Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Austin, I have to agree with you. The questions of circumstance raised earlier are NOT to be answered in the determination of guilt. They might, and often do, have an important role to play in the imposition of sentence but not in whether s/he is guilty of the crime itself. In this case, the circumstances were that she stole a bag full o' Leicas. It is her fault she didn't know how much it was worth - she intended the crime and further tried to peddle her bounty for profit. Im my opinion, the case should be prosecuted to the extent allowable by law. Frank Farmer, Esq. On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:56:15 -0400 Austin Franklin <darkroom@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Neil, > > Ah, in your "view" the legal system punishment > is now based on how much > money you earn, so you only serve "due justice" > to people who can afford to > have it served upon them? > > I have no problem with leniency, but still, the > punishment should fit the > crime to some degree...and a "ticket" is hardly > fitting for someone > KNOWINGLY STEALING someone else's > camera/property. Suppose that camera was > the lifeblood of the owner, and he simply could > not afford another one, and > the loss of it left him/her with an inability > to make an income? S/he > worked for years flipping chicken simply to > earn enough to afford it. How > did the thief know that wasn't the case > beforehand? > > Please... > > Austin > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On > Behalf Of Beddoe, > > Neil > > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 10:46 AM > > To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us' > > Subject: RE: [Leica] Leicas stolen - LUG > strikes back! > > > > > > I find the idea of the owner of a $4,000 > camera kit coming down hard and > > exacting retribution from a close to > subsistence wage chicken flipper > > "interesting". > > > > Neil > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: S Dimitrov [mailto:sld@earthlink.net] > > Sent: 24 October 2002 15:20 > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Leicas stolen - LUG > strikes back! > > > > > > You can actually make them rewrite that > ticket, and file a complaint > > with the city attorney. The assessed worth, > which would be new evidence, > > can be used to force them to reopen the case. > > In one incident, I've made the police rewrite > a report from one of > > malicious mischief to that of a hate crime. > They didn't think that a > > series of swastikas spray painted on the > outside of an immigrant's home > > to be a serious matter. > > I've always been of the opinion that the > first strike should bear all > > the weight of the community's indignation. By > the time you get to the > > third or fourth strike, it's already been too > late. > > Slobodan Dimitrov > > > > > > Austin Franklin wrote: > > > > > > > The police > > > > were called, > > > > the equipment confiscated, and the girl > was given a ticket. (wha wha > > wha > > > > WHAT?) > > > > > > Hi Jim, > > > > > > Glad to hear you got your equipment back! > What, exactly, was > > the "ticket" > > > she was given? Like a $25 fine? That > hardly is a deterrent. > > > > > > Reminds me of "joy riding"...someone can > steal your $250,000 Ferrari, > > claim > > > they were merely "joy riding" and it's not > considered theft, > > but they are > > > given something like a $50 ticket.... In > my book, taking something that > > > doesn't belong to you is theft. > > > > > > Austin > > -- > To unsubscribe, see > http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > "The law, like sausage, is best not seen made." -- Unknown - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html