| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
alongway
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 5:37 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| goreality wrote: |
| It's extortion because the police and prosecutors were not first informed of the crime that was apparently committed. They should be informed of the deal that was made too before they close the case or decide if they should continue with charges. Blood money system isn't the wild west style justice that a lot of people think it is. |
They're not required to be.
They can only decide to continue with charges in the case of non-personal crimes. Those are the only crimes they have full jurisdiction over, anything considered a personal crime cannot proceed without the cooperation of the victim.
Even in the case of the police already having been informed of a crime and then a compensation deal being reached, there is no obligation to say anything further to the police than "I do not wish to proceed with these charges". You don't have to inform them of any deal that you make. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
yodanole
Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: La Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| In Japan ( apparently ), there would have been......ummm.....videos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
goreality
Joined: 09 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
They're not required to be.
They can only decide to continue with charges in the case of non-personal crimes. Those are the only crimes they have full jurisdiction over, anything considered a personal crime cannot proceed without the cooperation of the victim.
|
If they weren't required to be informed why was not informing them extortion then? Also you are right in the case of personal crimes, but not for repeat offenders who don't know the victims personally (one cannot be friends with Tesco's Homeplus) because they become a danger to society at large. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alongway
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| goreality wrote: |
| Quote: |
They're not required to be.
They can only decide to continue with charges in the case of non-personal crimes. Those are the only crimes they have full jurisdiction over, anything considered a personal crime cannot proceed without the cooperation of the victim.
|
If they weren't required to be informed why was not informing them extortion then? Also you are right in the case of personal crimes, but not for repeat offenders who don't know the victims personally (one cannot be friends with Tesco's Homeplus) because they become a danger to society at large. |
That's not fully how a personal crime is defined. It doesn't specifically mean a crime between two people or friends.
As for why this was extortion, that is what I'm asking. I don't see anything that looks like extortion at all here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dairyairy wrote: |
3 million won "blood money" for some popsicles? That's extortion. |
Don't you think you could talk them down to a more reasonable price? Especially if you can show them your poor and can't afford that much.
The bottom line is enjoy your Octopus Car Wash job if you get a shoplifting record. It's a cold blooded world nowadays with easy access to your background. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
