PDA

View Full Version : question for lawyers


Wake2wake
07-08-2009, 04:07 AM
OK I'm just curious, because I'm sure we have some lawyers out there.
here is the situation, A group of kids goes pool hopping and goes into a neighborhood pool and goes for a swim, doesn't break anything or cause any problems. the person in charge of the pool comes down and calls the cops. three individuals are arrested and charged with trespassing and vandalism. now what the guy from the pool told them before the police got there was that the vandalism had occurred on a different night in the last month and the amount of vandalism was over $12,000. but that they are going to be charged for it because they "broke in" tonight so he "knows" that they have done it before.

now my question is, can they be charged with the vandalism even though it occurred on a night other than the one they were trespassing on?

Thanks for any help or advice anyone can lend.

Ben
07-08-2009, 08:39 AM
I'm going to guess a lawyer won't reply - they have this funny rule about not giving legal advice unless you're their client or something like that.

IMO, that is friggin crazy, I would think a 10 year representing the kids should be able to argue that one. Without clear proof, it seems impossible to be able to say far sure they did the previous damage. But that's just me.

Unless there are videotapes, and the guy really does "know".

bigmac
07-08-2009, 08:44 AM
I can give advice because I'm not a lawyer. So take it with a grain of salt.

Relative to the criminal case you're talking about, the decision as to what to charge them with isn't made by the pool guy nor by the police. That decision will be made by the prosecuting attorney and the charges he/she elects to file will be based on what he/she can prove in court.

The pool's owners could, however, elect to sue the ones caught in civil court for the damages. The burden of proof is a little simpler - all they'd have to do is convince a jury or judge that those were "probably" the kids who did it. Most civil juries will still want some kind of hard evidence, though.

BriEOD
07-08-2009, 09:45 AM
Not a lawyer, but work in federal law enforcement and have been to federal court plenty of times.

Mac is pretty spot on. Only the district/county attorney can pursue criminal charges. The pool owner makes the complaint and the police collect the evidence and write the report before passing it to the attorney. I'm sure their is more to the story than what you have provided. But, assuming it is just coincidental it doesn't sound like a high probability of a successful prosecution exists.

In criminal cases to return a guilty verdict the judge/jury must find the defendant(s) is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (like over 90% sure). However, in civil court the judge/jury just has to be 51% sure of guilt.

flipper
07-08-2009, 10:12 AM
OK I'm just curious, because I'm sure we have some lawyers out there.
here is the situation, A group of kids goes pool hopping and goes into a neighborhood pool and goes for a swim, doesn't break anything or cause any problems. the person in charge of the pool comes down and calls the cops. three individuals are arrested and charged with trespassing and vandalism. now what the guy from the pool told them before the police got there was that the vandalism had occurred on a different night in the last month and the amount of vandalism was over $12,000. but that they are going to be charged for it because they "broke in" tonight so he "knows" that they have done it before.

now my question is, can they be charged with the vandalism even though it occurred on a night other than the one they were trespassing on?

Thanks for any help or advice anyone can lend.


Just stay out of his D@MN POOL!!!!!:D

JimN
07-08-2009, 10:27 AM
I'm going to guess a lawyer won't reply - they have this funny rule about not giving legal advice unless you're their client or something like that.

IMO, that is friggin crazy, I would think a 10 year representing the kids should be able to argue that one. Without clear proof, it seems impossible to be able to say far sure they did the previous damage. But that's just me.

Unless there are videotapes, and the guy really does "know".

I was told by a lawyer, after asking a casual question when he happened to be at the store where I worked, that he can legally bill me for any legal advice he gives whether I contact him at his office or not. The fact that he was the store's lawyer didn't matter and he explained the precedent that was established by a doctor who billed someone who asked for medical advice at a party. To Ed's credit, he then asked, "So, off the record, what did you want to know?"

The burden of proof would be on the accuser. If there's no proof but everyone in town says "Yeah, it sounds like something they would do", it might not go well for the kids but the judge would probably instruct the jury (if there is one) to make sure the evidence points to the kids in question. This all changes if the case is assigned to 'The hangin' judge".

jdl xstar
07-08-2009, 10:47 AM
....he can legally bill me for any legal advice he gives whether I contact him at his office or not. The fact that he was the store's lawyer didn't matter and he explained the precedent that was established by a doctor who billed someone who asked for medical advice at a party. To Ed's credit, he then asked, "So, off the record, what did you want to know?"

That is slimy. I couldn't imagine gettig a bill from someone for casual legal/medical advice. You technical guys on this board could make a killing for charging all us for the advice you give about our boats!

JohnE
07-08-2009, 10:58 AM
That is slimy. I couldn't imagine gettig a bill from someone for casual legal/medical advice. You technical guys on this board could make a killing for charging all us for the advice you give about our boats!


Check your mailbox, Jim sent out invoices on the 1st.:D

rholmes
07-08-2009, 11:11 AM
Check your mailbox, Jim sent out invoices on the 1st.:D

Nice, that is funny right there!

bigmac
07-08-2009, 11:36 AM
That is slimy. I couldn't imagine gettig a bill from someone for casual legal/medical advice. You technical guys on this board could make a killing for charging all us for the advice you give about our boats!Relax, it can't and doesn't happen. A debt can't be incurred without a contractual relationship. Asking a question of a doctor or a lawyer at a party or on the internet (or a service tech on this board) doesn't imply a contract, therefore no debt, therefore no valid bill can be sent.

bigmac
07-08-2009, 11:45 AM
The burden of proof would be on the accuser. If there's no proof but everyone in town says "Yeah, it sounds like something they would do", it might not go well for the kids but the judge would probably instruct the jury (if there is one) to make sure the evidence points to the kids in question. This all changes if the case is assigned to 'The hangin' judge".

I assume you're talking about a civil lawsuit. In a criminal case, the burden of proof is on the state/county/city through the prosecuting attorney's office. And without reasonable proof, criminal charges would never be filed in the first place.

That will be $75 please.

MYMC
07-08-2009, 11:59 AM
Relax, it can't and doesn't happen. A debt can't be incurred without a contractual relationship. Asking a question of a doctor or a lawyer at a party or on the internet (or a service tech on this board) doesn't imply a contract, therefore no debt, therefore no valid bill can be sent.
Offer & acceptance...There must be evidence that the parties had each from an objective perspective engaged in conduct manifesting their assent, and a contract will be formed when the parties have met such a requirement. An objective perspective means that it is only necessary that somebody gives the impression of offering or accepting contractual terms in the eyes of a reasonable person, not that they actually did want to form a contract.

bigmac
07-08-2009, 01:03 PM
Offer & acceptance...There must be evidence that the parties had each from an objective perspective engaged in conduct manifesting their assent, and a contract will be formed when the parties have met such a requirement. An objective perspective means that it is only necessary that somebody gives the impression of offering or accepting contractual terms in the eyes of a reasonable person, not that they actually did want to form a contract.

Right. And a reasonable person would expect that compensation terms would be disclosed out as part of the contract offered.

JimN
07-08-2009, 01:03 PM
That is slimy. I couldn't imagine gettig a bill from someone for casual legal/medical advice. You technical guys on this board could make a killing for charging all us for the advice you give about our boats!

Well, what is the cost to a doctor or lawyer when they go through school and set up their practice? It's substantial and while many do work Pro Bono, they set their rates according to the desired payout. If I had my own forum, I'd be able to charge what I wanted but since this is MC's, they wouldn't allow it.

JimN
07-08-2009, 01:06 PM
Relax, it can't and doesn't happen. A debt can't be incurred without a contractual relationship. Asking a question of a doctor or a lawyer at a party or on the internet (or a service tech on this board) doesn't imply a contract, therefore no debt, therefore no valid bill can be sent.

The precedent is there but since "reasonable person" was thrown out there, if we had more of them, the kids would never have broken in and done the damage and sleazy people wouldn't do what they do.

JohnE
07-08-2009, 01:11 PM
So does all this mean I do or do not owe Bigmac some dough? I've asked him several questions, one clearly in a PM.

And if boat advice is being billed, I'm really screwed.:D

Mike, what oil should I run again in my MCX? And how do I change the damn impeller?

bigmac
07-08-2009, 01:16 PM
The precedent is there but since "reasonable person" was thrown out there, if we had more of them, the kids would never have broken in and done the damage and sleazy people wouldn't do what they do.

I doubt that the precedent is there, but if you can provide it, I'd be very interested to see it.

Naturally, one could send a bill for such a non-contractual advice (if one is a big enough @sshole), but the recipient could just throw it away without legal recourse.

bigmac
07-08-2009, 01:19 PM
So does all this mean I do or do not owe Bigmac some dough? I've asked him several questions, one clearly in a PM.


:D Happy to let it slide, unless JimN can find that I have a legal leg to stand on.

flipper
07-08-2009, 01:19 PM
Somebody better check with UMP. He's premed

JohnE
07-08-2009, 01:26 PM
Somebody better check with UMP. He's premed


Yeah but Stu is Mensa.

JimN
07-08-2009, 01:28 PM
I doubt that the precedent is there, but if you can provide it, I'd be very interested to see it.

Naturally, one could send a bill for such a non-contractual advice (if one is a big enough @sshole), but the recipient could just throw it away without legal recourse.

Remember, this was in Wisconsin, where the inmates have killed the wardens, burned the place and are going around stealing wallets and purses so they can build a new place that's nicer for them but not for the rest of us. It was also in the early '80s and we're talking about some lawyers, after all. No offense to the good ones.

east tx skier
07-08-2009, 01:45 PM
Offer & acceptance...There must be evidence that the parties had each from an objective perspective engaged in conduct manifesting their assent, and a contract will be formed when the parties have met such a requirement. An objective perspective means that it is only necessary that somebody gives the impression of offering or accepting contractual terms in the eyes of a reasonable person, not that they actually did want to form a contract.

Don't forget mutuality of consideration. No charge ... because I can't. And that wasn't legal advice. :)

TMCNo1
07-08-2009, 01:51 PM
Ya'll need to quit reading the Visitor Guide in the room at the Holiday Inn Express and stick to the local amusement brochure rack in the lobby!:rolleyes::D Man am I lost!

stx22
07-08-2009, 03:03 PM
Wake, not as simple as many have put it, but some of the earlier posts aren't completely wrong. If you want a general run down of the process, shoot me a pm.

p.s. Never a good idea to solicit legal advice on the this board at 3am, or any time...

Wake2wake
07-08-2009, 09:57 PM
just to be clear i am not one of the people who was arrested. but i also do know that my friends who were arrested did not commit any vandalism and were merely swimming in the neighborhoods pool and using the slide. After asking some people that i do know in the neighborhood the vandalism in question happened about a month ago and was some kids throwing the patio furniture on the roof of the pool house and throwing bags of cut grass into the pool. Again me nor my friends had anything to do with that.
I personally just thought it kind of sketchy for them to be charged with the vandalism when the night they were there there was none. I did drive by the pool today and saw a sign out front that says that the property has security cameras so I think it should be pretty easy to prove that it was not the people who were arrested.

on a funny note about this. my friend who was arrested for this was wearing nothing but a pair of cut off jorts. He said he had a fun conversation with the officer who took his mugshot and finger prints about how trashy he felt being hauled in with no shoes or shirt and cut off jeans. lol

and thank you everyone for your comments. not a huge deal or anything I was just curious how everything works and all.

TX.X-30 fan
07-08-2009, 10:36 PM
Yeah but Stu is Mensa.

No I live in central Texas. :confused:

nmcjr
07-09-2009, 09:48 PM
Best advice: get a lawyer if they don't already have one, and don't say a word to ANYONE without one. Talking can never help you only hurt you--the more you talk, the more they will nail you on, guilty or not.