Real interesting. To catch a thief on rural property.

[MossRoad]

I'm not sure what to make of this video. With the first question being: "Is it legitimate?"

The theft victim states repeatedly "all I want is my property back." But he never got back his expensive (functioning) cell camera and turned down the offer of compensation. Really? You have a destroyed expensive camera but refuse compensation needed to replace it?

This looks great for his YouTube channel, portraying him well. Was it staged? . Then a "detective" comments: "Thanks for being a stand up guy." Really? More puff for the YouTube star.

LEO patrol procedure varies by jurisdiction, but there were *many* mistakes made by these "officers" no matter what jurisdiction they were in. Probably at least 10. Maybe things are different elsewhere, but I don't think they are that different.

First thing-- the responding deputies (two) should have immediately separated the husband and wife to question them separately. They didn't do that which is a big red flag.

Why were any "detectives" needed? Unless one of them drove out the search warrant ... I didn't see any purpose for that ... and "three" of them showed up? Three?

The search warrant is signed by a judge. Once that threshold is crossed, things change. In this case, the officers would be required to take custody of the "stolen" property and give the perp a receipt for what was taken. It is no longer their choice of what to do-- the judge signing the warrant is now in charge. Then the judge decides which direction to take it. Once a search warrant is involved, the opportunity to "let's make a deal" has been lost.

Another oddity-- I noticed the "detectives" were providing their labor to load the "stolen property" into the victims truck? Is this a new LEO service-- free labor? While the "victim" stands by, moving nothing, and watching the detectives work? Hmmmm.

Maybe some parts of the story are legit, but there are too many red flags I see to believe it as presented. And just too many LEO mistakes involved. What happens is the "detective" drops the expensive compound bow and shatters it? Answer: the judge isn't going to be very happy .. nor the victim.

He refused the money from the wife to make the husband look even lower than he already did. Mission accomplished.

 

[JDZ735M]

I got the impression that city scum was moving into these rural and doing I don't know what else, but some are making and selling drugs.

That is 100% true.

 

[JDZ735M]

First thing-- the responding deputies (two) should have immediately separated the husband and wife to question them separately. They didn't do that which is a big red flag.

Why were any "detectives" needed? Unless one of them drove out the search warrant ... I didn't see any purpose for that ... and "three" of them showed up? Three?

The video was heavily edited, obviously. So while it's normally a good practice to separate partners to interview them we really don't know that they did not. Three detectives? ....probably just because three were available and it was going to be easy. A lot of guys just like to be on camera too.

 

[shooterdon]

I would not have been so "cool" about it.

 

[dragoneggs]

I would have taken the $1400 and prosecuted the thief to the fullest existent possible. There’s nothing lower then a thief.

Maybe a rapist.

 

[plowhog]

The video was heavily edited, obviously. So while it's normally a good practice to separate partners to interview them we really don't know that they did not. Three detectives? ....probably just because three were available and it was going to be easy. A lot of guys just like to be on camera too.

The only information I have is from watching the video. But I know a lot of LEO's and NONE of them like being on camera. (A grudgingly accepted fact that they almost always are filmed nowadays.)

The part that seems most obviously faked is the officers agreeing to "lets make a deal" allowing the perp to give stolen property back. I don't know of any jurisdiction where that would be allowed once it escalated to a judge signing a search warrant. This was not petty theft-- based on value this would be grand theft in virtually any jurisdiction. I wrote earlier it would be a requirement (in any jurisdiction I am familiar with) that the stolen property would be taken into custody and the perp given a receipt. Only later would the judge who signed the search warrant choose whether to proceed, and how. Search warrants include specific instructions and officers cannot just "wing it" once it elevates to that level. Once the search warrant is signed, the judge is in control.

Also noteworthy is the officers allowing the perp and victim in close proximity to each other-- really, really bad police work which should never happen. "Letting" or "inviting" the victim to come onto the perps personal property, and get in very close proximity. The list of bad LEO practices goes on and on.

Maybe its legit; maybe its a con job. I don't know. It doesn't help that the "victim" has a strong interest in self-promotion on his YouTube channel, and does lots of things to draw attention to himself. YMMV.

 

[buckeyefarmer]

Watched that video last week, and ordered that camera. Not cheap.

 

[the old grind]

The guy is a 'thief-chaser' for the sake of principle. There are many communities where LEO faces are well known, as are local celebrities that are accepted/appreciated. (Country, not city) Suppose some local 'uniforms' car-pool-in off-duty to expedite the recovery, knowing the YT guy won't press charges. (this time either)

Two things kinda get me, though. 1) the guy painted the cams as if thinking he wouldn't be seen on at least one. 2) The BS con about "maybe I was a little out of it, stuff gets crazy" etc. What was he 'on' that he went there twice? "Temporary insanity" or the AH just got caught and want to boot-lick a song & dance bit to think he still won? I saw what I saw in the video, the bum's face.

 

[AchingBack]

I would not have been so "cool" about it.

Perhaps he was thinking, "and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us".

 

[lman]

I would have taken the $1400 and prosecuted the thief to the fullest existent possible. There’s nothing lower then a thief.

You can't prosecute the thief, the Prosecutor does. You can make a request but from my experience most Prosecutors don't care much about victims and would be happy to see a case disposed out of court like this one.