Jump to content

Cache maggot arrested.


Recommended Posts

Last warning...

 

Chill out or the thread gets locked.

 

I say go ahead and close it down before someone actually puts a hit on the guy's head. Several people have danced all around it already.

 

I will agree, go ahead and lock it. I will not agree that anyone was dancing close to suggesting a hit be placed on the guy. Although I may be easily talked into chipping in to have a couple of those big bags of popcorn dumped on his lawn. Anyone know how much poop a flock of pigeons can produce in a day? :blink:

 

That's called vandalism.

 

No, it's called a joke. There is no lightening this thread, is there?

 

What you don't understand is just by saying that, there's probably a cacher out there contemplating doing just that. I can see someone doing something so they can feel like a hero, especially if the court decision comes down lenient. This has gone beyond an online debate. Like I said, this has a real potential of turning ugly. So because of that, we should all be VERY careful. Even if you are just joking, you've just given someone an idea of something they can do to him.

 

Give me a break! Is there anyone here who is on their way to the store to buy popcorn because of my joke? Not flipp'n likely. This whole thread is just a bunch of insanity. Will somebody please close the silly thing?

 

It's not beyond the realm of possibility.

How about instead of closing this thread, we all just start to act like the adults that our chronology would indicate that we should be acting like? This thread could/should simply go to sleep until there is some new factual information. Will it? Not on your life!
Link to comment
What you don't understand is just by saying that, there's probably a cacher out there contemplating doing just that. I can see someone doing something so they can feel like a hero, especially if the court decision comes down lenient. This has gone beyond an online debate. Like I said, this has a real potential of turning ugly. So because of that, we should all be VERY careful. Even if you are just joking, you've just given someone an idea of something they can do to him.
Give me a break! Is there anyone here who is on their way to the store to buy popcorn because of my joke? Not flipp'n likely. This whole thread is just a bunch of insanity. Will somebody please close the silly thing?
It's not beyond the realm of possibility.
Seems you guys are brazenly trying to get this thread locked, aren't you? I cut down on your nested quotes, but right in the core of 'em is this:
Last warning...

 

Chill out or the thread gets locked.

Another possible route would be timeouts for those willingly dragging the thread awry. . . :blink:
Link to comment
What you don't understand is just by saying that, there's probably a cacher out there contemplating doing just that. I can see someone doing something so they can feel like a hero, especially if the court decision comes down lenient. This has gone beyond an online debate. Like I said, this has a real potential of turning ugly. So because of that, we should all be VERY careful. Even if you are just joking, you've just given someone an idea of something they can do to him.
Give me a break! Is there anyone here who is on their way to the store to buy popcorn because of my joke? Not flipp'n likely. This whole thread is just a bunch of insanity. Will somebody please close the silly thing?
It's not beyond the realm of possibility.
Seems you guys are brazenly trying to get this thread locked, aren't you? I cut down on your nested quotes, but right in the core of 'em is this:
Last warning...

 

Chill out or the thread gets locked.

Another possible route would be timeouts for those willingly dragging the thread awry. . . :blink:

 

How about I started the thread and have asked that it be closed?

Link to comment
What you don't understand is just by saying that, there's probably a cacher out there contemplating doing just that. I can see someone doing something so they can feel like a hero, especially if the court decision comes down lenient. This has gone beyond an online debate. Like I said, this has a real potential of turning ugly. So because of that, we should all be VERY careful. Even if you are just joking, you've just given someone an idea of something they can do to him.
Give me a break! Is there anyone here who is on their way to the store to buy popcorn because of my joke? Not flipp'n likely. This whole thread is just a bunch of insanity. Will somebody please close the silly thing?
It's not beyond the realm of possibility.
Seems you guys are brazenly trying to get this thread locked, aren't you? I cut down on your nested quotes, but right in the core of 'em is this:
Last warning...

 

Chill out or the thread gets locked.

Another possible route would be timeouts for those willingly dragging the thread awry. . . :blink:

 

How about I started the thread and have asked that it be closed?

Please don't do that. Yes, you can. But I think the continuity, as bad as it is, is better than it otherwise might be.
Link to comment
Sides have been chosen and the sticks and stone are flying. Do you really think there is any reason to continue the battle?
Yes, I do. I think this, despite the rubbish, may prove to be one of the few really important "conversations" that we have had here. In the future, people will be doing searches for this information, and I think that its best if it all be kept in one thread.
Link to comment

If I could say, before the lock clicks, I would hate to see this thread closed without the final results.

 

Whether you believe this to be a matter of a few trinkets in a piece of tupperware, or a matter of National Security, I think it carries a lot of weight that this matter is actually seeing the inside of a courtroom. With nearly one million "pieces of tupperware" out there and millions of players, I think its more than just a passing interest.

 

 

There has been a lot of passion and posturing on both sides of the argument, but I am sure this thread is being followed by many readers who did not post.

 

I think closing the thread will not deal with the chaos that has been displayed here. There is another thread on the subject currently running. This chaos could easily erupt in that thread also. I would rather see the suggestions made by some recent posters about addressing the "participants" individually, rather than everyone as a group.

 

The best solution would be for everyone, myself included, to patiently wait and see what transpires. I don't believe every "threatening" word I read, here or anywhere else, to be credible. I do believe many feel passionately about this, and are venting their frustrations.

 

Closing the thread would be unfair to those who are interested in the matter, and not participating in the melee'.

 

Just my thoughts on the matter.

Link to comment
I think that is half the problem. Some people seem to be assigning way to much import to this one case. That seems to aggravate those who insist on placing to little on it. If you all want to keep spitting in each others coffee I don't care. I'm going to bed.
Well, the way I see it, the importance has nothing to do with mob rule or no mob rule or any of those carps. The real importance is that we may at last have at least the seed of being able to define (or not!) if a cache is legally private, or abandoned, property.
Link to comment

ok, i've followed thos thread from the begining, and make a comment oer two. and i had a thought occured to me while talking to my girlfriend, about a whole otther subject. earlier somone made reference to the CO and their being in court, and said something about them having time to blow or something (forgive me for not directly quoting cause i didn't feel like weeding back several pages) and the thought occured to me, if the CO is a 'loser' for attending the trial (i'm not calling the CO a loser) then where does that sit the rest of us, who either have been just following or are are outspoken and have picked a side, we have such great busy lives, and important pressing issues in our live that this is where we 'hang out'. come on! and as far as it's concerned, i'm GLAD, HAPPY, REJOICEFUL that the CO was at the trial. i'd attend but i can't justify a 2000 Mile trip for this. and as i don't think Mr. Repack, deserves to lose all, he does deserve some kind of reprocussion. you with children disipline your child in some way when they are taking other children's toys and being ugly to other chinldren and such? right? well come on folks, this guy is an adult and his actions are/were childish. what happens and what ever punishment he receives will be just.

Link to comment

I see no problem with the CO going to court. She's simply ensuring her interests are not overlooked. There's nothing vigilante or intimidating or "loser" about that.

 

It's very clear that a lot of caches have been taken (even if it can't be proved that Repack took them all) and that a lot of geocachers have been affected either directly or indirectly by these thefts.

 

It makes complete sense that someone might even take time off work to pursue this if it has had that much effect on her and her friends.

 

As long as things are handled civilly, I see no problem.

 

It's only when people start taking it to the next level that it begins to be problematic.

Link to comment
It's not beyond the realm of possibility.

A&T, what I'm trying hard to determine is if you and RoN actually have some message you wish to convey, or if the two of you are just making noise. I say this because of the tone of both of your posts. When all of your rhetoric is boiled out, you both have incredibly valid points, however your posts are so charged with emotional hyperbole that they tend to get a dismissive response from those who would best be served by what you are trying to say.

 

It's reminiscent of the character "The Monster Shouter", in Stephen King's "The Stand". He dressed in rags, rubbed ashes over his face, rang a large, loud bell and shouted his message of doom, over and over. Although his message was perfectly valid, the other characters dismissed him because of his delivery method.

 

If the issue wasn't one of such import, watching you two would almost be comical. :blink:

 

In a nutshell, you ask that folks put aside their emotions, yet you two appear unwilling to follow that same, sage advice.

 

Deep breaths, Brother.

 

Say what you gotta say.

 

Most of us will listen. :(

 

(Edit to add: In case it wasn't clear, I'm agreeing with most of your underlying message.)

Edited by Clan Riffster
Link to comment

One thing I hope is that this case doesnt draw any negative attention to the game by the local govornment.Like them thinking that geocaching is going to start becoming a problem for the police or the courts.I also hope people involved in this case dont visit this site and read this thread,there is more than a few borderline vigilante remarks on it.Not good.

Link to comment

I see no problem with the CO going to court. She's simply ensuring her interests are not overlooked. There's nothing vigilante or intimidating or "loser" about that.

 

It's very clear that a lot of caches have been taken (even if it can't be proved that Repack took them all) and that a lot of geocachers have been affected either directly or indirectly by these thefts.

 

It makes complete sense that someone might even take time off work to pursue this if it has had that much effect on her and her friends.

 

As long as things are handled civilly, I see no problem.

 

It's only when people start taking it to the next level that it begins to be problematic.

very well said, thank you

Link to comment

just reading much of this for the first time. It certainly seems like they did catch an alleged serial-muggler. would be interesting if in a few months, the locals will notice a difference up-state there.

 

Someone said they were in contact with them. Did they ever find out what this guy's reason was?

 

Some have said it might be some sort of ELF-type thing. Were the missing caches only taken from caches in natural setting or urban caches as well, including even wal-mart skirt caches?

what's funny/ironic is that if he had some sort of eco-radical bent, his own ideals might have prevented him from littering and throwing away the cache(evidence) once he grabbed it.

 

did they ever get a warrant to search the house/property? if he didn't throw them out cause he collected them, who knows why, they would have been there perhaps. too late by now most likely.

 

Was there any sort of pattern, besides a geographic center of activity? I mean, were the missing caches of a certain difficulty? easy, hard? some, in other threads, sometimes say the caches in their area are "too ____" or "too _____" . was he one of those?

 

if he was doing PM caches, was he a PM? has he ever logged a cache, or posted in the forums, before/after all this went down?

 

all in all, what a petty thing for this man to be involved in. considering who he is, based on what has been posted here, I would hope that, if he is dealing with sensitive information or property, he has at least earned himself a psych eval.

 

okay, hopefully enough topics for discussion here to get the thread back on topic until there are new developments in the case.

Link to comment
As a Central NY geocacher, I've been following this story and thread closely. I am beyond the main center of the thief's activity but have had plenty of inconveniences, frustration, and added expense in gas $ and time when caching in that area. Getting a DeLorme block and separate qualifying county caches in that area for those challenges was nearly impossible! After a string of my own DNFs and other caches that I passed because of the strings of DNF logs on them, I finally went way out of my way to get to a cache called "You Are Being Watched" GCVQCP - which was already placed back in 2006 as a direct reaction to the cache thief activities.

 

Several geocachers from the area have posted here emphasizing the scale of the cache thieving - scale in all respects: geographical, number of caches, and time over which they have been taken. There is definitely a determined cache thief in this area. It is true that the court case will be about the one cache he was caught red-handed with (and others from the car or game camera if they are added to the evidence) but I personally believe that he has been caught given what I have heard and how it matches up with the pattern of behavior that has been experienced in this area. I can understand the rejoicing of those involved and expect that they would have anticipated the geocaching community to share in their joy and am surprised at some of the reactions here. On our end we have mused about what we would do if there was a cache thief like this in our area and the idea of game cameras was at the top of the list. We also thought about creating a cache on private property (probably an ammo can lined with foreign currency) whose value would take it over the misdemeanor level and into the felony category so that higher charges could be sought. We were just thinking, of course, as many here no doubt have been and had no intention of actually carrying this out or pursuing a legal path.

Thanks for posting, it is like a breath of fresh air!

 

I find the idea of increasing the value of the container to increase the severity of charges interesting. I wonder if value of many containers over time would accumulate? Probably not, and it would be nearly impossible to link him to enough caches, unless he's got them all in his home. If he did, they are probably gone now anyways. . . :D

I don't know what the court will make of this because ultimately an item of minimal value has been taken and that is why I am disappointed that Groundspeak has not taken an active role in this by inquiring, educating, and arbitrating between those affected. Ultimately someone was heavily interfering with the game that is their business. If someone interfered with their computer system to electronically alter coordinates for the cache listings, I would expect that they would take action. The systematic and deliberate cache thief as not much different in its effect.
I think this an interesting take, that I don't think has been mentioned in this thread. Something GC.com might want to think about, if they haven't already.

 

If they have considered this & have decided against action, I'd suspect it would have to do with the fact that they are, technically, a listing service and have no real ownership in the containers that have been taken.

For those looking for more evidence, I found geolobo's posts here most interesting in this regard. He has actually communicated with the cache thief who both apologized "for the game of geocaching going where it is not supposed to be" and made an indirect offer of a contribution of $500 for containers and geocaching education as a retribution. Does a $500 retribution sound like a reasonable offer someone who stole a single magnetic key holder?
My thoughts exactly! The letter, as presented, didn't strike me as something written by someone falsely accused, but as someone who was trying to get out of trouble.

 

Great post, hopefully it will bring some focus back for those who can't seem to stop hitting thep_quote.gifbutton even when they have nothing to say about the topic. :)

 

thanks TTJ - I hope we can bring some of the more interesting issues back into this conversation!

Edited by ithacadoodle
Link to comment

This story is so full of win. Even if it doesn't stick, it's good to publicly embarrass this guy a bit.

 

Since the accused perpetrator is a military member, he will no doubt be more than embarrassed. The Military in general frowns on their members causing bad PR.

 

--JETSchmidt

Link to comment

This story is so full of win. Even if it doesn't stick, it's good to publicly embarrass this guy a bit.

 

Since the accused perpetrator is a military member, he will no doubt be more than embarrassed. The Military in general frowns on their members causing bad PR.

 

--JETSchmidt

 

He sounds more like a contractor/civilian than actual military.

 

Repak is an electrical engineer in the Cyber Operations Branch of the Air Force Research Laboratory Information Directorate
Link to comment

I want to offer the following:

 

1. My appreciation for the restraint of the moderator in recognition of the comments on this volatile thread going over a thousand.

 

2. My puzzlement at why anyone that wanted the thread to be locked wouldn't just take themselves out of the loop and quit reading it. if this has exceeded your personal threshold, let it go and move on. asking for it to be locked makes it sound like you are more interested in just stopping other people from being able to comment, rather than deciding for yourself whether to follow the discussion and participate.

 

3. My thanks for the wide range of comments shared by others ranging from thoughtful to inflammatory. It is a humanizing experience to appreciate the diversity of viewpoints, opinions, and humor within the geocaching community on a subject like this.

Link to comment
It's reminiscent of the character "The Monster Shouter", in Stephen King's "The Stand". He dressed in rags, rubbed ashes over his face, rang a large, loud bell and shouted his message of doom, over and over. Although his message was perfectly valid, the other characters dismissed him because of his delivery method.

 

That is an awesome analogy. I might just have to borrow that... :)

Link to comment
2. My puzzlement at why anyone that wanted the thread to be locked wouldn't just take themselves out of the loop and quit reading it. if this has exceeded your personal threshold, let it go and move on. asking for it to be locked makes it sound like you are more interested in just stopping other people from being able to comment, rather than deciding for yourself whether to follow the discussion and participate.
1. Human nature

 

2. General belief that inciting violence is not acceptable.

 

3. Wish to avoid giving the game a black eye.

Link to comment

If you guys aren't arguing, then you can't stay on topic. Plus there seems to be a large contingent that would like to see this discussion tabled.

 

Someone send me an e-mail when something is decided in the courts and I will unlock it.

 

Until then feel free to start a thread in Off Topic.

 

Have a WONDERFUL weekend!

Link to comment

his defense is easy...

 

i'm sorry, your honor, i mistook the CITO with CICO.

 

or...

 

your honor, they place these boxes out in public and beg people to find them and take items, mainly mctoys. i misunderstood the concept as i was more interested in taking the container rather than a mini barbie from a happy meal.

 

i liked the trapping comparison.... until you look into that and realize that there aren't too many of us geocaching for a living.

Link to comment

Maybe he will use the defense that he thought it was the key to his car. He always put his key there in case he ever lost his key.

 

He might then file a lawsuit against the cache hider, saying that the hider must have replaced his magnetic key holder with their's.

 

It is going to end up on Judge Judy.

Link to comment

053a2222-3dd5-4cb6-b3dc-b1cc3304ef3d.jpg

 

Thats him on the right.

 

The photo was from a positive news article about his son (left side) who was sending moral support letters to our soldiers overseas. After I noticed it online, I went back to look for it a week later and the article was gone, which was odd..

But then I discovered that I had saved it and had forgotten about it.

 

If anyone has noticed him at any other missing caches or any events, they should speak up now.

 

Other than the cache thefts, he sounds like a good guy..

Link to comment

If you guys aren't arguing, then you can't stay on topic. Plus there seems to be a large contingent that would like to see this discussion tabled.

 

Someone send me an e-mail when something is decided in the courts and I will unlock it.

 

Until then feel free to start a thread in Off Topic.

 

Have a WONDERFUL weekend!

 

ok the thread is unlocked, I assume that means something was decided in court.

any idea what the verdict was

Link to comment

If you guys aren't arguing, then you can't stay on topic. Plus there seems to be a large contingent that would like to see this discussion tabled.

 

Someone send me an e-mail when something is decided in the courts and I will unlock it.

 

Until then feel free to start a thread in Off Topic.

 

Have a WONDERFUL weekend!

 

ok the thread is unlocked, I assume that means something was decided in court.

any idea what the verdict was

 

Yes, guilty of theft of tupperware. Punishable by taxpayers having to pay for the prosecution.

Link to comment

If you guys aren't arguing, then you can't stay on topic. Plus there seems to be a large contingent that would like to see this discussion tabled.

 

Someone send me an e-mail when something is decided in the courts and I will unlock it.

 

Until then feel free to start a thread in Off Topic.

 

Have a WONDERFUL weekend!

 

ok the thread is unlocked, I assume that means something was decided in court.

any idea what the verdict was

That is being discussed in the serious thread. This one has been reserved for quips and snarks and such. ;)
Link to comment

My first reaction to the DA rejecting a deal of some sort was that he or she did not have enough to do. I expected the case to be resolved by an ACD - perhaps coupled with some form of restitution or community service. In my area, that would almost be a certainty.

 

My second reaction was to hope that Mr. Repak has enough deep pockets to keep the case interesting. While the DA could simply be holding out for stronger terms, and Repak to get tired of my paying attorney's fees, it would be nice to see this case resolve some of the underlying issues.

 

While I have seen more than one attorney miss fundamental issues in far more important cases, if I were representing Mr. Repak, I would file a few pretrial motions, use voir dire to pick the jury very carefully (if they let you do this in NY), move to dismiss the case as soon as the prosecution rested (unless the cache in question had specific permission to be placed there - in which case the legal issues might be different and I would take whatever plea I could get after a chess move or two), draft some creative jury instructions, and then appeal the issue if I lost (same caveat as above).

 

But I assume that my defense brethren in New York want to get attorneys fees. And I have not noticed that there are any "Free Paul" web sites or that the anti-caching facebook group has taken up a collection. Or that any foundation has stepped in to offer its services pro bono. So its hard to see that this will get far enough up the legal ladder to provide any real precedent.

 

But if they cannot reach a settlement it should at least be entertaining. If I lived in the area, I would not miss it (for a number of reasons).

Edited by Erickson
Link to comment

If you guys aren't arguing, then you can't stay on topic. Plus there seems to be a large contingent that would like to see this discussion tabled.

 

Someone send me an e-mail when something is decided in the courts and I will unlock it.

 

Until then feel free to start a thread in Off Topic.

 

Have a WONDERFUL weekend!

 

ok the thread is unlocked, I assume that means something was decided in court.

any idea what the verdict was

That is being discussed in the serious thread. This one has been reserved for quips and snarks and such. ;)

 

thanks for the link ... i noticed the quips and snarks and such, already

Link to comment

If you guys aren't arguing, then you can't stay on topic. Plus there seems to be a large contingent that would like to see this discussion tabled.

 

Someone send me an e-mail when something is decided in the courts and I will unlock it.

 

Until then feel free to start a thread in Off Topic.

 

Have a WONDERFUL weekend!

 

ok the thread is unlocked, I assume that means something was decided in court.

any idea what the verdict was

 

Yes, guilty of theft of tupperware. Punishable by taxpayers having to pay for the prosecution.

 

Talk about a waste of taxpayer money...

Link to comment
Yes, guilty of theft of tupperware. Punishable by taxpayers having to pay for the prosecution.

 

Talk about a waste of taxpayer money...

I wonder how that attitude would fly where I work? :)

"Sorry Mr Smith, I'm not going to arrest this poor unfortunate thief because your bicycle was too crappy to waste taxpayer money on a prosecution."

:);)B);):)

Link to comment

If you guys aren't arguing, then you can't stay on topic. Plus there seems to be a large contingent that would like to see this discussion tabled.

 

Someone send me an e-mail when something is decided in the courts and I will unlock it.

 

Until then feel free to start a thread in Off Topic.

 

Have a WONDERFUL weekend!

 

ok the thread is unlocked, I assume that means something was decided in court.

any idea what the verdict was

That is being discussed in the serious thread. This one has been reserved for quips and snarks and such. ;)

 

Which is why I asked that it be closed in the first place.

Link to comment
Yes, guilty of theft of tupperware. Punishable by taxpayers having to pay for the prosecution.

 

Talk about a waste of taxpayer money...

I wonder how that attitude would fly where I work? :)

"Sorry Mr Smith, I'm not going to arrest this poor unfortunate thief because your bicycle was too crappy to waste taxpayer money on a prosecution."

:);)B);):)

 

Problem is, your not comparing apples to apples.. It would be more like this:

 

"Sorry Mr Smith, I'm not going to arrest this poor unfortunate thief because your altoids can you left in the bushes was too crappy to waste taxpayer money on a prosecution."

 

Almost makes sense when you substitute an appropriate item

Edited by ReadyOrNot
Link to comment
Almost makes sense when you substitute an appropriate item

So, the theft is irrelevant, to you, so long as you determine that the stolen item should have little or no value to the owner.

Got it! You live in an interesting world. :D

Uh... Where, monetarily, do you draw the line?

A $2 Altoids tin apparently is OK to steal.

How about a $5 decon kit?

A $10 ammo can?

A $60 Pelican case?

Which, in the wisdom of RoN, would be perfectly acceptable for someone to steal?

Link to comment
Yes, guilty of theft of tupperware. Punishable by taxpayers having to pay for the prosecution.

 

Talk about a waste of taxpayer money...

I wonder how that attitude would fly where I work? :unsure:

"Sorry Mr Smith, I'm not going to arrest this poor unfortunate thief because your bicycle was too crappy to waste taxpayer money on a prosecution."

:lol::P:P:D:)

 

Problem is, your not comparing apples to apples.. It would be more like this:

 

"Sorry Mr Smith, I'm not going to arrest this poor unfortunate thief because your altoids can you left in the bushes was too crappy to waste taxpayer money on a prosecution."

 

Almost makes sense when you substitute an appropriate item

"Sorry Mr Smith, I'm not going to arrest this poor unfortunate thief because your Picasso only used 6 dollars in supplies to create and was too crappy to waste taxpayer money on a prosecution."

Almost makes sense until you realize the subjectivity of value.

Link to comment
As for the cache owner going to court over the loss of a cache, I've had victims come to court over 82 cents.

 

It not always about ROI.

 

I'm surprised you're shop is still in business if that's how you run it... most businesses weigh up ROI and decide small sums like that are NOT worth chasing in court - they just ban/refuse to do business with the debtor. :D

 

 

<snip>

 

"Sorry Mr Smith, I'm not going to arrest this poor unfortunate thief because your Picasso only used 6 dollars in supplies to create and was too crappy to waste taxpayer money on a prosecution."

Almost makes sense until you realize the subjectivity of value.

 

Isn't it more like...

 

"Sorry Mr Smith, I have no officers available to come to your assistance [whilst your home is being invaded/car is being stolen/you're being assaulted] because our last available officer was dispatched to arrest someone for stealing a piece of tupperware."

 

:P:)

Link to comment
Almost makes sense when you substitute an appropriate item

So, the theft is irrelevant, to you, so long as you determine that the stolen item should have little or no value to the owner.

Got it! You live in an interesting world. :D

Uh... Where, monetarily, do you draw the line?

A $2 Altoids tin apparently is OK to steal.

How about a $5 decon kit?

A $10 ammo can?

A $60 Pelican case?

Which, in the wisdom of RoN, would be perfectly acceptable for someone to steal?

At least one company, WalMart, has a policy to not prosecute first-time shoplifters when the value of the stolen items is less than $25. because it isn't worth the time it takes.

 

I would imagine prosecutors have some sort of threshold as well.

 

I wonder what the reported value of this cache was.

Link to comment
It certainly cannot be worth all the time and money expended on this waste of time.
What of yours may we steal, then? Can I come over tonight and take your lawn sprinkler? Apparently you wouldn't attempt to do anything about it.

Or, maybe I'll take your kid's bike. Its used... can't be worth all that much any more. Surely you wouldn't report that to the police... it would just be a waste of time and money.

Link to comment

It certainly cannot be worth all the time and money expended on this waste of time.

To my way of thinking there is more than the dollar value at issue here; there is also the question of precedent. I think it entirely possible that the DA is pursuing this because in part he wants to see how his court deals with the issue of someone taking an item that is essentially abandoned in a public place.

 

 

Or Repak ticked him off. :D

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...