3 ms·

Am I reading this wrong or is this just a case of a person stealing money/commuting fraud, and every institution involved being ready to act if charges are push

Am I reading this wrong or is this just a case of a person stealing money/commuting fraud, and every institution involved being ready to act if charges are pushed, but a mother wanting to shield her son by not pushing charges for the crime he admittedly committed... but still wanting the institutions to act as though changes had been pushed? I get that she wants to protect her kid, but at this point she really has to sit down and make the decision and figure out if she wants the 20k and will press charges for what literally transpired. Or if she would prefer to protect her kid and pretend nothing happened. Wanting to go both ways and have the receivers of the funds individually reimbursed her just so she can pretend her son didn’t steel the funds out of her account by lifting her password just seems utterly absurd.

mindslight 6y ago
The problem with this binary thinking is that the justice system has become horribly draconian, so a parent would never willingly entangle their child into it unless all other options had failed. One shouldn't have to effectively disown their son just to have the system handle unauthorized transactions as unauthorized. Really the donations themselves should be easily refundable, especially as they were done with a reversible payment system.
- dmix 6y ago
  > Really the donations themselves should be easily refundable So what does this have to do with the justice system exactly?
  - mindslight 6y ago
    The comment I responded to was making the point that Twitch was willing to refund if charges were pressed. The donations are the only non-reversible step here - if the money were still sitting in the son's account, the parents could easily transfer it back.
  - elliekelly 6y ago
    FTA: > “Unless I press charges against my son, they will not help as this is considered friendly fraud.” They being the bank. So unless Twitch/Amazon or the Streamers are willing to give her a refund she’s between a $20,000 rock and her son doing hard time.

mindslight 6y ago

The problem with this binary thinking is that the justice system has become horribly draconian, so a parent would never willingly entangle their child into it unless all other options had failed. One shouldn't have to effectively disown their son just to have the system handle unauthorized transactions as unauthorized. Really the donations themselves should be easily refundable, especially as they were done with a reversible payment system.

dmix 6y ago
> Really the donations themselves should be easily refundable So what does this have to do with the justice system exactly?
- mindslight 6y ago
  The comment I responded to was making the point that Twitch was willing to refund if charges were pressed. The donations are the only non-reversible step here - if the money were still sitting in the son's account, the parents could easily transfer it back.
- elliekelly 6y ago
  FTA: > “Unless I press charges against my son, they will not help as this is considered friendly fraud.” They being the bank. So unless Twitch/Amazon or the Streamers are willing to give her a refund she’s between a $20,000 rock and her son doing hard time.