Adam Judd, Gregory Foster, West Prototype, MFG.com

Who said the stuff has been confiscated? Nobody as far I can tell.
My point is if someone has your property, you have the legal right to recover it.
Right or wrong?
Do you think they execute search warrants to come over for dinner? A search warrant is to search for and seize evidence a crime. Stolen property is evidence of a crime. Anything even remotely believed to be stolen would have been taken as evidence. Again, I have executed thousands of search warrants and conducted hundreds of investigations the detective in charge. I have also had people that enter into a contact with someone most of the time a very loose verbal contract where their property ended up with someone else. The people would say the other party "stole" their stuff but based on what they told me it was a civil matter. Could it be criminal? Maybe but at the time we talked a criminal complaint would meet the amount of proof needed. For instance, I pay for a harness from someone and they get backed up and never end up sending it. We can't just jump to the conclusion he intended to defraud me from the beginning. This takes much more evidence. This on the face is a civil matter. The Travis issue is he is using an alias and had a repeated history of doing this. This goes a long way to prove and intent to defraud. If you bounce a check once it is a civil matter in most states. If you repeatedly bounce checks or write on closed banks and such then you have a criminal case. The guy who kicked this all off went to the extra effort to grab all the information he could to establish an intent to defraud. This is the difference. If he hadn't done all this or had all this knowledge, then he probably would have been told it was a civil matter. I have investigated bad contractors and initially it looked like a civil matter. Some of the facts seemed suspect so I pry more and give them time to make it right. When they don't and then try to evade my attempt to contact them, I built a great case that they were intending to defraud. The fact is the harness buyer and the main victim in this case had a contract with Adam and more was needed to be able to prove he intended to defraud. The default on an unfulfilled contract is a civil matter until there is enough evidence of the specific intent to defraud. Not sure of the specifics when you were told your case was a civil matter but sometimes it is a civil matter. Someone pulling a gun on you and robbing you is different from someone not fulfilling a contract. (again, maybe a very informal verbal contract).
 
Do you think they execute search warrants to come over for dinner? A search warrant is to search for and seize evidence a crime. Stolen property is evidence of a crime. Anything even remotely believed to be stolen would have been taken as evidence. Again, I have executed thousands of search warrants and conducted hundreds of investigations the detective in charge. I have also had people that enter into a contact with someone most of the time a very loose verbal contract where their property ended up with someone else. The people would say the other party "stole" their stuff but based on what they told me it was a civil matter. Could it be criminal? Maybe but at the time we talked a criminal complaint would meet the amount of proof needed. For instance, I pay for a harness from someone and they get backed up and never end up sending it. We can't just jump to the conclusion he intended to defraud me from the beginning. This takes much more evidence. This on the face is a civil matter. The Travis issue is he is using an alias and had a repeated history of doing this. This goes a long way to prove and intent to defraud. If you bounce a check once it is a civil matter in most states. If you repeatedly bounce checks or write on closed banks and such then you have a criminal case. The guy who kicked this all off went to the extra effort to grab all the information he could to establish an intent to defraud. This is the difference. If he hadn't done all this or had all this knowledge, then he probably would have been told it was a civil matter. I have investigated bad contractors and initially it looked like a civil matter. Some of the facts seemed suspect so I pry more and give them time to make it right. When they don't and then try to evade my attempt to contact them, I built a great case that they were intending to defraud. The fact is the harness buyer and the main victim in this case had a contract with Adam and more was needed to be able to prove he intended to defraud. The default on an unfulfilled contract is a civil matter until there is enough evidence of the specific intent to defraud. Not sure of the specifics when you were told your case was a civil matter but sometimes it is a civil matter. Someone pulling a gun on you and robbing you is different from someone not fulfilling a contract. (again, maybe a very informal verbal contract).
So as law enforcement would you suggest the good people of KLOV to wait 10-15 years for the police to do nothing? Or in this case wait a year or two for the case to go through the court system only to have a judge find there isn't enough evidence to prove fraud. And that's after spending thousands of dollars on lawyers. And possibly going out of business. Or go over to his driveway and get your stuff, try to sell it and recover at least some of the money? Which we both know we have a legal right to do.
 
So as law enforcement would you suggest the good people of KLOV to wait 10-15 years for the police to do nothing? Or in this case wait a year or two for the case to go through the court system only to have a judge find there isn't enough evidence to prove fraud. And that's after spending thousands of dollars on lawyers. And possibly going out of business. Or go over to his driveway and get your stuff, try to sell it and recover at least some of the money? Which we both know we have a legal right to do.
You really show a compete ignorance on the issue. You don't pay thousands of dollars to have the state prosecute someone when you are a victim of a crime. Any criminal complaint can take at least a year or more to complete, especially one as complicated as this. In some cases, the prosecutor can authorize the return of the goods before trail under certain circumstances. You do not have a right to just go over and grab your stuff back. There are several reasons for you to not do this and let the law do what it is supposed to do. I am simply trying to give information on how the law works in these cases and you seem to think it is better to just circumvent the legal system, both civil and/or criminal to take your stuff back. You are not legally able to just go over there and strong arm your stuff back. Will you be prosecuted for it? Probably not. It is the legal way to do things, no.

Wait, No I am completely wrong. You are much better at this legal stuff than I am. I ask you to please disregard any and all comments by me and just show up grab all the stolen stuff to Robin Hood it back to the right full owners. In case you haven't figured it out, I am trying to give info to others in the thread as I figured you would not listen at all and just argue. Guess I was right. Carry on. I'm done.
 
You really show a compete ignorance on the issue. You don't pay thousands of dollars to have the state prosecute someone when you are a victim of a crime. Any criminal complaint can take at least a year or more to complete, especially one as complicated as this. In some cases, the prosecutor can authorize the return of the goods before trail under certain circumstances. You do not have a right to just go over and grab your stuff back. There are several reasons for you to not do this and let the law do what it is supposed to do. I am simply trying to give information on how the law works in these cases and you seem to think it is better to just circumvent the legal system, both civil and/or criminal to take your stuff back. You are not legally able to just go over there and strong arm your stuff back. Will you be prosecuted for it? Probably not. It is the legal way to do things, no.

Wait, No I am completely wrong. You are much better at this legal stuff than I am. I ask you to please disregard any and all comments by me and just show up grab all the stolen stuff to Robin Hood it back to the right full owners. In case you haven't figured it out, I am trying to give info to others in the thread as I figured you would not listen at all and just argue. Guess I was right. Carry on. I'm done.
So if my neighbor steals my mower, it's sitting in his driveway and I walk over there and get it, what's going to happen?
NOTHING! Because you can't steal your own fuckin mower. Sure he can call the cops and say I stole his mower but he isn't going to because he is a criminal. But if he did I would say it's my mower. Now it's a civil matter. And that's as far as the police will ever take it. Everyone here knows for a fact the police won't do anymore than they have to. Ya'll aren't doing any big investigations or solving any complicated crimes. The proof is in the pudding. Ram controls has stolen tens of thousands of dollars from the members of KLOV and nothing has happened to him.
 
Last edited:
You really show a compete ignorance on the issue. You don't pay thousands of dollars to have the state prosecute someone when you are a victim of a crime. Any criminal complaint can take at least a year or more to complete, especially one as complicated as this. In some cases, the prosecutor can authorize the return of the goods before trail under certain circumstances. You do not have a right to just go over and grab your stuff back. There are several reasons for you to not do this and let the law do what it is supposed to do. I am simply trying to give information on how the law works in these cases and you seem to think it is better to just circumvent the legal system, both civil and/or criminal to take your stuff back. You are not legally able to just go over there and strong arm your stuff back. Will you be prosecuted for it? Probably not. It is the legal way to do things, no.

Wait, No I am completely wrong. You are much better at this legal stuff than I am. I ask you to please disregard any and all comments by me and just show up grab all the stolen stuff to Robin Hood it back to the right full owners. In case you haven't figured it out, I am trying to give info to others in the thread as I figured you would not listen at all and just argue. Guess I was right. Carry on. I'm done.
Ida,

At some point would the police/prosecutor's office go seize the material themselves as evidence and transport it somewhere to be held? They wouldn't just leave it there, would they?
 
Ida, At some point would the police/prosecutor's office go seize the material themselves as evidence and transport it somewhere to be held? They wouldn't just leave it there, would they?
They would not. A search warrant is to search and seize. Like I said they might be able to hand the stuff back before trail in some cases. I would think the prosecutor would allow that. The one thing I can say is I never left anything that could have been stolen property at a scene. I executed a search warrant for stolen property and spend the better part of a month tracking down victims of car burglaries that they did not report as they thought it would not do any good. Most search warrants will cover any and all suspected stolen items even if it does not relate to the initial case.
 
They would not. A search warrant is to search and seize. Like I said they might be able to hand the stuff back before trail in some cases. I would think the prosecutor would allow that. The one thing I can say is I never left anything that could have been stolen property at a scene. I executed a search warrant for stolen property and spend the better part of a month tracking down victims of car burglaries that they did not report as they thought it would not do any good. Most search warrants will cover any and all suspected stolen items even if it does not relate to the initial case.
So it sounds like at some point the prosecutor or police will go grab up the stuff in his driveway?

> spend the better part of a month tracking down victims of car burglaries that they did not report as they thought it would not do any good.
Ida, do you mean they stole the car and the victim didn't report it or they broke in and stole stuff from the car and didn't report it? If it's the former, I'd be amazed. I know around here the police just tell you to file a report if something is stolen; they won't even come look at the car and it seems incredibly rare to hear of anyone getting their stolen stuff back.
 
Probably items stolen during unlawful entry of a motor vehicle I imagine, not theft of an automobile.
Certain things could be traceable with some effort, although often it might be a lot of effort.
So it sounds like at some point the prosecutor or police will go grab up the stuff in his driveway?

> spend the better part of a month tracking down victims of car burglaries that they did not report as they thought it would not do any good.
Ida, do you mean they stole the car and the victim didn't report it or they broke in and stole stuff from the car and didn't report it? If it's the former, I'd be amazed. I know around here the police just tell you to file a report if something is stolen; they won't even come look at the car and it seems incredibly rare to hear of anyone getting their stolen stuff back.
 
A car burglary is where someone goes in and steals from your car. Burglary and Robbed are misused and misunderstood on the whole. Burglary is entering and stealing something from a place you are not allowed to go in general. Robbing is where someone uses force to take things from you in person.
 
So it sounds like at some point the prosecutor or police will go grab up the stuff in his driveway?

> spend the better part of a month tracking down victims of car burglaries that they did not report as they thought it would not do any good.
Ida, do you mean they stole the car and the victim didn't report it or they broke in and stole stuff from the car and didn't report it? If it's the former, I'd be amazed. I know around here the police just tell you to file a report if something is stolen; they won't even come look at the car and it seems incredibly rare to hear of anyone getting their stolen stuff back.
As I understand it, the picture was taken by the victim to show the Police that the delivered property was in the driveway. This would have helped them get the search warrant and the picture was before the warrant was executed. I am not sure why people are assuming this stuff was left at the location after the search warrant was executed. Maybe the victim can tell us for sure.
 
Back a truck up in his driveway. Dare him to call the police.
And in doing such a thing, you turn into a criminal.

Yes, you are reclaiming property that he has not paid for.

I thought about this - we knew where the guy who had bought the stereo system lived. (He also bought an alarm system.)

If caught, you'll be arrested and end up in court. My suggestion - don't do this.
 
So it sounds like at some point the prosecutor or police will go grab up the stuff in his driveway?

> spend the better part of a month tracking down victims of car burglaries that they did not report as they thought it would not do any good.
Ida, do you mean they stole the car and the victim didn't report it or they broke in and stole stuff from the car and didn't report it? If it's the former, I'd be amazed. I know around here the police just tell you to file a report if something is stolen; they won't even come look at the car and it seems incredibly rare to hear of anyone getting their stolen stuff back.
Normal police process is once charges are filed, the "stolen material" gets picked up as evidence, and goes to a storage location.

Generally. According to a sheriff I helped get elected. Different municipalities do things differently so this may not be true. The bigger the town, the better the procedures and controls due to legal liability.
 
And in doing such a thing, you turn into a criminal.

Yes, you are reclaiming property that he has not paid for.

I thought about this - we knew where the guy who had bought the stereo system lived. (He also bought an alarm system.)

If caught, you'll be arrested and end up in court. My suggestion - don't do this.
Ok, serious question...what would a guy be charged with? Definitely not theft. You can't steal your own stuff, by definition of law.
Ownership has already been established as a premise in this case. So just for arguments sake do we have to prove to police we own the property? No! Innocent until proven guilty. The police would have to prove I don't own the property. Which they can't do because I'm not a thief.
 
Ok, serious question...what would a guy be charged with? Definitely not theft. You can't steal your own stuff, by definition of law.
Ownership has already been established as a premise in this case. So just for arguments sake do we have to prove to police we own the property? No! Innocent until proven guilty. The police would have to prove I don't own the property. Which they can't do because I'm not a thief.
Theft by deception.

Grand Larceny.
 
Ok, serious question...what would a guy be charged with? Definitely not theft. You can't steal your own stuff, by definition of law.
Ownership has already been established as a premise in this case. So just for arguments sake do we have to prove to police we own the property? No! Innocent until proven guilty. The police would have to prove I don't own the property. Which they can't do because I'm not a thief.
Sorry, you were asking what the police would charge you with.

In my case, it would have been breaking and entering, and burglary.

You aren't allowed to drive up to someone's property, get out of your car and start loading up stuff. Possession is 9/10 of the law, so unless you can show repossession rights, it's his until the case goes to court.

And remember, the stuff is likely in police impound at this point. Not at the front of his garage.
 
As soon as something is taken as evidence it is under the stewardship of the police who seized it, and if they consider it evidence they WILL seize and secure it- one way or another.

I would think you would be charged with theft from the municipality in question unless granted permission by a judge to take it back, even if everyone agreed it was yours.
 
I would have made sure there were no cameras and just poured gas over it and lit a fire. :)

Possibly.... maybe... I might.... I might not....
 
  • Haha
Reactions: EVB
I would have made sure there were no cameras and just poured gas over it and lit a fire. :)

Possibly.... maybe... I might.... I might not....
That's the problem these days - cameras.

They are everything.

They see the racoon walk up to my front door at 3:00 am.
The possum.
The two cats that visit.
The delivery people.
Me mowing the grass.
The wife tending to her flowers.

And if one is there - woe be unto you.

Even the Secret Service who blocked a camera before taking over a woman's business as a command post (with the alarm blaring in the background, and yes, this violated the constitution) got in trouble because before they blocked the one on the outside (and forgot the one on the inside) they were captured on tape.
 
Back
Top Bottom