It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mom Accused Of Being Grinch: Returns Shop With A Cop Merchandise For Cash

page: 10
17
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 10:33 AM
link   
i wonder if the police force got to keep a percentage of the overall money collected like one of the users in this thread mentioned.

if so, i wonder if they made it known they would be keeping a percentage, while they were accepting the donations.

if not, i wonder if that falls under "theft by deception".

if so, i wonder who will be arresting these officers.




posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi
Theft by deception... A victim-less crime? It appears the mother intentionally entered the program to shop with the cop for gifts for her children that she planned to return for cash, from the beginning. She got what was coming to her. Poor kids. What a pity to have a mother, such as she...


ETA:
If she needed money to pay for bills, as others have suggested, there are other social programs in place to help families in need. One does NOT use their children in such a way. This program was voluntarily entered into with intent to deceive the cop out of money and rob her kids. Truly disgusting.


edit on 20-12-2010 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)


What?!

You have evidence / proof that the mother *intentionally* entered the program to make cash?

Do you also have proof /evidence that she *planned* to do this right from the start?

I'd like to see that please.

If you don't have evidence or proof, you are making a groundless judgement...something that seems to be rampant in America at the moment.

You have heard of an evidential process haven't you? It's a little something the authorities require in order to prosecute a crime...i know it's a pain having to actually produce evidence of a crime just to throw someone in jail, but that's how a free society works...gut feeling or suspicion does not count as proof of anything...thankfully.

Perhaps you'd be better off living in China or N. Korea, or some other Mickey Mouse state, where such things are often forgotten about?

I agree that the mother could be seen as being ungrateful and churlish, but that isn't a crime..certainly not anything to be thrown into jail for anyway.

I also think that the police tried to do a noble thing by these families, although i don't think their motives were *entirely* unselfish..an element of community relations with the police was probably the prime agenda.
Either way, the police realised what an ungrateful woman the mum is, and decided to get revenge on her by throwing her into jail.

That is *not* justified and that is *not* the rule of law. I have sympathy for police forces all over the world, many do a fantastic job, in the face of real danger and hostility from some of the public, but throwing out lawful procedures and trails of evidence simply because they didn't like the woman or her ungrateful attitude is *not* right, or lawful.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by RelentlessLurker
i wonder if the police force got to keep a percentage of the overall money collected like one of the users in this thread mentioned.

if so, i wonder if they made it known they would be keeping a percentage, while they were accepting the donations.

if not, i wonder if that falls under "theft by deception".

if so, i wonder who will be arresting these officers.


Let's be realistic.

Charities do not run themselves.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 11:07 AM
link   
I used to be a military police officer.. never really had to deal with this issue really,, it seems to me that the mother was using the system.. weather she did or did not enter into the program with that expressed purpose is for the court to decide. it seems to me by reading all the articles that I have a few facts of my own.

1. she is under prior investigation for misusing state programs .I,E food stamps , well fare.
2. Two of her kids father say that they give money to them and that they were not in need of said program.
3. she has a previous record of theft
4. she is not under arrest for returning gifts she is under arrest for fraud under 300 bucks

The way the O.P spins and puts her own take on the story with the name calling to the cops saying they are dirty in my experience she has a bias weather it be her own criminal past with the cops that she feels she was wronged on. or she could have gotten a ticket she felt wasn't justified.

It is a crime people.. just because there is a holiday doesn't mean crime takes one.. people will always do these things.. don't let the holiday get in the way of your judgment of the story. If she is in the right than her lawyer will get her more money than she knows what to do with. If the dozen or so other people who charged her with a crime are right than she will be convicted.. not all "mom"s deserve their kids,dads are no exception either here..



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Here's another story of a mom who stole Christmas gifts from her kids and sold them. She bought crack coc aine with the money. She will be charged with theft along with other charges. Curious to see how many of you have sympathy for this mom?

Police: Belleville mom sold kids' Christmas presents for crack
www.stltoday.com...



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by virraszto
Here's another story of a mom who stole Christmas gifts from her kids and sold them. She bought crack coc aine with the money. She will be charged with theft along with other charges. Curious to see how many of you have sympathy for this mom?

Police: Belleville mom sold kids' Christmas presents for crack
www.stltoday.com...


It just leads into what I was saying that she was already under investigation. I wonder if the O.P feelings on the matter at all? I don't think I've seen her on for a few pages.. thanks for the new article and bring some logic back into this thread.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I am proud of you, Tater. I read lots of your posts here, and enjoy reading your viewpoints. To see you take such a stance on liberty in this instance is very nice.


You are right. The mom is a piece of crap. But what she did was not illegal. What if what the kids picked out is not meeting her approval? What if she wants to return 1 or 2 things to get money to buy a cousin (who is also poor) a little something, too?

This is a bait. They offered a gift, and when they felt insulted by what she did they misused their authority. I hope they get reprimanded for it.

And then i hope CPS looks into this mother and makes sure she isn't using the kids milk money for crack.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I am proud of you, Tater. I read lots of your posts here, and enjoy reading your viewpoints. To see you take such a stance on liberty in this instance is very nice.


You are right. The mom is a piece of crap. But what she did was not illegal. What if what the kids picked out is not meeting her approval? What if she wants to return 1 or 2 things to get money to buy a cousin (who is also poor) a little something, too?

This is a bait. They offered a gift, and when they felt insulted by what she did they misused their authority. I hope they get reprimanded for it.

And then i hope CPS looks into this mother and makes sure she isn't using the kids milk money for crack.


It has been proven time and again that she did brake the law. If she approved is irrelevant and itheir is proof if you read back a few pages that she damn near returned every thing.. I don't think coats need to be subject to her approval.

This is not bait, they gave her Children gifts and yes most any one would feel insulted when you return it and buy drugs. also I don't thank that a dozen or so people who are working on this case are misusing their authority. far from it I hope that CPS does look into it and take this women's kids and return them to their father. that away she cannot abuse the system.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by virraszto
Here's another story of a mom who stole Christmas gifts from her kids and sold them. She bought crack coc aine with the money. She will be charged with theft along with other charges. Curious to see how many of you have sympathy for this mom?

Police: Belleville mom sold kids' Christmas presents for crack
www.stltoday.com...


Two different women, two different stories. As said before, anything is possible and just because it is assumed that the subject of this thread "took the presents" from her kids, does not mean she should be "lumped" in with a
person that is a KNOWN drug addict with an article that is full of information.

Just because "grinch mom" is supposedly been in trouble over food stamps, and who here knows this is not a "revenge" tactic by two of her baby daddy's....there is a lack of info to make any solid judgments against her at all.

From the info available in this instance, I do get that the officer and FOP were the ones bent out of shape more than anything and took action on their own assumptions of "teaching" this woman a lesson.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Reaper2137
 


Perhaps. I had this thread open for awhile on my task bar...and it grew since i started typing my response.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Its ok.. I am not used to disagreeing with you.. you have a thoughtful insight but in this case I had to due to what I had already read. thanks for the debate tho



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
The woman exploited her children for cash. That's a big no-no, the kind of stuff that Social Services takes your kids for.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Ok people I am going to say it, you know where you go when you want drugs, to the city,,,this is well known, She "got her wallet stolen in Louisville"? A big city with just as much of a bad rep as Detroit... I think they list it as the second worse place to live right after Detroit. She bought drugs I would bet my life on it. It may have been different if she said it was ripped off in her hometown, or even that she got it snatched from her house, but the Louisville thing is just too obvious!!!!!



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


1) she applied to this program, yet she returned toys that were duplicates??

this goes to show that she in fact didn't need this program, her children already got enough toys

2) programs like this don't just accept an unlimited number of people... because she enrolled in it, some children are going without this year

3) regardless if she used the money for bills or drugs... the intent of the program is to make sure children that would have no christmas toys will have some... she abused this program and desrves to be charged as a criminal for the blatant theft that it is



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


No. Louisville isn't that bad, though I personally prefer Lexington. It definitely isn't even in the top ten worst cities in America. Actually Detroit isn't number one. I think this year Cleveland was voted worst.

It is possible that she was in Louisville shopping, though I do agree with you (though I can't base it on anything) I had the feeling she might have been buying drugs too.
edit on 22-12-2010 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


No, they don't. But some charities manage to magically run on, say, 5% of total donations. While some spend an appalling 80% on overhead. I think quite a few are being deliberately less than efficient. And the creators not uncommonly grant themselves quite sizable salaries. I am going to start a nonprofit for some cause, go door to door, and pocket 80% of the money like a few of our larger charitable organizations. Seems like a good racket to be in.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by virraszto
 


Listen, I think the mom was in the wrong. It is the thought process behind many who see this woman in the wrong that I find alarming. Although they might be right for the wrong reasons, the perspectives of many who responded about this were knee-jerk and emotionally charged. Not only that, but they lacked the emotional intelligence requisite to know that this woman's reality is quite different from their own, and as such, a different lifestyle is mandatory. I am betting that many of the self-righteous do worse things every week. The only difference is that they get away with it, either not getting caught or doing something legal that they know has terrible consequences, all the while knowing that the rest of society is either primarily just as bad or too myopic to know. And hence the sociopaths do this guilt free. And sociopaths and psychopaths also have a notorious tendency to play referee, much like many self-righteous in this thread. Just saying.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by orwellianunenlightenment
reply to post by Annee
 


No, they don't. But some charities manage to magically run on, say, 5% of total donations. While some spend an appalling 80% on overhead. I think quite a few are being deliberately less than efficient. And the creators not uncommonly grant themselves quite sizable salaries. I am going to start a nonprofit for some cause, go door to door, and pocket 80% of the money like a few of our larger charitable organizations. Seems like a good racket to be in.


Yes. But I think or have heard from others - - because I have never actually looked up the data.

Legitimate charities have to be licensed and report their "numbers". It is regulated and available to the public.

I would think the police dept would have to keep records.

Anyway - - I think the Red Cross has an extremely high administrative cost.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Louisville is not that bad if you are fortunate enough to be able to afford to avoid the bad areas. It is not Detroit, but it sure is not a very safe place to live.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


No. Louisville isn't that bad, though I personally prefer Lexington. It definitely isn't even in the top ten worst cities in America. Actually Detroit isn't number one. I think this year Cleveland was voted worst.

It is possible that she was in Louisville shopping, though I do agree with you (though I can't base it on anything) I had the feeling she might have been buying drugs too.
edit on 22-12-2010 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join