Armed robbery at the Leica store

[Alan Edward Klein]

BINGO

That's about the only situation involving robbery/theft/embezzlement and the like where all involved parties are really made whole.

Well, insurance usually has deductibles. So you won't get the full value of the stolen item.

 

[DREW WILEY]

No tall tales from me. I could tell a hundred more just like them. About 6 yrs before I retired, my office was actually installed in a giant vault with wiring and alarms all around. That finally ended in-house pilferage at least, after some employee every few years ended up with a drug habit, and inevitably resorted to theft. Of course, it got nicknamed my life-sentence cage. Only a handful of other employees were allowed in there. It held the largest inventory of Fein and Festool power tools and accessories in the West, plus a whole lot more, all pro quality and expensive. But the biggest risk was when someone working in the Receiving Dept got a drug habit, and tried to alter the paperwork itself to cover their tracks.

No insurance company is going to reimburse you for purchasing something stolen. In fact, they might investigate you for insurance fraud as well as receipt of stolen property.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

You would prefer that the current owner be the one who lost out, despite having in good faith paid in full for the item to a legitimate seller?
And therefore throw into doubt every single retail transaction everyone ever enters into - "new" goods can be stolen too you know.
There is no solution that doesn't result in an innocent victim. So you decide where you put the risk - usually the person who has the ability to secure and insure the property.

The bottom line is he bought stolen property. It doesn't belong to him or the person who "sold" it to him. Why shouldn't the rightful owner be made whole?

Regarding "new" goods, buy from a reputable dealer. If they're peddling stolen goods, you'd win a lawsuit against them in court even if they did buy stolen property by mistake. The court would find the customer expected reasonable due diligence by the store. IF a store is buying stuff that fell off of a truck, the court and the cops aren;t going to believe the store is innocent. Most probably, a legitimate store would correct the issue before it got that far. They wouldn't want bad publicity.

But if you buy stolen stuff on the web from some unknown entity because you're getting a "bargain", that's your problem. It belongs to the original owner, the rightful owner, not you.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

This reminds me of the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme. Many people thought they'd be made partially whole from the funds that remained. The guy in charge told them since they received interest payments over the years (let's say 12% a year on their original investment), then that would be deducted from their original investment because those payments were really the capital investment of people who invested subsequently. There were no interest payments or dividends since Madoff never invested the money,

So in effect, the older customers were "stealing" new customers' capital investments. So basically, they were reimbursed their own capital investments. So the "interest"payments were deducted from their investment and they lost everything as they were already repaid. In fact, people who got back more than they originally invested actually owed everyone else money. I'm not sure how those situations were settled.

 

[DREW WILEY]

What cops and courts believe doesn't mean a darn thing if a single juror can be caused to doubt it. I was personally burglarized once, and the ONLY reason I got my camera gear back is that I recorded specific serial numbers, which matched those on the suspected stolen items. For the same reason, I told my customers to record their serial numbers on their receipts, and carefully file those away, or else they could never prove specific theft, or have full leverage with the insurance company itself. We once did that for them, but over the long haul, due to the sheer volume of sales, it became unrealistic for us to keep doing ourselves. Or take a xerox copy of that to a suspect outdoor trade fair, and if you see what your think is yours there, snag the attendant pollice officer, and he'll reclaim it and arrest the seller on the spot.

Storefront fences - retailers specializing in stolen goods, require a lot more caution and plainclothes officer attention. They've got guns and buddies with guns keeping an eye on people. Those busts take time, but involve serious prison sentences, typically around 12 to even 20 yrs in the instances I was involved with, since it was often our own diverted shipments which brought attention to the felons. A few times, entire warehouses of stolen equipment were identified, predictably in LA. Nowadays, some of the smash and grab operations even have the gall to have their own websites and online sales function. One of those was busted a few weeks ago with over 18 million in stolen goods in it. You buy something like that, you lose your money, and still have to give back the item you paid for, if it was stolen. And an online purchase makes that easy to trace. Too good a deal to be true? - it probably is.

 

[benjiboy]

That raises an interesting question. What if you buy a stolen camera sold on eBay? Who's responsible? Do you get stuck with the loss? eBay gets stuck?

In the U.K. if you are offered the goods at a ridiculously cheap price by the thief, or thieves and know the true value, you will not only loose the equipment, but would probably also be charged with "recieving stolen goods".

 

[MattKing]

I guess Alan thinks it is okay that every thing that everyone buys from anyone else - B&H, Roberts Camera, KEH, the local camera store, etc. - should be subject to being siezed from the final purchaser because somewhere in the chain of distribution either stole it or paid for it with a fraudulent cheque.
Including, of course, everything in his house, and everything he ever sold as part of his business to any of his customers.
Just think of the commercial chaos, not to mention the chaos to the commercial lending worldd.

In the U.K. if you are offered the goods at a ridiculously cheap price by the thief, or thieves and know the true value, you will not only loose the equipment, but would probably also be charged with "recieving stolen goods".

And also in the UK, and Canada, and most if not all the US, if you buy it from a legitimate retailer or wholesaler and pay a market price, you will be entitled to keep it as an innocent purchaser for value.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Can we report a theft of bandwidth due to the subject matter and time spent on this thread? Should a sub forum be set up for legal discussions and banter? Would one be required to wear wigs in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK?

 

[MattKing]

No court wigs here - banned long ago. The horses appreciate it.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Sirius - if you would move to a colder climate, you might appreciate woolen wigs. But maybe you'd be more the Seattle Punk Rock type with the year-round ski cap on? - plus matching arm tatoos to your zanie Hassie decals.

Sorry to perpetuate the fray. I had planned to take my Fuji RF for a little walk on the shoreline today, but Brrr ... It's forecast to snow on our higher hills tonite. And I don't want to heat up the drymounting /framing room again today, so the madness goes on....

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I guess Alan thinks it is okay that every thing that everyone buys from anyone else - B&H, Roberts Camera, KEH, the local camera store, etc. - should be subject to being siezed from the final purchaser because somewhere in the chain of distribution either stole it or paid for it with a fraudulent cheque.
Including, of course, everything in his house, and everything he ever sold as part of his business to any of his customers.
Just think of the commercial chaos, not to mention the chaos to the commercial lending worldd.


And also in the UK, and Canada, and most if not all the US, if you buy it from a legitimate retailer or wholesaler and pay a market price, you will be entitled to keep it as an innocent purchaser for value.

Buying things from person to person on the web or on the street is not a legitimate retailer. You'd probably have to return it to the rightful owner if he could show he owned it and prove it was stolen. I asked about how eBay fits into this situation but don't know the answer to whether they are responsible at all.

I also said that if you buy a product from B&H, Robert,s etc that somehow turns out stolen, an unlikely event, B&H would make good on it to their customer. Packets of hundred of stolen items don't just show up at the receiving door of B&H. In addition, big stores represent they are selling you new products from the manufacturer. If it winds up being stolen, they're responsible for making good. They could be required to reimburse the original owners letting the final customer keep the products. But they'd be the ones responsible or possibly the distributors if it was the distributor who moved the stolen goods.

Where it might be dicier is with KEH who buys used stuff all the time, one at a time from individuals. I imagine they have some process where they check to see if things are stolen before they buy them. I would imagine they too would make good to their customers if something they sold turned out to have been stolen.

 

[Pieter12]

Where it might be dicier is with KEH who buys used stuff all the time, one at a time from individuals. I imagine they have some process where they check to see if things are stolen before they buy them. I would imagine they too would make good to their customers if something they sold turned out to have been stolen.

I have sold to KEH in person on multiple occasions. Aside from looking up the item's value on a laptop, they write you a check on the spot.

 

[Dan Fromm]

The point is, you have to prove to a jury that not only specific items were stolen, but that anyone holding those, or even reselling them, had knowledge they were stolen.

Drew, it depends on where you are. Here in New Jersey, the rule is that whoever possesses a stolen item that a reasonable person would believe is stolen can be prosecuted as a receiver of stolen goods. I was once on a jury in a trial where the accused had someone else's car, claimed he had bought it for pennies from a friend but couldn't name the friend or produce a title. We found him guilty.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I have sold to KEH in person on multiple occasions. Aside from looking up the item's value on a laptop, they write you a check on the spot.

I guess they figured if it turns out stolen, they might get stuck with one item. So why worry about it?

Or you had an honest face.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Drew, it depends on where you are. Here in New Jersey, the rule is that whoever possesses a stolen item that a reasonable person would believe is stolen can be prosecuted as a receiver of stolen goods. I was once on a jury in a trial where the accused had someone else's car, claimed he had bought it for pennies from a friend but couldn't name the friend or produce a title. We found him guilty.

Not the kind of guy who would use a Leica.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I don't think the law is really any different here. But only serious cases ever go to trial, and that means serious lawyers get involved. Then it's all up to a jury. And I've known of some absolutely ridiculous decisions that do defy common sense. But most of the time, there is a conviction. If there weren't confidence of that to begin with, the prosecutors would have never indicted them. But that means the odds are still largely in favor of the thieves, because they get away with a lot of things before they're stuck so deep in the LaBrea Tarpits that they're easy to prosecute. It's also very expensive and labor intensive to go to trial, and everything is terribly backlogged and understaffed in the best of circumstances, while the pandemic represented the worst of circumstances.

But it's gotten so so bad during the covid years, with blatant smash and grabs in jewelry stores and upscale downtown shops - with even cars being driven right through storefronts - that there has been enormous pressure on the system to do something about it fast - even political careers being upended due to it. Reminds me of what my father recalled about the Great Depression years and its
exceptional amount of Bonnie & Clyde type of crime.

One of the recent incidents involved a South Bay man recreationally shooting in SF with some especially fancy DSLR gear and driving a new Lexus sport utility vehicle; in other words, a thief magnet. Instead of risking damage to that stuff with the usual grab and run or smash and grab tactics, they followed him all the way home an hour away and robbed him at gunpoint, terrorizing the family too. After that, he was so depressed that he said he'd never shoot a camera again.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Sirius - if you would move to a colder climate, you might appreciate woolen wigs. But maybe you'd be more the Seattle Punk Rock type with the year-round ski cap on? - plus matching arm tatoos to your zanie Hassie decals.

Sorry to perpetuate the fray. I had planned to take my Fuji RF for a little walk on the shoreline today, but Brrr ... It's forecast to snow on our higher hills tonite. And I don't want to heat up the drymounting /framing room again today, so the madness goes on....

I always thought that the wigs were outdated and pretentious.

 

[Pieter12]

Not the kind of guy who would use a Leica.

But maybe the kind who would sell you one.

 

[MattKing]

I always thought that the wigs were outdated and pretentious.

Just like the prerogative writs and other legal anachronisms that so many US legal systems retain from ~ 250 years ago, while the rest of the world has moved on.
By the way, they are horsehair wigs, and apparently itch like crazy. You won't find them in Canada, and in most UK courts.
But more generally, be careful about getting your legal advice from Photrio. With such radical revolutionaries like Alan proposing massive changes to a legal system that your country has used for ~ 250 years and which evolved for many centuries before that, you could become confused.
A tracing remedy for personalty that defeats legal title to that personalty? What's next, the elimination of private property all together?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Drew, it depends on where you are. Here in New Jersey, the rule is that whoever possesses a stolen item that a reasonable person would believe is stolen can be prosecuted as a receiver of stolen goods. I was once on a jury in a trial where the accused had someone else's car, claimed he had bought it for pennies from a friend but couldn't name the friend or produce a title. We found him guilty.

Coincidentally I just got called for jury duty in New Jersey. I thought at 77 you're too old. I might fall asleep. Like the judge.

 

[Wallendo]

$180,000 of Leica equipment stolen.

... and here we have a four page thread about what? ... 4 cameras and 5 lenses stolen.

 

[rcphoto]

$180,000 of Leica equipment stolen.

... and here we have a four page thread about what? ... 4 cameras and 5 lenses stolen.

At maximum

 

[jimgalli]

Can someone point me to the Pinkham & Smith store in San Francisco please.

 

[JerseyDoug]

Coincidentally I just got called for jury duty in New Jersey. I thought at 77 you're too old. I might fall asleep. Like the judge.

In New Jersey when you fill out the online questionnaire for prospective jurors, or fill out the paper form they send if you do not reply online, you can ask to be excused for reason of age if you are 75 or older.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

In New Jersey when you fill out the online questionnaire for prospective jurors, or fill out the paper form they send if you do not reply online, you can ask to be excused for reason of age if you are 75 or older.

Just did that. Thanks.