Well, that's quite a scenario, Larry. I will spea... (
I see. So this guy is smart enough to amass a sizeable fortune but too stupid to pay someone else to do his dirty work for him. Oh, and not only that, but he does the 'deed' in broad daylight where he is easily identified and convicted. Perfect crime - Not!
But seriously, to answer your question, I do not b... (
You lost sight of who determines the justice of the punishment. You might not be willing to accept reparations that another might be happy with. This is not about what you agree or disagree with but what a hypothetical victim considers equitable. You can cite 'need' or 'greed' as factors influencing a given decision, and rightly so, but you do not get to make the determination because you are not the victim.
And how could this serve as a deterrent?
I don't know about you, but if I were affluent, and someone in my position was stripped to the level of pauper, I'd be suitably deterred from making the same mistake, for sure. Starting all over again from scratch is not my idea of 'fun'.
Given your example, if this guy would kill someone over a noise disturbance, then he has some obvious anger issues, and becoming suddenly poor isn't going to help matters.
Sure make him sit up and pay attention, wouldn't it?
So what about his next victim? Sure, he now will receive his just punishment because he cannot buy his way out again, but would the widow bear some responsibility for that next victim?
Who says there would even be a 'next victim'? Regardless, if he was to kill again, his punishment would once again be in the hands of his new victim's next of kin, who will impose whatever sanction they feel is appropriate. Why would the previous victim's widow have any part in such a proceeding? She saw to the justice of the punishment according to her own values and the next person would undoubtedly do the same, according to his/her personal value system.
Saying that 'he now will receive his just punishment because he cannot buy his way out again' infers that he was not punished justly on the first offence, but you do not make that determination.
And what does the woman tell her kids. "Well, Daddy is dead because the mean neighbor killed him, but I let him go free because he made us rich." That right there is a good lesson. Not!
How she justifies her decision to her children is her issue. Maybe her children would agree that the payment is equitable and maybe not. That would be for them to argue with their mother and not for outsiders to judge.