4 ms·

Possession of stolen goods[1] is a crime USA-wide, and in many other countries. The rationale behind is ability to prosecute fences[2] - people who act as inter

by dexen 8y ago

Possession of stolen goods[1] is a crime USA-wide, and in many other countries. The rationale behind is ability to prosecute fences[2] - people who act as intermediaries and a layer of security between thieves and end-users, providing the thieves with option for easy cash-out. Edit: As a counter-point, at least in Poland, while obtaining stolen goods is an offense ("paserstwo"[3]), the buyer of any good or service that has a "legal defect" - including having been stolen, IIRC - has a valid legal case to demand recourse from the seller. The goods are nonetheless subject to forfeiture. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fence_(criminal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fence_(criminal) [3] https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paserstwo https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paserstwo

cr1895 8y ago
From your own link: "A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proven: The person received or concealed or stored or disposed of items of stolen property. The items were moving as, or constituted a part of, interstate commerce. The items had a value in excess of $5,000. The person acted knowingly and willfully." So that doesn't really answer the question asked, because it's only a federal crime if the goods are known to be stolen and a part of "interstate commerce." Now, at the state level, this may differ. But neither of us has that information.
- dexen 8y ago
  A subsequent section on Wikipedia (link [1] in GP) tells us the following: >All US states also have laws regarding receipt of stolen property; however, there usually is no minimum dollar amount in many jurisdictions, and, of course, the requirement in Federal law regarding interstate commerce does not apply. i.e., USA-wide >Also, in many states (Ohio, for example), the burden to prove criminal intent is not as stringent or is nonexistent. i hereby rest my case.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    Curiously, the references backing those statements are both dead :)
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

by dexen 8y ago

cr1895 8y ago

From your own link: "A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proven: The person received or concealed or stored or disposed of items of stolen property. The items were moving as, or constituted a part of, interstate commerce. The items had a value in excess of $5,000. The person acted knowingly and willfully." So that doesn't really answer the question asked, because it's only a federal crime if the goods are known to be stolen and a part of "interstate commerce." Now, at the state level, this may differ. But neither of us has that information.

dexen 8y ago
A subsequent section on Wikipedia (link [1] in GP) tells us the following: >All US states also have laws regarding receipt of stolen property; however, there usually is no minimum dollar amount in many jurisdictions, and, of course, the requirement in Federal law regarding interstate commerce does not apply. i.e., USA-wide >Also, in many states (Ohio, for example), the burden to prove criminal intent is not as stringent or is nonexistent. i hereby rest my case.
- icebraining 8y ago
  Curiously, the references backing those statements are both dead :)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]