So...If James robs an apple store
and steals an iphone12
- then James goes to a Pawn shop and sells that iPhone12,
- then the pawnshop resells the iPhone12 again to Karen
- Karen then resells it to Reggie on craigslist,
who is liable for the iPhone theft? In most courts, typically the first(james) and last person(Reggie) are liable for the crime, with the last person typically just returning the item. However, a wise lawyer would prioritize suing the party that can actually afford to pay back the highest amount of restitution, the pawn shop.
The transatlantic slave trade is effectively this scenario on a larger scale, and personally i think id take the side of the wise lawyer in only pursuing the party most capable of paying back the debt. The US govt.
Everyone is complicit, but i shrewdly argue that the richest person left standing is the most complicit and capabale of doing the most good in paying back losses. I also argue that its a dangerous line of inquiry to split the request up because i can already see US politicians playing dumb and shifting the blame elsewhere to detract from themselves.