How is this robbery?

[mugs]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill
Mira malparido:

GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2006 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current through the 2006 Regular Session ***

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) [v]By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion[/b], or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.



STFU already.

Where in the article does it state that force was used or threatened.

There's an implied "or" between those three statements, just like the implied threat of force when you hand someone a note demanding money.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill
Mira malparido:

GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2006 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current through the 2006 Regular Session ***

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion, or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.



STFU already.

Where in the article does it state that force was used or threatened.

Where the hell did I said it said that? You cannot read legislative codes worth a damn (most 12 year olds cannot), but read section 2 or 3. All the note had to do was coerce the teller. It could have been as simple as saying "Give us the money or else." How the fvck can you sit here and argue it isn't robbery when you don't know the contents of the note? That makes you not only illogical, but likely a chronic masturbator with little time to learn the English language.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

I'm an asshole because i don't care waht you think.OK

Yes. You post on an Internet forum asking a question, and when you get answers that you don't like you act childish.

The question was rhetorical. I got a feeling you don't care for me, maybe you should just avoid my threads. I don't like your condescending name-calling.

You get the feeling I don't care for you? You posted a stupid thread, I made a joke, and you responded with "I don't care what you think." Get over it man, it's not like I kicked your dog or something.

What joke? and yes i don't care what you think.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FoBoT
they took money that didn't belong to them


duh

It seems to me if their is no overt threat of harm to bank employees then the money was just given away.

:roll:


banks don't give away money

you are being obtuse

No i object to the use of the term 'robbery' in this case.

Well, I object to you sharing the fvcking air with me because you are a goddam moron, but I guess I'm just going to have to deal.

Take your name-calling and get out of this thread.

HAH! Like a give a damn what you want. More suicide and less posting, please.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill
Mira malparido:

GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2006 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current through the 2006 Regular Session ***

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion, or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.



STFU already.

Where in the article does it state that force was used or threatened.

Where the hell did I said it said that? You cannot read legislative codes worth a damn (most 12 year olds cannot), but read section 2 or 3. All the note had to do was coerce the teller. It could have been as simple as saying "Give us the money or else." How the fvck can you sit here and argue it isn't robbery when you don't know the contents of the note? That makes you not only illogical, but likely a chronic masturbator with little time to learn the English language.

Know all that mattered it seems in this case is the mere existence of a note. regardless of what were it's contents. What if they were 7- year olds would that still be a threat.
Oh, and don't call me names. You coward.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill
Mira malparido:

GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2006 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current through the 2006 Regular Session ***

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion, or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.



STFU already.

Where in the article does it state that force was used or threatened.

Where the hell did I said it said that? You cannot read legislative codes worth a damn (most 12 year olds cannot), but read section 2 or 3. All the note had to do was coerce the teller. It could have been as simple as saying "Give us the money or else." How the fvck can you sit here and argue it isn't robbery when you don't know the contents of the note? That makes you not only illogical, but likely a chronic masturbator with little time to learn the English language.

Know all that mattered it seems in this case is the mere existence of a note. regardless of what were it's contents. What if they were 7- year olds would that still be a threat.
Oh, and don't call me names. You coward.

Can I get that in English, please?

You seem to forget that they haven't been tried and convicted. They are simply SEARCHING for them and they are ACCUSED of robbery. Do you understand what that means? Let's say I accuse you of being a complete and total moron with zero redeeming qualities. While that may be obviously true, it is still an allegation and not a conviction. This thread, however, is probably evidence enough that my allegation stands.

That being said, do us all a favor. Cut the ends off of a medium length piece of gardenhose. Park your car in the garage with the door down, but keep it running. Insert one end into the tailpipe and the other end into a small crack in your window. Take deep breathes for about 15 minutes.

If that's too complicated then go to Wal-Mart and buy a rifle or shotgun. Stick it under your chin and pull the trigger with your toe. Bye-Bye!

The world would be a better place.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill
Mira malparido:

GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2006 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current through the 2006 Regular Session ***

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion, or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.



STFU already.

Where in the article does it state that force was used or threatened.

Where the hell did I said it said that? You cannot read legislative codes worth a damn (most 12 year olds cannot), but read section 2 or 3. All the note had to do was coerce the teller. It could have been as simple as saying "Give us the money or else." How the fvck can you sit here and argue it isn't robbery when you don't know the contents of the note? That makes you not only illogical, but likely a chronic masturbator with little time to learn the English language.

Know all that mattered it seems in this case is the mere existence of a note. regardless of what were it's contents. What if they were 7- year olds would that still be a threat.
Oh, and don't call me names. You coward.

Can I get that in English, please?

You seem to forget that they haven't been tried and convicted. They are simply SEARCHING for them and they are ACCUSED of robbery. Do you understand what that means? Let's say I accuse you of being a complete and total moron with zero redeeming qualities. While that may be obviously true, it is still an allegation and not a conviction. This thread, however, is probably evidence enough that my allegation stands.

That being said, do us all a favor. Cut the ends off of a medium length piece of gardenhose. Park your car in the garage with the door down, but keep it running. Insert one end into the tailpipe and the other end into a small crack in your window. Take deep breathes for about 15 minutes.

If that's too complicated then go to Wal-Mart and buy a rifle or shotgun. Stick it under your chin and pull the trigger with your toe. Bye-Bye!

The world would be a better place.

OK pal anything you say. Your still a coward.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill
Mira malparido:

GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2006 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current through the 2006 Regular Session ***

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion, or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.



STFU already.

Where in the article does it state that force was used or threatened.

Where the hell did I said it said that? You cannot read legislative codes worth a damn (most 12 year olds cannot), but read section 2 or 3. All the note had to do was coerce the teller. It could have been as simple as saying "Give us the money or else." How the fvck can you sit here and argue it isn't robbery when you don't know the contents of the note? That makes you not only illogical, but likely a chronic masturbator with little time to learn the English language.

Know all that mattered it seems in this case is the mere existence of a note. regardless of what were it's contents. What if they were 7- year olds would that still be a threat.
Oh, and don't call me names. You coward.

Can I get that in English, please?

You seem to forget that they haven't been tried and convicted. They are simply SEARCHING for them and they are ACCUSED of robbery. Do you understand what that means? Let's say I accuse you of being a complete and total moron with zero redeeming qualities. While that may be obviously true, it is still an allegation and not a conviction. This thread, however, is probably evidence enough that my allegation stands.

That being said, do us all a favor. Cut the ends off of a medium length piece of gardenhose. Park your car in the garage with the door down, but keep it running. Insert one end into the tailpipe and the other end into a small crack in your window. Take deep breathes for about 15 minutes.

If that's too complicated then go to Wal-Mart and buy a rifle or shotgun. Stick it under your chin and pull the trigger with your toe. Bye-Bye!

The world would be a better place.

OK pal anything you say. Your still a coward.

You missed the PSA. It should be: "You're still coward."

I'm certainly not a coward, but you probably give Doug Feith a run in his label as "dumbest fvcking guy on the planet."

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Mill
Mira malparido:

GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2006 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current through the 2006 Regular Session ***

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion, or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.



STFU already.

Where in the article does it state that force was used or threatened.

Where the hell did I said it said that? You cannot read legislative codes worth a damn (most 12 year olds cannot), but read section 2 or 3. All the note had to do was coerce the teller. It could have been as simple as saying "Give us the money or else." How the fvck can you sit here and argue it isn't robbery when you don't know the contents of the note? That makes you not only illogical, but likely a chronic masturbator with little time to learn the English language.

Know all that mattered it seems in this case is the mere existence of a note. regardless of what were it's contents. What if they were 7- year olds would that still be a threat.
Oh, and don't call me names. You coward.

Can I get that in English, please?

You seem to forget that they haven't been tried and convicted. They are simply SEARCHING for them and they are ACCUSED of robbery. Do you understand what that means? Let's say I accuse you of being a complete and total moron with zero redeeming qualities. While that may be obviously true, it is still an allegation and not a conviction. This thread, however, is probably evidence enough that my allegation stands.

That being said, do us all a favor. Cut the ends off of a medium length piece of gardenhose. Park your car in the garage with the door down, but keep it running. Insert one end into the tailpipe and the other end into a small crack in your window. Take deep breathes for about 15 minutes.

If that's too complicated then go to Wal-Mart and buy a rifle or shotgun. Stick it under your chin and pull the trigger with your toe. Bye-Bye!

The world would be a better place.

OK pal anything you say. Your still a coward.

You missed the PSA. It should be: "You're still coward."

I'm certainly not a coward, but you probably give Doug Feith a run in his label as "dumbest fvcking guy on the planet."

Are you ugly? You must be to be so hateful to someone you have never met.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Up until this October this store was right down the street from where I lived. Very upscale area, meaning that its most likely these girls came from some good background.

(I shopped at Publix across the street from this Kroger - cheaper/nicer/etc). The area is home to 300-1M homes.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Know all that mattered it seems in this case is the mere existence of a note. regardless of what were it's contents.

No, the contents of the note are very imprtant.

I reveiwed about a dozen or legal cases of bank robbery where a note was used, including some apeals dealing almost strictly with the wording of a note.

The wording of the note will be quite important as to whether this can be prosecuted as a robbery.

If the note was sufficiently benign, so that the teller couldn't fear for his/her life I suppose they could be prosecuted for larceny. This could be an interesting case..

Fern

 

[FoBoT]

maybe ManyBeers was right?

new info

MARCH 1--Police tonight arrested two young women, a bank teller, and a fourth accomplice in connection with Tuesday's robbery of a Bank of America branch in Acworth, Georgia. The inside job was allegedly pulled off by Ashley Nicole Miller and Heather Johnston, both 19, with the assistance of bank employee Benny Herman Allen, 22, and Michael Chastang, 27. While the incident appeared to be a bank robbery, cops now consider it a felony theft and have charged the quartet accordingly. Miller and Johnson were captured by a bank surveillance camera as they stood smiling at a counter after handing a teller a note demanding money.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0228073bandits1.html

 

[imported_Shivetya]

typical of crooks, they stayed in the area of the crime, less than 20 miles away!!!

 

[Pacemaker]

If the note said, "May I have some money?" and it was given to them, how is that even theft? That would be like saying if I ask my friend for 5 bucks and he gives it to me I'm stealing it from him. You could argue that banks don't give out money, but I would say they do everyday, and they are called loans. How could you say that they weren't just asking for a loan when someone handed them a wad of cash?

I'm aware that most likely the note said something threatening or was worded in a threatening way, but if it wasn't then how could it have been a crime at all? If anything the teller stole the money and gave it to someone who asked the teller nicely for money.

 

[SonnyDaze]

Originally posted by: Pacemaker
If the note said, "May I have some money?" and it was given to them, how is that even theft? That would be like saying if I ask my friend for 5 bucks and he gives it to me I'm stealing it from him. You could argue that banks don't give out money, but I would say they do everyday, and they are called loans. How could you say that they weren't just asking for a loan when someone handed them a wad of cash?

I'm aware that most likely the note said something threatening or was worded in a threatening way, but if it wasn't then how could it have been a crime at all? If anything the teller stole the money and gave it to someone who asked the teller nicely for money.

Good job super sleuth. It's a moot point now anyways. Obviously an inside job, so robbery will be thrown out and they'll be charged with felony theft.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: Tobolo
Wow these chicks are hot. They are going to get loved on in Jail.

I was thinking they are going to be worth a lot of smokes in the pokey

 

[ManyBeers]

bump

 

[allisolm]

How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

Because since the teller was involved it was not a robbery but i believe a conspiracy to defraud, or simple theft. By the way are you insane or on some kind of medication for your delusions?

 

[Born2bwire]

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

This thread just keeps delivering.

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

Because since the teller was involved it was not a robbery but i believe a conspiracy to defraud.

I missed the part where you said that you did not think it was a robbery because you couldn't understand the term "implied" but rather due to the fact that it was an inside job.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Born2bwire

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

This thread just keeps delivering.

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

Because since the teller was involved it was not a robbery but i believe a conspiracy to defraud.

I missed the part where you said that you did not think it was a robbery because you couldn't understand the term "implied" but rather due to the fact that it was an inside job.

I know what implied means. It is my contention they posed no threat to anyone regardless of what the note said. Maybe banks shouldn't just hand over money based on words printed on paper but only when a clear overt threat has been made. Perhaps visible weapons, physical intimidation, i don't know.

Maybe the note was nothing but an idle threat. If they brought no weapons to back up their threat, then that's all it was. Right?

 

[TheAdvocate]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Know all that mattered it seems in this case is the mere existence of a note. regardless of what were it's contents.

No, the contents of the note are very imprtant.

I reveiwed about a dozen or legal cases of bank robbery where a note was used, including some apeals dealing almost strictly with the wording of a note.

The wording of the note will be quite important as to whether this can be prosecuted as a robbery.

If the note was sufficiently benign, so that the teller couldn't fear for his/her life I suppose they could be prosecuted for larceny. This could be an interesting case..

Fern

Really, what it comes down to is what class felony they're convicted of, if they don't find a way to plead it down to a misdemeanor. This obsession with trying the case on a statutorily technical level without half the evidence in consideration is absolutely ridiculous.

Maybe it would help "manybeers" to understand that the prosecution MUST assert the highest level charge that they they can indict for, or else be barred from seeking it later. Therefore, they shoot for the moon everytime. Better safe than sorry.

And to get your panties out of their wad, it usually gets sorted out by the grand jury, and if not, the actual trial will expose whatever flaws are inherent in the case. You're acting as if these girls are already tried and convicted. It's ridiculous.

I did enjoy the pwnage by Mill though. That was fun.

 

[allisolm]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

Because since the teller was involved it was not a robbery but i believe a conspiracy to defraud, or simple theft. By the way are you insane or on some kind of medication for your delusions?

Ah, rather like saying that Britney Spears is rich because she's brilliant and, when it's shown that her IQ has nothing to do with it, saying "see, I was right, she's rich."

I got it.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: TheAdvocate

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Know all that mattered it seems in this case is the mere existence of a note. regardless of what were it's contents.

No, the contents of the note are very imprtant.

I reveiwed about a dozen or legal cases of bank robbery where a note was used, including some apeals dealing almost strictly with the wording of a note.

The wording of the note will be quite important as to whether this can be prosecuted as a robbery.

If the note was sufficiently benign, so that the teller couldn't fear for his/her life I suppose they could be prosecuted for larceny. This could be an interesting case..

Fern

Really, what it comes down to is what class felony they're convicted of, if they don't find a way to plead it down to a misdemeanor. This obsession with trying the case on a statutorily technical level without half the evidence in consideration is absolutely ridiculous.

Maybe it would help "manybeers" to understand that the prosecution MUST assert the highest level charge that they they can indict for, or else be barred from seeking it later. Therefore, they shoot for the moon everytime. Better safe than sorry.

And to get your panties out of their wad, it usually gets sorted out by the grand jury, and if not, the actual trial will expose whatever flaws are inherent in the case. You're acting as if these girls are already tried and convicted. It's ridiculous.

I did enjoy the pwnage by Mill though. That was fun.

It's ManyBeers thank you.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: allisolm

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

Because since the teller was involved it was not a robbery but i believe a conspiracy to defraud, or simple theft. By the way are you insane or on some kind of medication for your delusions?

Ah, rather like saying that Britney Spears is rich because she's brilliant and, when it's shown that her IQ has nothing to do with it, saying "see, I was right, she's rich."

I got it.

You are obviously much more intelligent than me, why do you bother with me? I'm not worth your trouble. I admit it, i am wrong and you're right. In fact you are better than me... Yes?No?