I hope there is a lawyer or police officer on here... A friend of mine at work and her husband (both from Bosnia) own a moving company, 2 trucks and 4 guys. One of the guys was having people make the checks out in his name, $4,500.00 worth of checks. The police retrieved the checks but would not arrest the guy, because he hadn't cashed them. HE STILL STOLD THE CHECKS, HAD THEM MADE OUT IN HIS NAME! Why wouldn't they, or couldn't they arrest him?
2007-05-24 02:14:07 · 12 answers · asked by Godlover 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Stealing a check is a misdemeanor offense. If the check, in the amount you indicate, had been cashed, it would have become a felony because of the amount involved.
The value of the check (paper) is mere pennies and therefore the value does not exceed the threshold of an amount to become a felony offense.
The law stipulates that a misdemeanor must be witnessed by the officer for him to make an arrest.
In my state he could be prosecuted for Theft of Property 3rd Degree:
(a) The theft of property which does not exceed five hundred dollars ($500) in value and which is not taken from the person of another constitutes theft of property in the third degree.
(b) Theft of property in the third degree is a Class A misdemeanor.
Had the check been written by the person holding it, and had this person altered the check with the intent to defraud, then there is a potential for felony forgery. But because he had others write his name on the check....I don't believe a forgery charge will work.
What needs to take place is YOU need to sign the warrant for the individuals arrest and the case will then be presented to the District Attorney for prosecution as you are the "primary witness." You can also contact your local district attorney's office for further guidance!
Best wishes.
2007-05-24 02:27:09 · answer #1 · answered by KC V ™ 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I have only the rules of the road.
Why?
1 The police presumed to change the definition of evidence.
2 The police stole private property.
3 The private property belongs to the check writers.
4 The checks that are the private property were purchased from banks.
5 Banks are federal or international storage places.
6) The police did not have enough "manpower" to (likely about 50/50 male to female ratio) sort the recycled copy checks from bank issue, and the C.I.A. delayed the information on which trees were used for each bank check that is bank issue.
7 The F.B.I. arriived and courteously let the police know that it is federal alleged crime.
8 One of the police mothers' kids recognized that the bank issue checks are different from the bogus copy checks from the pre-fab bank buildings.
9 The C.I.A. recognized that they can tell the difference between right architecture and the pre-fab copy banks, and were glad to know that at least they know it's going on.
2007-05-24 06:06:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because until he cashes them no crime has committed...he hasn't stolen the money yet...he could claim that he intended to put the checks in the bank and then give the money to his employer...and when arrested that is exactly what he will do so the police couldn't touch him....until he cashes them he has not completed the crime.
2007-05-24 02:24:54 · answer #3 · answered by Dr. Luv 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your friends would probably need to press charges first. However, I'm not a cop/lawyer. Until the funds were cashed, or the owners state otherwise, the man may have claimed he was acting as an agent of the company.
2007-05-24 02:18:58 · answer #4 · answered by evans_michael_ya 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
A check is not payment (i.e., is not "legal tender") until such time as the check passes through the Federal Reserve System.
So, that's why he wasn't prosecuted or arrested. Basically, he just stole paper, he didn't benefit from it or anything. He didn't steal anyone's money. He can only get fired.
2007-05-24 02:33:09 · answer #5 · answered by Trying to Help 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the person who issued the check in name of that fraud guy, makes a complaint with the police that this guy has cheated me and had taken away money (check) from me in name of another company (your friend), police will take this fraud into custody.
2007-05-24 02:28:23 · answer #6 · answered by Ramesh M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Odd indeed. There must be some law about not being able to prosecute until you attempt to cash the illegal checks.
I know, technically, a check is considered legal tender.
2007-05-24 02:18:40 · answer #7 · answered by Wolfgang92 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know the details, such as why the people made out the checks in his name. Maybe the police did not think they had enough evidence to prove it was fraud.
.
2007-05-24 02:21:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because there was no crime! He did not cash the checks no one was damaged! If you want the law itself go to www.expertlaw.com
2007-05-24 05:12:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps because he talked his way out of it.......he might have said something like, "I was just holding the money and planned to transfer it to my employer," or something like that....perhaps the police thought it would have been too hard to prosecute (not worth the taxpayer's money).
2007-05-24 02:19:01 · answer #10 · answered by Traqqer 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋