How is this robbery?

[Fern]

Originally posted by: KLin

Originally posted by: SSSnail
They will be all charged with bank robbery or conspiracy to bank robbery, and also felony theft. What's the argument again?

The OP contends that without a weapon, robbery wasn't committed. I contend the note was the weapon, and robbery was committed.

This has been addressed in my previous post(s). The lack of a weapon is irrelevant here (although if they had one it would likely have been an aggrevating circumstance and resulted in additional charges).

The note is very important in cases (except this one - see below). If the wording of the note if found to explictly or implicitely threaten the teller, the crime rises to level of Robbery.

If there is no threat, as in this case, it cannot rise to the level robbery (notwithstanding the "snatch" provision) but will be a different crime, such as felony theft etc.

There was no threat here, no matter what the note did or didn't say because the teller was in on it (an accomplice). So. hHe couldn't have feared for his life etc.

Just google "bank robbery note". Those 3 words are more than sufficient to direct you to the many court cases discussing the pertinent law(s).

Fern

 

[Project86]

The courts also consider the situation. Do you have a legitimate reason to fear for your safety? The answer can be largely dependent upon the circumstances. For example:

1) Someone calls you on your home phone and says "give me your wallet."

In this case, you have obviously not been robbed. You are safe in your own home. If you agree to meet the caller and give him your wallet, based solely on that single "give me your wallet" statement, you have not been robbed... there would have to be some other threats made, and they would have to be reasonably believable.

2) Someone approaches you in a dark alley and says "give me your wallet."

This is the exact same statement, but in this case it is reasonable to assume you are in danger if you do not comply. You give the guy your wallet, and call the police, who later catch the guy. He will be charged with robbery. The only difference between scenario 1 and scenario 2 is the circumstances. I believe that this bank situation (at face value, before all the inside job fraud info came out) is similar to scenario 2, where it is reasonable to fear for your safety, thus making it a robbery.

 

[DainBramaged]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Shlong
Picture
CNN Article

They look real threatening,

I'd hit them.

 

[bignateyk]

uhh.. regardless of whether the tellers were in on it, it was still a robbery.

They were still robbing the bank..

 

[erickj92]

I would be Sh**ing my pants!!!

 

[erickj92]

P.S. wre they hot?

 

[imported_cheapdude]

I'd hit both of them.

 

[iamaelephant]

Originally posted by: erickj92
P.S. wre they hot?

RTFT or GTFO