BLOOD ON YOUR LENS

Nope sorry, that is not not true. In our criminal justice system, there must be 4 elements that need to be proven.

Ok, what are these elements?

[quote=]In our criminal justice system[/quote]

maybe that's why one guy went to jail for corruption and the other is in the highest position one could hold.

sometimes common scenes must prevail.

if I find MY stolen 1DsIII attached to MY stolen 70-200 in the hands of anyone I will knock them the F$ck out!

Mental state (Mens rea)
Conduct (Actus reus)
Concurrence
Causation

There is more to this than meets the eye. Brad is taking on Sean personally. Why?
Its none of my effing business, but this is a public forum where i spend my ill-spent middle age, so I wanna know what gives. Brad, what is your issue with Sean?

Bearing in mind i meat Sean once at the expo, and he won't remember me if I bit him in the leg, and never met Brad at all. (I have spent a small boatload of money on Sean and Luba's DVDs though)

Im just honestly intrigued why something as seemingly open-and-shut has escalated into personal attacks.

Seriously, what givesM why is Sean attacked by Brad? There must be an underlying reason why Brad is making sean out to be a bad guy.

Im not taking sides, im just curious as heck, and my curiosity is piqued.


My 2 Zimbabwean cents: never was dirty laundry if its not yours to wash. The law is the law. No matter how convoluted. Until said suspect is found guilty by a court of law, we have no right to condemn him. After that, I'll sell the rotten fruit to throw at him.

if I find MY stolen 1DsIII attached to MY stolen 70-200 in the hands of anyone I will knock them the F$ck out!
Yeah, but he could have got it from a very honest-looking guy in a parking lot, who left the proof of ownership in his other jean-pants....

Mental state (Mens rea)
Conduct (Actus reus)
Concurrence
Causation


Is that "means, motive, opportunity and presence of mind"?

Just for the record, and it's been stated numerous times:

Neither myself or ODP condones any criminal activity.

I honestly hope that the 2nd hand dealer is not guilty because there is going to be a major backlash with lots of people who couldn't afford brand new gear and saving up over time to buy a 6 or 7 year old lens or 400D body that will now lose that equipment and the money they spent on it.

I feel very sorry for these people, but that is the way it will go, and as sorry as I am for them, I am just as sorry for the people that have lost their equipment in muggings and home invasions and shootings... a few of them I also know personally.

I have spoken to Warrant Officer Oosthuizen who has been taking just as many calls as I have over the last few days from concerned photographers all over the country. The whole case is currently being transfered to another jurisdiction - I will contact him again tomorrow and find out who is the new officer in charge of the case and publish the details...

Im just honestly intrigued why something as seemingly open-and-shut has escalated into personal attacks.

In a rather jaded nutshell Gerry,
- I posted the SAPS press release on ODP
- After initially appearing to be quite concerned and helpful, Sean proceeded to contradict the SAPS press release quite radically, informing the members on ODP that
1) .the arrests were made because a buyer recognized goods from a seller and communicated their concerns to the seller. . So far, none of the people I have been communicating with has been under arrest
2) and the members involved have been cleared
3) most of their equipment is currently with the SAPS "in case" newer reports come in of stolen goods.

I posted the SAPS press release directly, as I did here. In my experience, if anyone misrepresents, nay, totally contradicts the facts like this, we normally say "this person is lying"

The fact that when I pointed these "discrepancies out" to Sean, the argument stepped down to " lets be honest we have never heard of you" or something to that effect. That is insulting, because it infers that my credibility is at question, even though NONE of the facts contained in the press-release were of my making.

...I'm with those who buy brand new equipment here ...but the say that " being in possession of stolen equipment" ...even if you dont "know" it was stollen ....isn't a crime ...yeh well think again ...from the SA Constitutional Court ...section 37.1 ...reads as follows ..
Any person who in any manner, otherwise than at a public sale, acquires or receives into his possession from any other person stolen goods, other than stock or produce as defined in section one of the Stock Theft Act, 1959, without having reasonable cause, proof of which shall be on such first mentioned person, for believing at the time of such acquisition or receipt that such goods are the property of the person from whom he receives them or that such person has been duly authorized by the owner thereof to deal with or to dispose of them, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to the penalties which may be imposed on a conviction of receiving stolen property knowing it to have been stolen except in so far as the imposition of any such penalty may be compulsory." (Emphasis added.)....a particular case ...CCT 25/99 lead to 2 offenders being jailed for 7 & 6 yrs each ....The magistrate accepted that their evidence in this regard could reasonably possibly be true and found them not guilty on the charge of theft. He held nonetheless that they had had physical possession of the stolen goods, which brought the provisions of section 37 into play. He rejected the evidence adduced by the appellants in support of their belief that the goods had not been stolen, and convicted them on a competent verdict of having contravened section 37. Neither of the appellants was a first offender and they were sentenced to seven and six years imprisonment respectively....i'm with the Law on this one !!!!

Brad,

Again, I reported what was told me to the community in general as the story unfolded.

I posted the SAPS press release directly, as I did here. In my experience, if anyone misrepresents, nay, totally contradicts the facts like this, we normally say "this person is lying"

The press release doesn't state anything about how the police came to Search the house. Only your version of the story...

I spoke to various people in the Cape about this, not one of those told my they are under arrest, at the time that I spoke to them...

I reported what I was told as I tried to get more information.

I did not misrepresent, and I did not lie, and in My experience, when there are total contradiction in stories, It means there are more than one person's point of view on what happened ... Her version, His version and "The Truth"

Which is why we wait for the legal proceedings to take place.

At 9h37 PF Grobler asked:

"Sean do I understand correctly that the seller took the items to the police willingly and co-operated with them ? and provided them with all the detail of the where he bought the items ?"

To which I responded at 9h48:
"Yes, He is the one that reported to the police that certain goods he has for sale may in actual fact be stolen..."

Before I posted my next comment at 9h59, I updated my last post to read:
"Edit:
Just FYI - I am getting completely different versions of the same story from different people now. Will wait for SAPS to get back to me."

When it became apparent that the different versions that came in does not correlate at all... More than 8 hours before your next post on the forum.

And I emailed you at 10h04 asking exactly that, after posting the update on the forum...

If it insulted you that I asked in that email at 10h04:
"How exactly do you fit into this? I am getting conflicting reports from various people, as well as the SAPS"

Seeing that I have personally never heard your name before in my life... (I have heard tons about you since, though... )

After you started insulting me and the forum members in general I politely asked you again at about 21h31 on the forum:

"Braddo,

I am sorry that you feel this is not factual information. I have emailed you in response to your earlier mail asking for clarification on who you are as well as the statements you have made, but you have not responded. I reported the information as it came to us from various sources. We are not the SAPS. This is a photography forum.

"Claptrap" and "pink unicorns" aside - nobody wants to be in possession of stolen goods and nobody wants to have much to do with criminal activity. Not the members, and not ODP, but to be fair, until a day ago, nobody on this forum has heard of you?

Please keep your comments civil and maybe identify yourself and your role in this more clearly. You are also very welcome to phone me at the ODP shop tomorrow morning if you do not want to do it publicly. I have been fielding calls from many members (buyers and sellers) this morning and have been responding to emails the whole day."

At which point you decided to insult a few more members (comments deleted but still available as screengrabs and admin reveal... just like all the comments you have made on FB, PiX, Modelbase, TurnItAround, etc - even the ones later deleted)

I have tried to remain courteous throughout, even though you have not afforded me the same, rather making sarcastic comments about myself and my wife (no, she is not a Somali Pirate...), inferring illegal activity on my behalf and ODP's community and membership, snide remarks, and outright accusations. Was the "Ja oubaas" comment supposed to be some kind of racial slur?

There is nothing more I can say to the Modelbase Community about this incident so I can happily now leave you to find another community to repost this blog that insinuates that ODP and it's admins (including me) is in some way trying to protect a criminal or criminal activity, at which point, I will come online again and we can start this dance over. Every time I can point to one more public location where people can read your exact words, and in the places they were deleted or removed or edited by you, I will post the screen grabs.

May I suggest that you rather spend your energy on a witch hunt for the thieves? And not forum admins and forum members that oppose crime just as much as you do?


(By the way, thank you for re-activating me on the modelbook portfolio site. Why did you delete the accusations you made against me on FB?)

Question 1: If I buy a camera off ODP/Modelbase/Chewing gum tree from some anonymous Frikkie and it turns out to be stolen - am I in trouble?

Question 2 - if I buy a camra off Cash Crusaders or any other registerd pawn shop am I in trouble?

Qustion 3 - if "no" to any of the above, do I have recourse to get my money back or keep the goods I paid for in good faith?

(By the way, thank you for re-activating me on the modelbook portfolio site. Why did you delete the accusations you made against me on FB?)

*sigh* Deja-vu again
as I mentioned before, I did not delete anything. As much as you repeat this, it only has the potential of becoming true in your world.
I don't live in that world, so can't defend myself against insane crap plucked out of thin air.

Gerry, question 1 and 2, no you not in trouble, nor are you a criminal, but the goods will be taken by the police, and eventually the insurance company (or the owner if it was not insured). So, the only trouble you in, is you paid for something you do not have (except if you knew it was stolen, but that is a difficult one to prove in court as a general rule).

To question 3. You can open a criminal case against the seller for fraud, but you will not get your money back (except if you can prove that it was your money - serial numbers). It is then handled as stolen goods same as above.

The only way you can get your money back, is to lodge a civil case against the seller (above and beyound his criminal case. Usually it is not financially worth while, except if you go to the small claims court - I think currently the limit is R12000, but don't quote me on that.

..Gerry .....Go to Jail ...Dont forget to take beer !.....the laws are there ...but the implementation ...is up to Sh.t ....your choice ....but a nephew of mine just bought a second hand banger ..from a dealer .to get to varsity ...guess what ...boys in blue came and took it !!! stolen and reregistered 2 yrs ago , how long and how much would a court case cost against the dealer ??? ...more than the car is worth ....and i guess the sellers realize Joe Public will always bail .....so they continue ...

Ok, just verified it http://www.justice.gov.za/scc/scc.htm

Limit is R12000