3 ms·

Yes I did. Which I clarified because a pedantic ball flew over the first goal post.

staticman2 3y ago
You asked "Do you have any examples of charges and convictions on theft without a prior claim of deprivation to a good or service from an owner?" The real question is do you have an example of a judge ruling that someone can't be charged and convicted on theft without a prior claim of deprivation to a good and service from an owner? Because I'm pretty sure you are wrong. If you were correct about your belief, I'm sure you can find an example of someone charged with murder and theft, and the theft charges being thrown out because the victim is unavailable to say something was stolen. I guess in your imagination I can steal money from the wallet of a person in a coma in front of a cop, and get off scot free, since the victim can't testify against me?
- fingerlocks 3y ago
  No, because you stole in front of a cop. If you stole from a comatose person in the witness of non-cop, and that non-cop has authority of agency over the comatose, they can can press charges and you can be arrested. Does that help?
  - staticman2 3y ago
    You seem to be inventing legal terms and ideas like an improvisational poet ("authority of agency over the comatose"????). How could that possibly help?
    - fingerlocks 3y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_agency https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_agency
      - staticman2 3y ago
        As that wikipedia article explains Agency is a commercial law concept. It has nothing to do with the prosecution of crimes under criminal law. Also "authority of agency" isn't a legal term. Which is why you'll find no results on google scholar. Agents have a scope of authority-- but nobody calls this "authority of agency" and furthermore your concept of an "authority of agency" for reporting a crime isn't a thing. (You'd have to actually read the results that come up on google scholar to confirm this as putting in direct quotes in google turns up results that don't contain that exact actual quote.) Furthermore you know you are just making things up, why not just concede you like to imagine how criminal law works and you are having fun making up things like "authority of agency"? Or perhaps you think i'm a very stupid person and treating you unfairly, maybe you can educate me by finding a reference for your claim that "In the United States you can’t be arrested and charged with theft without the owner claiming you actually stole something" I suspect your source was your impression of law and order episodes, but even if I'm wrong it seems unfair for you to demand evidence from others without providing any yourself. I look forward to being educated by how you know "In the United States you can’t be arrested and charged with theft without the owner claiming you actually stole something". This seems to be a crazy claim on it's face, since, as I explained, the owner of the object might be dead, in a coma, an infant, being threatened by the mob not to testify, etc. And the concept of hostile witnesses also exists in criminal law.
        fingerlocks 3y ago
        Ok you’re being rude. First, my wife is a lawyer. Second, I pasted that link because I thought you didn’t know what “agency” meant based on your non-sequitur response. As in “principal” and “agent”. I never claimed that was a legal term. If you are an agent with authority, what would you call it? Power of attorney doesn’t apply here. In general, someone that acts on the behalf of another. That’s it. No one is inventing new words. That’s just how grown-ups talk. Ergo. If the owner is dead, then someone else is the owner. If the person in a coma, someone else can legally act on their behalf, like a spouse or family member. You know, someone with authority. Acting on behalf, like an agent. There’s those poetic words again! Same applies to an infant. Understood? Finally, the point I was making is that someone has to report the crime and demonstrate that theft actually occurred for a successful prosecution. You are extremely unlikely to get arrested, much less prosecuted, for openly hypothesizing about whether a theoretical crime took place. Which is the very topic we were originally discussing. I was fast and loose with the word “owner” because I thought my audience would understand the broader definition. Apparently “agent” doesn’t t work for you either, but whatever you want to call it, I hope for your sake that it’s been made more clear. I’ve already clarified my position once, and now ad nauseum. I don’t know what else to say if you’re still confused.

You asked "Do you have any examples of charges and convictions on theft without a prior claim of deprivation to a good or service from an owner?" The real question is do you have an example of a judge ruling that someone can't be charged and convicted on theft without a prior claim of deprivation to a good and service from an owner? Because I'm pretty sure you are wrong. If you were correct about your belief, I'm sure you can find an example of someone charged with murder and theft, and the theft charges being thrown out because the victim is unavailable to say something was stolen. I guess in your imagination I can steal money from the wallet of a person in a coma in front of a cop, and get off scot free, since the victim can't testify against me?

fingerlocks 3y ago
No, because you stole in front of a cop. If you stole from a comatose person in the witness of non-cop, and that non-cop has authority of agency over the comatose, they can can press charges and you can be arrested. Does that help?
- staticman2 3y ago
  You seem to be inventing legal terms and ideas like an improvisational poet ("authority of agency over the comatose"????). How could that possibly help?
  - fingerlocks 3y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_agency https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_agency
    - staticman2 3y ago
      As that wikipedia article explains Agency is a commercial law concept. It has nothing to do with the prosecution of crimes under criminal law. Also "authority of agency" isn't a legal term. Which is why you'll find no results on google scholar. Agents have a scope of authority-- but nobody calls this "authority of agency" and furthermore your concept of an "authority of agency" for reporting a crime isn't a thing. (You'd have to actually read the results that come up on google scholar to confirm this as putting in direct quotes in google turns up results that don't contain that exact actual quote.) Furthermore you know you are just making things up, why not just concede you like to imagine how criminal law works and you are having fun making up things like "authority of agency"? Or perhaps you think i'm a very stupid person and treating you unfairly, maybe you can educate me by finding a reference for your claim that "In the United States you can’t be arrested and charged with theft without the owner claiming you actually stole something" I suspect your source was your impression of law and order episodes, but even if I'm wrong it seems unfair for you to demand evidence from others without providing any yourself. I look forward to being educated by how you know "In the United States you can’t be arrested and charged with theft without the owner claiming you actually stole something". This seems to be a crazy claim on it's face, since, as I explained, the owner of the object might be dead, in a coma, an infant, being threatened by the mob not to testify, etc. And the concept of hostile witnesses also exists in criminal law.
      - fingerlocks 3y ago
        Ok you’re being rude. First, my wife is a lawyer. Second, I pasted that link because I thought you didn’t know what “agency” meant based on your non-sequitur response. As in “principal” and “agent”. I never claimed that was a legal term. If you are an agent with authority, what would you call it? Power of attorney doesn’t apply here. In general, someone that acts on the behalf of another. That’s it. No one is inventing new words. That’s just how grown-ups talk. Ergo. If the owner is dead, then someone else is the owner. If the person in a coma, someone else can legally act on their behalf, like a spouse or family member. You know, someone with authority. Acting on behalf, like an agent. There’s those poetic words again! Same applies to an infant. Understood? Finally, the point I was making is that someone has to report the crime and demonstrate that theft actually occurred for a successful prosecution. You are extremely unlikely to get arrested, much less prosecuted, for openly hypothesizing about whether a theoretical crime took place. Which is the very topic we were originally discussing. I was fast and loose with the word “owner” because I thought my audience would understand the broader definition. Apparently “agent” doesn’t t work for you either, but whatever you want to call it, I hope for your sake that it’s been made more clear. I’ve already clarified my position once, and now ad nauseum. I don’t know what else to say if you’re still confused.