My point has been he either stole it or his bought it at a 75 percent discount as he claims. We really don't know because thieves are pretty good liars too.
tie
one minute you are actually admitting the truth, that you really dont know what the truth is, because thieves are pretty good liars.
interesting thought that statement. when you extrapolate that a bit further using your method of deduction, because ups management are pretty good liars, then that would make them thieves as well?
Fact is he either stole the phone or bought it at a 75 percent discount knowing the thing was hot.
you are also stretching the truth of knowledge when you state that he bought it knowing it was hot. not fact, supposition on your part and the panel agreed. remember, ups management set in on this. they had a 50% say. so what the heck was it that they heard or didn't hear that made them think your/their LP department was way off base and brought the guy back to work? your guys. ups ,management. so they screwed up in your opinion? they heard the evidence and said he was not guilty. but you are assuming a lot of things and allowing your distaste for 705 to cloud your judgment to assume that he is guilty beyond doubt.
your usual discerning judgment has been turned off on this one. way off base
thief or receiver of stolen goods. Same thing a thief.
if that is the case, why not shut down all flea markets, ebay, pawn shops, etc. i guess the legal system does not see it your way?
Could he be an accomplice? Nobody knows that he wasn't. Besides without this person in question there wouldn't have been a market for the stolen merchandise. Kinda like a prostitute and a john. The john isn't the prostitute, yet he can be guilty of a crime.
89, maybe a lot of things. maybe he had help from the aliens in area 51?
nobody knows he wasnt, but nobody knows he was either. maybe you helped out? if i think that, does it make it so? after all, in your statement, why would i need proof?
what we do try and do in this country before we execute or jail someone is to have pretty good evidence of guilt. its called proof. and from the sounds of the evidence shown at the hearing, they did their deductions like you and tie. he could done this, he could done that. hell, why not charge him with an unsolved murder, after all, thieves are good liars, good liars also have murdered, charge him with first degree murder.
youve got the cart before the horse. he is not guilty until guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt. they tried to do that at a panel of 50% union, 50% management. and they determined that the proof was not there. and all these possible dream situations that you, tie and the lp guy dreamed up were just that. wet dreams designed to get a stupid kid fired. they did that, after hearing all the evidence presented. wonder why??????????
btw, a john is not charged with prostitution, its called solicitation. looking for one is not a crime, but if you will take the time to learn, paying for the services is where the crime takes place.
stupidity is not currently a crime. they did not charge him with possession of a stolen phone, they did not charge him with buying stolen goods. they charged him with stealing the phone. period. that is what the charge is. and the evidence shows????????
d