Court Date - Stolen Goods.

[JM]

PistonHeed1667 said:

On advice from solicitor I done a 'no comment' interview. Was then bailed.

This whole thread is probably bull-crap, but anyway...

If you gave a "no comment" interview, then maybe they want you to confirm your course of action so they are having to take you to court to get you to speak.

[anonymous-user]

Maybe on Planet Bullst, where the events of this thread are (not) taking place, but it doesn't work quite like that on Earth.

[JM]

Breadvan72 said:

Maybe on Planet Bullst, where the events of this thread are (not) taking place, but it doesn't work quite like that on Earth.

Maybe didn't explain too well what I meant.

If he was asked in the police station where he got the phone from and replied, no comment.
Was then asked what happened to it or where is it now, and replied no comment.

And if there is a court case involving other parties relating to the alleged stolen phone and it being stolen and sold on. I can see why he would be asked to appear in court to give his version of events he was involved in.

[anonymous-user]

You cannot be compelled to give evidence when you are accused of a crime, and a prosecution wouldn't usually go ahead just on the basis that something rum has happened and Mr X ought to explain himself. Anyway, all academic, it seems, as this thread appears to be based on a not very interesting fantasy.

[Randomthoughts]

Could this be some kind of perverse fishing exercise? Get some well meaning soul to give you bad advice on a charge you know shouldn't stick with proper legal advice on the facts as stated, and try to claim something from them?!

[MoleVision]

Either way I find guilty and sentence to 2000 lines

1000x "I have done"
1000x "I did"

[Mad Dave]

If there really is such an innocent explanation then why go No Comment? You can't complain at not being believed when you didn't give an account.

[SV8Predator]

zedx19 said:

This is definitely a very similar story to the laptop one, almost identical in every way bar handling an iphone instead of a laptop. What is going on here? Troll?

It's the same poster:

PH21736 = PistonHeed1667

Plenty of this required:

[zedx19]

SV8Predator said:

zedx19 said:

This is definitely a very similar story to the laptop one, almost identical in every way bar handling an iphone instead of a laptop. What is going on here? Troll?

It's the same poster:

PH21736 = PistonHeed1667

Plenty of this required:

What's the point though? Is OP getting a kick out of people offering advise for a non-existent situation?

[anonymous-user]

18 earns 150k, but should be in the 45 percent bracket now, sounds like a load of bullst, probably doing it for some sort of trolling exercise.

[carreauchompeur]

Initial 'charge' doesn't really add up and in the circumstances described 'no comment' is bad advice...

[Randomthoughts]

The Spruce goose said:

18 earns 150k, but should be in the 45 percent bracket now, sounds like a load of bullst, probably doing it for some sort of trolling exercise.

And can only afford a 2004 1.2 Clio.

Might have taken 'only have' a 2004 1.2 Clio on 150k, some people have different priorities, but 'can only afford' smells of ste.

[Red Devil]

Aretnap said:

pork911 said:

I may be confused but is the reset the only charge and yet you didn't reset it?

As per Cat, I suspect that he's confusing " reset" - the term Scots Law uses for dishonestly handling stolen goods, with "reset" - the act of restoring electrical equipment to its factory settings. He does not actually have to reset the phone in order to reset it, so to speak.

I had to look that one up.
http://www.nas.gov.uk/guides/legalTerms.asp#QtoZ
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1995/39/sectio...
Amazing what you can learn on here.

Also, I'm guessing that, despite the identical spelling, they are pronounced differently.

The Scots have some wonderful legal terms: Stouthrief.

Putting aside the likely troll, if the posted account is correct I don't see how a charge of reset could be made to stick.
http://uk.practicallaw.com/books/9781845921521/cha...

[98elise]

Mad Dave said:

If there really is such an innocent explanation then why go No Comment? You can't complain at not being believed when you didn't give an account.

My brother as accused of leaving the scene of an accident, that didn't occur. There was a near miss, but no contact or damage to either car. The police called him to an interview about a number of possible offences.

My brother was advised by a solicitor to provide a written statement of his side, and to answer no questions. The police decided not to continue with any of the offences.

There are some circumstances where "no comment" is the best answer. Its not just for the movies.

[matchmaker]

JM said:

PistonHeed1667 said:

On advice from solicitor I done a 'no comment' interview. Was then bailed.

This whole thread is probably bull-crap, but anyway...

If you gave a "no comment" interview, then maybe they want you to confirm your course of action so they are having to take you to court to get you to speak.

"Was then bailed". Hmmm. If that is the case, then the OP will have been released by the police on his written undertaking to appear in court, usually the next day...we shall see.

And another thing, OP. Where is your stall? The Barras or Paddy's Market?

[Cat]

Red Devil said:

I had to look that one up.
http://www.nas.gov.uk/guides/legalTerms.asp#QtoZ
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1995/39/sectio...
Amazing what you can learn on here.

Also, I'm guessing that, despite the identical spelling, they are pronounced differently.

The pronunciation is the same as the more common usage of the word.

Red Devil said:

The Scots have some wonderful legal terms: Stouthrief.

Yep; hamesucken, plagium, malicious mischief, violating a sepulchre, uttering, culpable and reckless conduct, lewd and libidinous practices etc.

Cat

Edited by Cat on Tuesday 19th August 14:11

[supersport]

zedx19 said:

SV8Predator said:

zedx19 said:

This is definitely a very similar story to the laptop one, almost identical in every way bar handling an iphone instead of a laptop. What is going on here? Troll?

It's the same poster:

PH21736 = PistonHeed1667

What's the point though? Is OP getting a kick out of people offering advise for a non-existent situation?

There was a chap in Porsche section who had three accounts, bigged himself up with the others and exhibited different personas. You could argue he was a nutter Who knows why people behave a certain way online.

[SV8Predator]

Cat said:

Red Devil said:

The Scots have some wonderful legal terms: Stouthrief.

Yep; hamesucken, plagium, malicious mischief, violating a sepulchre, uttering, culpable and reckless conduct, lewd and libidinous practices etc, Cat.

Yup, "Cat" sounds rather kinky though!