I recovered my stolen MBP !! Thanks PHILMUG

[imacron]

I'm sharing this story on how successfully philmug has helped me recover my stolen MBP.

a long overdue thank yous to elbert, hitme, soloworx, penmanila ! salamat ng maraming marami

My MBP was stolen on the eve of my birthday last November. The rear side window of my car was smashed and the thief took with him my laptop bag, ipod, and GPS. I posted this incident in philmug. I know that it is almost impossible for me to recover my stolen MBP.

But miracles do happen. A month after the loss, I receieved an email from the moderators, particularly Elbert. A seller posted a MBP with the same serial and specs. I couldn't believe the news.

So I contacted hitme for advice on how to recover the stolen item. So he told me to check on the laptop and make sure that it is indeed mine before I seek an entrapment.

So immediately called the seller and pretended to be an interested buyer. I met him in a gas station. And true enough, the laptop is mine. I kept myself composed and struck a deal with him to buy from him that same day.

So I went to the police and setup an entrapment. At 6pm, we met in a starbucks cafe. And upon paying him, the operatives swooped on him.

The seller was detained in the camp. This was night of december 23. The MBP was placed under the custody of the police.

A case was filed against the seller in the Pasig Court. Fortunately, the fiscal's office doesn;t want to take custody of the MBP. So it was released to me that very day. A subpoena was sent to both parties to appear.

The case against him is violation of anti fencing law. He filed a counteraffidavit stating that he only bought it from a certain person in Tipid PC. And he was also a victim. He was not the actual person who stole the MBP. He bouhgt it for 50k and was trying to sell it to me at 58k.. haggled to P54. The family is pleading with me to drop the case. I'm thinking about it.

Q: What is the seller's liability in this situation ? Is the reasoning of "i just bought it from someone" going to stand in court ? What would be his best defense ?



thanks again,


dominic

[iPood]

nice to read some good news like these,

up for sir elbert, hitme, soloworx and pennmanila

congrats imacron for retrieving your baby back

[rockophoria]

Great you got it back!

well I hope djwoblely is reading this

[enuhski]

Congrats!

To answer your question, the seller can go to jail and pay a huge fine depending on the value of the item stolen. The fencing law punishes anyone who sells/buys stolen goods. There is a presumption that the person bought a fenced item if it is in his possession. It's up to him to establish that he didn't buy a fenced item. I dunno if good faith will be enough to save him, since 'intent to gain' is part of the definition of fencing. He should have been more vigilant in inspecting the item that he bought, especially since it probably did not come with the requisite documents evidencing ownership.

[loko__loko]

imac... the "seller" bought from somebody else?.. thats his problem to prove to the court.

[rockophoria]

Congrats!

To answer your question, NO. The fencing law punishes anyone who buys stolen goods. There is a presumption that the person bought a fenced item if it is in his possession. It's up to him to establish that he didn't buy a fenced item. He should have been more vigilant in inspecting the item that he bought, especially since it probably did not come with the requisite documents evidencing ownership.

The seller can go to jail and pay a huge fine depending on the value of the item stolen.

Specially if the seller lied by saying he bought it abroad when asked where he got/bought the unit for the receipt..

[phildg2000]

Wow, it's good to know that people like elbert, hitme, soloworx and pennmanila are around to help in situations like this.
So, if the guy is claiming that he too is a victim, then can he give some info on the guy he bought it from?

[enuhski]

hehe i edited my answer a bit from above, did some thinking. anyway, i'll post the definition:

fencing - intent to gain for himself or for another, shall buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any article, item, object or anyting of value which he knows, or should be known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft.

so how do you establish you couldn't have known the item was the proceeds of robbery/theft?

#1 - look for the receipt from seller, and if the items that normally come with a lappy are not sold with it (kunwari walang charger) - ask why. wag bilhin kaagad 'til you're absolutely sure you didn't buy a stolen laptop.
#2 - if philmugger, check in philmug

mahirap mabulag sa good deals kasi baka nakaw yan.

[jappy]

Great you got it back!

well I hope djwoblely is reading this

same here.


@imacron
glad you acted fast and got your mbp.

[penmanila]

i'm very happy about the outcome of this case. congrats, imacron! and thanks to those who really helped (they know who they are). at the same time that we're quick to condemn the buyers of these fenced goods, it might be good to remember how easily this can happen to any of us--or to our brothers or sisters, none of whom would be thieves, or people knowingly buying from thieves. many of us have been buying all kinds of things from ebay and tipidPC, among other places online, where there's very little means (short of checking serial numbers, as we know now) to establish the true origins of what we buy. it's good that computers and electronics have serial numbers. what about items that don't? how can you check for provenance?

as for prosecuting the buyer (and now reseller) of the stolen item, my attitude toward him will very probably be determined by his attitude to me. of course i can expect some initial resistance, even hostility, especially from an unwitting buyer who thinks he himself was fooled and is out of pocket by so much money. anyone will try to keep what he thinks is rightfully his.

but once reason sets in and the resistance breaks down, and if he's willing to return the item and to cooperate in the investigation to land the real thief, then i'd probably let him off the hook; after all, he lost money, too. he and the original owner should work as allies, rather than adversaries. but if he refuses to return the item even after proof of ownership and reasonable time have been given, then he could be seen as allying with the thief, and i'd be less kindly disposed toward him.

in any case, prosecuting and condemning the buyer of stolen goods (whether witting or unwitting) will still be much less satisfactory for me than prosecuting the original culprit, and i would do everything to get the buyer on my side, so that can happen.