Creditors use fake court to intimidate consumers

[ShadowDragon8685]

I think even if the state AG is bribed well enough to look the other way, the FBI should trump up whatever charges they need to in order to take over.

We have a vested public interest in ensuring that people never have a reason to doubt the legitimacy of the justice system proceedings they're interacting with, especially to the level of doubting whether the courtroom and the judge is legitimate. Pancake? I hope they flatten these guys into a thin smear of dough and grease.

[Thanas]

I think even if the state AG is bribed well enough to look the other way, the FBI should trump up whatever charges they need to in order to take over.

We have a vested public interest in ensuring that people never have a reason to doubt the legitimacy of the justice system proceedings they're interacting with, especially to the level of doubting whether the courtroom and the judge is legitimate. Pancake? I hope they flatten these guys into a thin smear of dough and grease.

Shadowdragon, consider this a warning. Tone down your tough-guyisms, nobody is buying the act. Meanwhile, they make your posts even more headache-inducing to read than they already are.

[SVPD]

I think even if the state AG is bribed well enough to look the other way, the FBI should trump up whatever charges they need to in order to take over.

That's just as disgusting as the "voter fraud is ok if my candidate wins" thing.

[Edi]

I think even if the state AG is bribed well enough to look the other way, the FBI should trump up whatever charges they need to in order to take over.

We have a vested public interest in ensuring that people never have a reason to doubt the legitimacy of the justice system proceedings they're interacting with, especially to the level of doubting whether the courtroom and the judge is legitimate. Pancake? I hope they flatten these guys into a thin smear of dough and grease.

I'll back up what Thanas said. You were one of the main proponents of vote fraud in the other thread and you're the main proponent of further lawlessness here and you're too goddamn fucking stupid to even see just how hypocritical you're being.

Here you're waxing all self-righteous about how the public must never doubt the legitimacy of the justice system and oh, by the way, let's just make sure that the people whose conduct you disapprove of go to jail, even if you have to trump up the charges and pervert the course of justice.

That's certainly not going to make the public doubt the integrity of the justice system, no sir!

Seriously, do everyone a favor and just shut the fuck up.

Or if you absolutely must post anything in any thread, do the following:

1. Type post
2. Do NOT hit "Submit"
3. Cut out 90% of your original post in order to condense the point
4. Do NOT hit "Submit"
5. Cut out 50% of the new draft of the post
6. Recheck the second cut of the post and remove all the tough guy bullshit that wasn't already cut
7. Submit ONLY if you actually have something substantive to say
8. Else delete the draft and do not post

Am I making myself clear enough just how much of a worthless, useless asshat you're currently being? Or do you perhaps need even more elaboration on it?

[ShadowDragon8685]

Shadowdragon, consider this a warning. Tone down your tough-guyisms, nobody is buying the act. Meanwhile, they make your posts even more headache-inducing to read than they already are.

I expressed a desire to see the heavy end of the judicial hammer brought down with extreme prejudice: much like you yourself would probably express a desire to see someone convicted of a very heinous murder receive the longest possible jail term available under your judicial system.

I think even if the state AG is bribed well enough to look the other way, the FBI should trump up whatever charges they need to in order to take over.

That's just as disgusting as the "voter fraud is ok if my candidate wins" thing.

So, you think that Al Capone shouldn't have been nailed on tax evasion because it was the only thing that they could make stick because it was Federal, then?

There's a vested societal interest in seeing outfits like this get taken down, because not only are they impersonating law enforcement, they're impersonating an entire judicial system. Stories like this spread, and people are going to start disbelieving the authority of the real police or judicial system: and I don't mean just whackjobs. You have a vested interest in that not coming to pass, since it would make your life immensely more difficult.

I'll back up what Thanas said. You were one of the main proponents of vote fraud in the other thread and you're the main proponent of further lawlessness here and you're too goddamn fucking stupid to even see just how hypocritical you're being.

Was I proposing it? No, I was seriously questioning if it was justifiable given the circumstances, but that's neither here nor there. Please don't try and bait me off-topic into a different argument.

Here you're waxing all self-righteous about how the public must never doubt the legitimacy of the justice system and oh, by the way, let's just make sure that the people whose conduct you disapprove of go to jail, even if you have to trump up the charges and pervert the course of justice.

So, the tax evasion charges against Al Capone should have been dropped, then? It's not perverting the course of justice to nail someone who's obviously and flagrantly guilty of something you can't make stick for some reason other than lack of evidence (such as juries too friendly to the defendant/intimidated by the defendant/prosecutors in the defendant's pocket,) it's putting justice back on course. If it takes stretching a legal definition or two, that's the way it is.

The world isn't always pretty black and white. It's not always middle gray, but it's not always ivory and obsidian, either.

That's certainly not going to make the public doubt the integrity of the justice system, no sir!

You're right, it'll be just like the time everybody started cursing the damnable corrupt government for putting that nice Alfonse boy away on tax evasion charges.

[Metahive]

So, you think that Al Capone shouldn't have been nailed on tax evasion because it was the only thing that they could make stick because it was Federal, then?

Are you saying the claims of tax evasion were made up by the FBI?

[ShadowDragon8685]

So, you think that Al Capone shouldn't have been nailed on tax evasion because it was the only thing that they could make stick because it was Federal, then?

Are you saying the claims of tax evasion were made up by the FBI?

No, I'm saying they were patently overcharged. It also presumes that you owe taxes at all on money gained from criminal enterprise, which could potentially be challenged (probably not successfully) on fifth amendment grounds as claiming the income would result necessarily in incriminating yourself in those very same criminal enterprise.

It was a ridiculous thing to get Capone on, a trite charged trumpeted up far above itself, but they did it and it worked. If they have to stretch the hell out of the definition of mail fraud or something (possibly related to the delivery of documents) to get these guys, then I wouldn't consider it remotely a miscarriage of justice.

Kind of like "conspiracy to deprive civil rights." Granted that was a hell of a lot more heinous than this mess, but the point remains: when the crime is damaging enough to society as a whole and the local authorities cannot or will not handle the matter, then the federal government needs to step in. Unfortunately, the actual crime probably being something over which the federal government does not have jurisdiction, they'd probably have to stretch something to fit.

[Metahive]

No, I'm saying they were patently overcharged.

You do know that this isn't what "trumped up charge" means, don't you? You were arguing that law enforcement should make shit up in order to remove certain elements from society or right certain ills. This has nothing whatsoever to do with Capone's case since he himself pretty much admitted to be guilty by attempting a plea bargain. Nothing "trumped up" there. Find a better example.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Yeah... 'trump up charges' doesn't mean 'Throw the book at them', it means 'make up fake or fraudulent charges to prosecute someone.' Don't believe me? Check the dictionary

What's more, you've invented the term 'trumpeted up' which I assume YOU think means 'raised from low regard' or 'exalted' by your use here:

It was a ridiculous thing to get Capone on, a trite charged trumpeted up far above itself, but they did it and it worked. If they have to stretch the hell out of the definition of mail fraud or something (possibly related to the delivery of documents) to get these guys, then I wouldn't consider it remotely a miscarriage of justice.

The tax evasion charge was not trumped, NOR was it trumpeted, it was simply a zealous (or overzealous) prosecution against a known criminal. I would imagine in this circumstance local authorities will seek out all the possible crimes to charge these people with and prosecute accordingly. This will ALSO not be trumping, or trumpeting, but I believe it will be triumphant.

In conclusion Shadow, shut the fuck up, think about what someone who is smarter than you (like Thanas) or of greater authority (like Edi) is saying when they tell you you're wrong, and go sit in the corner and contemplate how you came to be a grown man (or teenager) who doesn't fluently speak his native language. Now's a great time for you to appologize to the people in this thread and retract your statements regarding the advocation of illegal acts in the pursuit of 'justice'.

Note: Sorry mods if I'm overstepping, but I HATE improper use of phrases. If I grade one more paper where a student writes 'For all intensive purposes' I might flip my lid.

[Axiomatic]

I seem to recall hearing that for impersonating police officers and faking an entire justice system, the company responsible was fined 3000 dollars.

Truly they will never recover from this setback.

[Simon_Jester]

I seem to recall hearing that for impersonating police officers and faking an entire justice system, the company responsible was fined 3000 dollars.

Truly they will never recover from this setback.

While at this point, nothing would surprise me...

Really? Where did you hear that?

[Axiomatic]

I seem to recall hearing that for impersonating police officers and faking an entire justice system, the company responsible was fined 3000 dollars.

Truly they will never recover from this setback.

While at this point, nothing would surprise me...

Really? Where did you hear that?

I don't remember, and actually, I was mistaken. It was a 3000 dollar fine per person, so multiply that with 370. Also restitutions, which presumably means they have to give the money back.

[Simon_Jester]

So, around 1.1 million dollars plus (hopefully) all the money they collected from 370 people. That might actually hit them pretty bad depending on how big a company they are.

Hopefully there are also criminal charges. Remember that civil liability and criminal guilt are tracked separately (consider the OJ Simpson case as an example of this).

It's the criminal charges that matter, in my opinion. A man in an office can easily shrug off cash losses if it seems like it's worth the risk. The prospect that you, specifically and personally, as an executive of the company, might very well go to jail is another matter.

[Coalition]

I don't remember, and actually, I was mistaken. It was a 3000 dollar fine per person, so multiply that with 370. Also restitutions, which presumably means they have to give the money back.

Would that also be multiplied per fake case? I.e. if the fake judge sat in front of ten people, would that count as ten separate offenses?

[CaptainChewbacca]

'Per Person' refers to per person deceived, not persons who participated in the fraud.

[SVPD]

I think even if the state AG is bribed well enough to look the other way, the FBI should trump up whatever charges they need to in order to take over.

That's just as disgusting as the "voter fraud is ok if my candidate wins" thing.

So, you think that Al Capone shouldn't have been nailed on tax evasion because it was the only thing that they could make stick because it was Federal, then?

There's a vested societal interest in seeing outfits like this get taken down, because not only are they impersonating law enforcement, they're impersonating an entire judicial system. Stories like this spread, and people are going to start disbelieving the authority of the real police or judicial system: and I don't mean just whackjobs. You have a vested interest in that not coming to pass, since it would make your life immensely more difficult.

Put the goalposts back where you got them. You said "trump up" charges, a term which is universally understood to refer to inventing fake charges against people. I don't recall that the Tax Evasion charges against Al Capone were in any way less than legitimate, and if they were, no, I would not have been in favor of trumping them up. "Trumping up" charges does not mean "charging with lesser crimes". If I arrest a bank robber and also charge him with leaving reckless driving during his escape, the reckless driving is not a "trumped up charge" because of its lesser severity.

As for a "vested social interest" obviously ther's a social interest in prosecuting criminals. That doesn't mean we should undermine the judicial system in an effort to nail these people for... undermining the judicial system. As for how its going to affect people's attitudes towards the police, you can shut the fuck up right now. People are always trying to tell me how the public at large is going to change its attitude because of something or other and I better watch out and you know how many times it has happened?

Zero. So don't tell me what affects my job. I know what does a hell of a lot better than you do, and one thing that would negatively affect my job is people making up fake charges.

[Coalition]

'Per Person' refers to per person deceived, not persons who participated in the fraud.

Drat. I was thinking that the fake judge would get fined for impersonating a judge, the fake sheriffs would each get fined for imitating an officer of the law, plus others, all multiplied by the number of people deceived.

I.e. the fake court might have a judge, two sheriffs, a clerk, and a recorder. Additional people in the audience would not get fined as 'imitating a spectator in a court of law' is not a crime. So that is five fines right there for the impersonations if they only do it once for $15,000. Multiply that by 370 people and that is $5.55 million. I'm sure someone in the accounting office has pointed that out already though.

[General Zod]

'Per Person' refers to per person deceived, not persons who participated in the fraud.

Drat. I was thinking that the fake judge would get fined for impersonating a judge, the fake sheriffs would each get fined for imitating an officer of the law, plus others, all multiplied by the number of people deceived.

I.e. the fake court might have a judge, two sheriffs, a clerk, and a recorder. Additional people in the audience would not get fined as 'imitating a spectator in a court of law' is not a crime. So that is five fines right there for the impersonations if they only do it once for $15,000. Multiply that by 370 people and that is $5.55 million. I'm sure someone in the accounting office has pointed that out already though.

They'd be looking at ten years in jail at minimum anyway (if Henry Terry's case is anything to go by), which is far better than any piddly fine.

[SVPD]

'Per Person' refers to per person deceived, not persons who participated in the fraud.

Drat. I was thinking that the fake judge would get fined for impersonating a judge, the fake sheriffs would each get fined for imitating an officer of the law, plus others, all multiplied by the number of people deceived.

I.e. the fake court might have a judge, two sheriffs, a clerk, and a recorder. Additional people in the audience would not get fined as 'imitating a spectator in a court of law' is not a crime. So that is five fines right there for the impersonations if they only do it once for $15,000. Multiply that by 370 people and that is $5.55 million. I'm sure someone in the accounting office has pointed that out already though.

No, but conspiracy and complicity are. You could most likely nail them for that.

[Drone]

So, you think that Al Capone shouldn't have been nailed on tax evasion because it was the only thing that they could make stick because it was Federal, then?

Are you saying the claims of tax evasion were made up by the FBI?

No, I'm saying they were patently overcharged. It also presumes that you owe taxes at all on money gained from criminal enterprise, which could potentially be challenged (probably not successfully) on fifth amendment grounds as claiming the income would result necessarily in incriminating yourself in those very same criminal enterprise.

Except of course, you don't. You're not required to incriminate yourself on those forms, simply report the amount of illegal income. Your tax forms can not be used against you in court unless the forms themselves are filled out fraudlently.