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: 5
17
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


LOL - good call! On to Plan B ...




posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


But this is not a gift TO HER. It was a gift to her children. She did not own the gifts, so she should not have tried to return them for refund.
When you take things that do not belong to you, that is theft. When you sign onto charity programs to receive goods without paying anything, then return those things, that is theft. That is the way it is with FOOD STAMPS, too. And WIC. You can only purchase certain items. You cannot return items bought and get a refund for cash. To do so is illegal. IT IS CONSIDERED A FORM OF FRAUD, and getting caught doing it gets you kicked out of the program, with audits run on other similar programs.
This applies to what she did. She signed up to get things for her children FREE. To return them for cash is dishonest at the very least, and smacks of fraud to begin with. If she needed money for other things, don't sign up for things you don't want.

She also 'stole' from some other kids, who would have welcomed any toys or clothes given. Not all the people asking for this would have been accepted. She obviously shouldn't have been given anything.

Your offense is ill-placed. Cops don't need to do this, but they do because they know it means the difference in having any kind of Christmas at all. This is the kind of story that makes many people pause before giving anything the next time this kind of program asks for donation. This type of behavior is why I no longer give to SA bell-ringers, Toys for Tots, and the like.
This mother abused the generosity of someone, stole gifts from her kids, and gives "charity to the needy" at Christmas time a bad name.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 

There are no social programs that cover all your bills, you may think there is but there's not. Poor assumption, I live in the same state as this lady. LEAP will pay her heat; eg, gas bill or electric, people with gas can't have one without the other, they will only pay one. Catholic Charities and Salvation Army can help her w/elec and water only for a month, LIFT UP for food 3 times a yr, she has kids so I would think and hope she's getting help from HUD. Just food for thought, things are not always how we percieve them when we're not standing in others shoes.

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



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


What is the difference between this and someone pretending to have cancer to get money from people?

I say that carefully, because it is possible that she really needed that money for bills, food, etc. If she did, however, there are ways she could have received help. Defrauding a program designed to give kids a happy Christmas is not the way.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


I'm curious to know why you spell it Amerika..

Do you perhaps speak native Japanese and are un-aware that when it is translated into english that the proper spelling is "America."?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Miraj
 


German roots (sp) indicating America is a fascist state - just a guess...



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


You know that someone cannot be arrested, jailed, and charged by one cop, right? The cop's superior has to have a say, as does the prosecutor. This involves more than a "rage-filled cop."



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Those whom oppose your view are simply identifying that your " hatred ' for the cops ( bare in mind I have little respect for any LEO ), is based off emotion. Time and time again throughout your argument, you have not only failed to submit facts that would be on the contrary, but you have lacked the ability to conjure up a constructive thought that would debunk the those whom disagree with you. Yes, i have noticed personal inquiries to your personal life. However, those who have, were simply trying to establish a scenario based question to you. Instead of acknowledging this fact, you took these inquiries as a personal attack to you. Which is clearly not the case.
Um, no one here has any right, nor is it jermaine to the discussion, any personal details from me or any other poster. It shows a clear lack of debate skill to keep harping on about me personally.

I do not have to debunk anything either, what is there for me to debunk? This makes no sense.

I never claimed to be emotionless, nor do I consider it a flaw, unless you are basing a LEGAL decision upon pure emotion, as in the case of this cop.

Why in the world would any poster NEED my PERSONAL information, to formulate made up scenerio based questions for??



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch
I agree that going to jail for this is extreme and should not have happened.
All of you that say that there are social programs that help with bills, well I know for a fact, that they only give you a small amount for your electric bill..I had to use it once..they do not help with your rent, or medicine, at least not in my town.
That being said..if she really did need money for something, she should have told the cop that she needed money for that purpose, instead of gifts. At least, they may have tried to help.
I also think it's horrible to take away presents from her kids..I'm sorry, I've lived extremely poor before and I would never do that.
I would never do that either, but I will never agree with jailing someone for returning a gift. That is gross abuse of the justice system.

And I doubt the cop would have helped, he is such a control freak that he ripped apart a family he claims he was trying to help all because someone did not utilize his gift in the manner HE saw fit.

He did not help those kids at all. He harmed them! Not their mother, she did nothing legally wrong, imo.

Thanks for your opinion, Freelunch.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by GirlGenius
reply to post by LadySkadi
 


You put that very well. I feel sorry for her kids; boy, they must have been disappointed. What a scammer! People need to get involved with their churches and community centers, whether they need or want to give help. We have to support each other.
I am pretty sure the kids were more disppointed, and frightened and scared and confused, when the same cops who were supposed to help them ended up ripping apart their family instead.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Fake Acid Attack Victim Charged With Theft For Taking Donations
newsone.com...

intent of taking donations for personal gain other than what the intended donation was meant for is theft by deceit

if the woman signed up for the gift of toys and clothes knowing that she would just be returning them for cash, then she knowingly commited fraud



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Strange that there was no report on the kids. What happened to them when mama was arrested...
Did she even stay the night in jail?
edit on 20-12-2010 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Those whom oppose your view are simply identifying that your " hatred ' for the cops ( bare in mind I have little respect for any LEO ), is based off emotion. Time and time again throughout your argument, you have not only failed to submit facts that would be on the contrary, but you have lacked the ability to conjure up a constructive thought that would debunk the those whom disagree with you. Yes, i have noticed personal inquiries to your personal life. However, those who have, were simply trying to establish a scenario based question to you. Instead of acknowledging this fact, you took these inquiries as a personal attack to you. Which is clearly not the case.
Um, no one here has any right, nor is it jermaine to the discussion, any personal details from me or any other poster. It shows a clear lack of debate skill to keep harping on about me personally.

I do not have to debunk anything either, what is there for me to debunk? This makes no sense.

I never claimed to be emotionless, nor do I consider it a flaw, unless you are basing a LEGAL decision upon pure emotion, as in the case of this cop.

Why in the world would any poster NEED my PERSONAL information, to formulate made up scenerio based questions for??





Because clearly, submitted facts and definitions of intent is a concept you are unable to process. So with that, those posters who inquired within your personal standpoint were simply trying to put things in perspective, or " lamens terms".



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
I have yet to see in any article where the "cop" was "full of rage".

He was extremely disappointed and probably bewildered as to why the children's mother would
sign them up for a program that specifically takes children out for a fun day, lets them select their own
gifts, only to turn around and sell them back for the cash.

You sound as though this cop is someone you have a personal gripe against, almost.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 



I would never do that either, but I will never agree with jailing someone for returning a gift.


You seem very emotionally attached to this story, which is all fine and dandy, but you're being irrational. Your vehement "rogue cop" theory and continued insistence that she has only been arrested for returning gifts is false. She was arrested for theft by deception under $300. She will be prosecuted for thefy by deception under $300, not for returning gifts.

Furthermore, re: The rogue cop idea, theory, whatever;

After consulting with the county attorney and the district court judge, deputies arrested Amanda J. Beard, 28, of Brandenburg on a warrant for theft by deception under $300


Source: CBS affiliate

You'll notice multiple people were involved before a warrant was issued, not just one rogue cop who got his feelings hurt as you maintain. The burden of proof here is on the prosecutor and she will have her day in court. The proof seems pretty compelling based on the article, as I doubt the law says "unless you have mitigating circumstances." Perhaps she has a very compelling reason for doing what she did, it's hard to tell with the limited information available.

From what we have available though, it seems to me that this mother stole her children's gifts and sold them for all intents and purposes.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Pimpish
 


How am I emotionally attatched to this story? I found out about this morning, and this is called bringing it to the board for debate. My debate style is the same as it is in this thread, across all my threads. Stop projecting onto me and stick to debating the topic.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
]I would never do that either, but I will never agree with jailing someone for returning a gift. That is gross abuse of the justice system.


the arrest wasn't about just returning gifts

she was arrested for commiting fraud against a charitable organization



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Your emotionally attached just by the very means you " attack " this officer with your utter disgust. Not based on facts ( which by the way, he confronted the D.A. which gave him the go ), but based on his alleged actions that you obviously didn't agree with. your past comments on this thread of yours has been based off emotion, nothing more.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Your emotionally attached just by the very means you " attack " this officer with your utter disgust. Not based on facts ( which by the way, he confronted the D.A. which gave him the go ), but based on his alleged actions that you obviously didn't agree with. your past comments on this thread of yours has been based off emotion, nothing more.
And? So? My emotions do not change the facts in the case as we know them thus far.

Is there a point here, or are you just going to continue the personal statements?



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join