly to society's detriment IMO- but of applying laws reasonably and broadly/equally.


I am saying that Keith Foster did screw up, royally.  With the encouragement/egging of law enforcement, he gave them a clear path to bring the hammer down on him.  He has paid a six figure fine, lost two side businesses, and will likely lose most if not all of his main source of earnings.  His very good reputation has suffered great damage.  Does he need to go to jail as well? 


The range of punishments for a variety of crimes is very much relevant here.  Is it common sense to put Keith in jail for five years while nearly a quarter of those convicted of committing violent crimes are sentenced to NO incarceration?  Do we really want to equate what he did with pushing heroin or running guns?   If so, in pursuit of this type of common sense and moral righteousness, we better start building a lot more jails. 

You seem to be genuinely bothered by the new drunk driving limit in Utah. You have mentioned it twice in this thread now and refer to it as breaking the law "innocently".  That's a disturbing description . As someone who had a relative killed by a drunk driver I don't think anyone who has been drinking should get behind the wheel of a car and drive.  In this day and age with Uber, lyft etc there is literally no excuse for this type of behavior.

[Lou_Duran]

Jeff,


I was unaware of previous convictions for similar crimes.  If this is a fact, then maybe Foster deserves to serve some time.

You are likely right that very little of what we think will have an impact on the final sentencing.  IMO, the law and the application of justice has become very politicized and arbitrary.  Yet, I'd rather take my chances here than about any other place I am aware of.

Beyond what happens to Keith, I hope that the planning work he had completed for two Tillie courses I am aware of will be carried forward by his successors.  Both courses would be greatly improved is his ideas came to fruition.

BTW, finally played Cowboys a couple of weeks back after a 7-year absence.  The BBB investment and the more customer-oriented management are welcomed improvements.  The course seems to be a proverbial cash register.  I got to believe that it is one of the top daily-fee revenue generators in the state.  

[Kalen Braley]

I will second Toms comment:

Hold up the local convenience store with a knife, steal a couple hundred dollars, and get 10 years without chance for parole.

Steal billions thru investment fraud and plunder countless retirement funds people are counting on and you get a slap on the wrist, a fine worth maybe 10% of the amount stolen, and no jail time.

P.S. I live in Utah and while I agree with DUI laws .05 BAC is pretty silly.  For a small person this could be just one stiff drink...

[John Kavanaugh]

I hope the Buck Club has onsite lodging. I was looking forward io teaching a few millennials on how to pound craft beers after schooling them on great architecture.

[Kalen Braley]

I hope the Buck Club has onsite lodging. I was looking forward io teaching a few millennials on how to pound craft beers after schooling them on great architecture.

Still a long way off, but I think its supposed to eventually.  As for craft beers, a few local ones are damn good...Epic, Wasatch, and Squatters all have some worthy offerings! 

[John Kavanaugh]

Craft beers in Utah are like the girls at Notre Dame, you'll take what's in front of you...and like it.

[Joe Hancock]

Kalen,


I don’t know if you have kids, and I am the last one to say there is one best way to raise them. But, I can tell you that my kids (and now our grandkids) will always think the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. But, they were always well informed about the consequences of their misdeeds beforehand. If they still chose to “be naughty”, then we enforce the defined consequence, without regard to their agreement of whether it is “just” or not.


With adults, especially those who are knowingly breaking the law(s) of the land, they must accept the consequences. And, they are adults. If they care at all, they will know what happens if they get caught.


I bet Mr. Foster knew what would/ could happen. The fact that several here, including you, think it’s unjust confounds me.


But, I am a simple man.

[Kalen Braley]

Craft beers in Utah are like the girls at Notre Dame, you'll take what's in front of you...and like it.

John,


I used to think that too, until I moved here.  Utah has a few offerings that are damn fine, even when stacked up against some of the best.  In my active beer snob days several years ago I used to do beer swaps with people all over the US and drive hours in some cases to find some of the greatest micro-brews.  For a few years there I had sampled over half the beers on Rate Beers world top 100...and Utah has a few that could contend for that list even if they wouldn't make it.

[John Kavanaugh]

Kalen,


In all honesty I don't much care for milennials or craft beer. The Buck Club comment bordered on sarcasm. Sorry. There goes that resolution.

[Lou_Duran]

Kalen,


Have you heard of the Bernies, Madoff and Ebbers, and financier/golf patron Allen Stanford?  Or are you falling into the left-wing trap that wants to criminalize bad business decisions and unpopular political positions.  If aggressive marketing and broken promises constitute crimes, the bulk of our elected officials and much of the permanent bureaucracy should be in jail.


As to Tom's assertions that you "second", other than being demonstrably wrong in this specific instance and in a number of others in my experience, it feeds the highly unproductive, biased "white privilege" narrative which does nothing but excuse failure and sow division.  I should have sat on my fingers, but I too was provoked in light of a personal experience with a relative who though white and in the top 10%, has been on a sharp descent following a police dragnet outside of a popular hotel catering to business travelers.  The charge was very similar to what the new UT law will yield.  It didn't involve erratic driving- allegedly the tail light of a new Hertz or Avis car malfunctioned for an instant; no breathalyzer or blood test- only a flash light to the eyes and being forced to walk a line in cold, hard rain, plus a young prosecutor bent on collecting a scalp (not my assessment, but one of a local lawyer with extensive experience in that jurisdiction).  Ironically, this was in a big college football town and if the individual was on the team without regard to his race or wealth, the cop may have asked for an autograph instead.


Ari,


My condolences on the death of your relative.  Drunk drivers, especially those who are charged repeatedly and cause accidents  should be punished severely.


I am not terribly disturbed by the new UT law.  It is just excessive in my opinion and will likely do little to mitigate the real problem, heavy, undisciplined drinkers.  The law may provide more revenues to law enforcement and the justice industry, and it might even further the goals of those who prefer prohibition.  I think it will also come at the cost of restaurants, clubs, and a further erosion of respect for the law.


Joe,


That is one of my favorite songs, Simple Man!       

[John Kavanaugh]

Lou,


Of all the excuses for overt racism I have heard during my long tenure on this earth yours is the worst. A rich white guy got a DUI. Wow. He's lucky he didn't get shot for his trouble. That's the reality for many minorities, rich or not.

[Kalen Braley]

Joe,

I never condoned willfully disobeying the new DUI rules, even if I disagree with the change personally.  I have 4 adult kids, 3 of which drink on occasion and we have always taught them to call us or Uber if they even think they're over...

But as has been mentioned before, there are tons of laws on the local, state, and national level most would agree are nothing short of crap.  And It is our duty and right as informed citizens to elect law makers who will try to find the best balance, even if it can be a difficult task at times.

But back to the topic at hand, it would seem KF has willfully done his illegal deeds, several times, and had no intention of stopping if the reported statements are accurate....


P.S.  Day one of the new law included no new arrests, they were all over .08.  https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900048609/utah-highway-patrol-reports-no-arrests-under-new-dui-law-in-first-24-hours.html

[ward peyronnin]

The real questions are why are laws in force? As deterrents of course.

Not everyone engaged in this trade deemed illegal for very specific, quantifiable reasons has assets or a reputation to lose. Therefore, in order for it to be a true deterrent penalties must be applied consistently across all violations and not abandoned for someone like Keith Foster.

The effort must be made to preserve these magnificent members of biological diversity. this is not a violation of a tree hugger "environmentalist" with romanticized notions of saving the earth. This is the slaughter of species already threatened by loss of habitat  and other pressures . Just take a look at what happened in 19C America and what we lost forever.

[Tom_Doak]

Have you heard of the Bernies, Madoff and Ebbers, and financier/golf patron Allen Stanford?  Or are you falling into the left-wing trap that wants to criminalize bad business decisions and unpopular political positions. 
     

Bad business decisions??


I only know of Mr. Madoff via the dozens of members of North Shore and Inwood who lost much of their savings to him.  They don't speak very highly of his business model.


But I got to witness the Sir Allen Stanford show first hand.  A land planner I know introduced us about a project he was supposedly going to build in Antigua.  It was an odd visit; we did everything but actually set foot on the ground.  In hindsight, that was because he didn't actually own the ground:  he was just going to sell memberships and then maybe buy it.  We had a sumptuous dinner with the country's banking minister, who was on very friendly terms . . . Sir Allen had pretty much greased the elected officials of the whole country, which was still way cheaper than buying off Rhode Island.


His "business plan" was evidently to rip off hundreds of millions of dollars in a pyramid scheme.  He didn't invest his investors' money in stocks or real estate . . . he paid a little out to previous investors to keep the money rolling in, forged a bunch of fraudulent documents to cover it up for as long as he could, and spent as much as he wanted on living the dream.


But the reason he's in Federal prison for a long time is because he stole from wealthy people.  The powers that be too often look the other way when you just defraud average Joes out of their savings, but they will throw the book at you if you reach for theirs.