Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

o/t - Why Do the Victims Have to Press Charges?

3 views
Skip to first unread message

David / Amicus

unread,
May 22, 2013, 1:37:42 PM5/22/13
to
On my daily walk I requent a mom & pop grocery store. Yesterday they
told me that the wife's cell phone was stolen. They cater to the high
school lunch hour crowd. The store has a security camera so they saw who
took it.

They called up the school and spoke to the police cop. They got the
phone back and the boy got suspended.

The school cop asked if they wanted to press charges and they said no. I
got the impression they did not want to because their son is a student
at the school and there might be retribution against him by other kids.

But a crime was committed. Why must the victims be the ones who press
charges before anything is done?

Porter Smith

unread,
May 22, 2013, 2:06:49 PM5/22/13
to
Ami...@webtv.net (David / Amicus) wrote in news:10270-519D0266-444
@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net:
A crime requires a "complaining witness". Even though there is evidence
that the kid took a phone, someone has to say "that was my phone and he
took it without my permission."
.

Michael Black

unread,
May 22, 2013, 3:23:24 PM5/22/13
to
If you actually watched cop shows on tv, you'd know that some crimes don't
require a complaint, while lesser things do.

I would assume that since this is a low level crime, if the owner isn't
prepared to press charges, then there'd be no witness, and thus no reason
to go on with the prosecution.

When they get robbed a second time, perhaps they will press charges. ON
the other hand, if someone is murdered, that's serious enough that the
state wil prosecute anyway.

Michael

A1...@gmail.com

unread,
May 22, 2013, 3:36:30 PM5/22/13
to
On 22 May 2013 18:06:49 GMT, Porter Smith <my_por...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Except there are crimes where the state would be the one pressing
charges. .

David / Amicus

unread,
May 22, 2013, 3:34:36 PM5/22/13
to
But there is a "witness", The crime was caught on camera.

Since the victims are not pressing charges why is the boy being
suspended from school?

Porter Smith

unread,
May 22, 2013, 3:45:57 PM5/22/13
to
A1...@gmail.com wrote in news:7g7qp8di57012rkpa...@4ax.com:
In those cases the complaining witness is usually a police officer or the
prosecutor. Thsi typically happens in homicides since the victim
obviously cannot file the complaint.

In this case where there seems to be evidence, the cop could file the
charges, but it is unlikely he would do that without a co-operating
witness, especially for such a minor offense. It costs a lot of monet to
process a criminal charge.

Porter Smith

unread,
May 22, 2013, 3:47:27 PM5/22/13
to
Ami...@webtv.net (David / Amicus) wrote in news:10269-519D1DCC-2575
@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net:

> But there is a "witness", The crime was caught on camera.
>
> Since the victims are not pressing charges why is the boy being
> suspended from school?
>
My question would be "Why was the kid suspended for an offense that took
place off school grounds?"

David Johnston

unread,
May 22, 2013, 4:00:51 PM5/22/13
to
Possessing stolen property on school grounds?

David / Amicus

unread,
May 22, 2013, 5:15:45 PM5/22/13
to
<<My question would be "Why was the kid suspended for an offense that
took place off school grounds?">>

Sorry, I have no idea.

I think he should be prosecuted in juvenile court. I'm not advocating
jail time or feeding him to the bears but maybe communuty service?

Or maybe have to wear a sandwich board and stand outside the store
saying "I AM A THIEF".

theget

unread,
May 22, 2013, 6:55:44 PM5/22/13
to

theget

unread,
May 22, 2013, 6:58:13 PM5/22/13
to
On May 22, 3:34 pm, Ami...@webtv.net (David / Amicus) wrote:
> But there is a "witness", The crime was caught on camera.

Testimony by a camera is AFAIK not permitted in courts. It's
discrimination against machinery.



David / Amicus

unread,
May 22, 2013, 7:46:49 PM5/22/13
to
<<Testimony by a camera is AFAIK not permitted in courts. It's
discrimination against machinery.>>


Yet many cities have red light cameras to get $$$.

theget

unread,
May 22, 2013, 11:15:38 PM5/22/13
to
That's evidence, not testimony.

Porter Smith

unread,
May 22, 2013, 11:39:44 PM5/22/13
to
Ami...@webtv.net (David / Amicus) wrote in news:12799-519D58E9-1
@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net:

> <<Testimony by a camera is AFAIK not permitted in courts. It's
> discrimination against machinery.>>
>
>
> Yet many cities have red light cameras to get $$$.
Running a red light is not a criminal offense.

David Johnston

unread,
May 23, 2013, 12:27:51 AM5/23/13
to
I'm sure that a security camera video of someone walking into a place
and shooting the proprietor would be admitted as evidence.

Theft is something different than murder though. It's possible for
someone to walk off with your phone or your car and for you to treat it
as them having borrowed it.

David / Amicus

unread,
May 23, 2013, 2:18:17 PM5/23/13
to
UPDATE

There were three boys and they were suspended for one week.


Mrs Shopkeeper told me that even her son who is a student at the same
school thought she ought to have pressed charges.

Porter Smith

unread,
May 23, 2013, 3:18:51 PM5/23/13
to
Ami...@webtv.net (David / Amicus) wrote in news:12800-519E5D69-11
@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net:
I can certainly understand why she mighty be hesitant. No one was injured
and her property was returned. If there was a criminal case, her phone
would be taken as evidence. She would have to submit a formal statement.
Then there would be an investigation with more interviews from the
prosecutor and police. Then she might have to testify in front of a grand
jury. Assuming the kids didn't plead out, she would then have to testify
at their triel or juvenile hearing. All that takes time away from her
business.

At the end of the day, what's in it for her?

D.F. Manno

unread,
May 23, 2013, 4:00:42 PM5/23/13
to
In article <XnsA1C8A0C4DFCF6m...@8.17.249.100>,
My question would be "Why are any of you taking what the OP wrote at
face value?"

--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
GOP delenda est!

David / Amicus

unread,
May 23, 2013, 8:07:45 PM5/23/13
to
Why would I lie about it?

Here's how it all started. Sometimes they have a tv on mute to some news
channel.

But the other day when I went in there was music playing in a foreign
language.

So I asked about it. Mrs Shopkeeper told me it were prayers in Punjabi
asking for peace and calmness etc.. I told her it was nice.

And that's when she told me the story of her cell phone being stollen.

theget

unread,
May 24, 2013, 10:33:34 PM5/24/13
to
On May 23, 8:07 pm, Ami...@webtv.net (David / Amicus) wrote:
> Why would I lie about it?
>
> Here's how it all started. Sometimes they have a tv on mute to some news
> channel.
>
> But the other day when I went in there was music playing in a foreign
> language.
>
> So I asked about it. Mrs Shopkeeper told me it were prayers in Punjabi
> asking for peace and calmness etc..


Are they Sikh by any chance? Listening to the morning prayer perhaps?

> I told her it was nice.

What did you mean by that? I suspect you didn't understand the words,
so did you mean the sound?

David / Amicus

unread,
May 25, 2013, 1:34:30 AM5/25/13
to
<<Are they Sikh by any chance? Listening to the morning prayer
perhaps?>>
    
Yes they are Sikh. Don't know whether it was the morning prayer.


"I told her it was nice."


<<What did you mean by that? I suspect you didn't understand the words,
so did you mean the sound?>>


It was soft and mellow, soothing.

theget

unread,
May 25, 2013, 11:01:40 AM5/25/13
to
Should you ever get the ability to watch vids at youtube, you can
search there for: sukhmani sahib full paath, and find your inner soft,
mellow and soothing.

0 new messages