Is targeting consenting adults in the hobby game more or less ridiculous than the below sting...

http://www.avpress.com/n/05/0305_s4.hts

While CA law does impose the duties quoted below, it also says that "2080.7.  The provisions of this article have no application to things which have been intentionally abandoned by their owner.

In this case, easy dismissal since it was intentionally abandoned.

:
CALIFORNIA CODES
CIVIL CODE
SECTION 2080-2080.10

2080.  Any person who finds a thing lost is not bound to take charge
of it, unless the person is otherwise required to do so by contract
or law, but when the person does take charge of it he or she is
thenceforward a depositary for the owner, with the rights and
obligations of a depositary for hire.  Any person or any public or
private entity that finds and takes possession of any money, goods,
things in action, or other personal property, or saves any domestic
animal from harm, neglect, drowning, or starvation, shall, within a
reasonable time, inform the owner, if known, and make restitution
without compensation, except a reasonable charge for saving and
taking care of the property.  Any person who takes possession of a
live domestic animal shall provide for humane treatment of the
animal.



2080.1.  (a) If the owner is unknown or has not claimed the
property, the person saving or finding the property shall, if the
property is of the value of one hundred dollars ($100) or more,
within a reasonable time turn the property over to the police
department of the city or city and county, if found therein, or to
the sheriff's department of the county if found outside of city
limits, and shall make an affidavit, stating when and where he or she
found or saved the property, particularly describing it.  If the
property was saved, the affidavit shall state:
  (1) From what and how it was saved.
  (2) Whether the owner of the property is known to the affiant.
  (3) That the affiant has not secreted, withheld, or disposed of
any part of the property.
  (b) The police department or the sheriff's department shall notify
the owner, if his or her identity is reasonably ascertainable, that
it possesses the property and where it may be claimed.  The police
department or sheriff's department may require payment by the owner
of a reasonable charge to defray costs of storage and care of the
property.

One can only wonder how many illegals these same cops could have tracked down and arrested if they hadn't been wasting their time with this exercise in stupidity.

When I find a lost wallet or purse (and I have found several over the years) I look through it to find a phone number and/or address of the owner and return it directly to them.

I have no faith in the "proper authorities" to return the valuables.

This is sinking really low, and the government wonders why people are losing so much respect for it.

for having sex in private.  But it's definately a new low.

And like Palmdale isn't the meth cooking capitol of the world and the cops should have better things to do.  But it's really important to check the honesty of strangers.  I always heard it was "finders keepers."

Besides, I wonder what happens to the money if nobody claims it?  It seems to me that if nobody claims it after a reasonable time it should be given to the finder.  Therefore - why turn it over to the mall, it will just disappear.

My story -  Some guy once left a wallet full of cash on the bed and went to take a shower.  I admit I was tempted to lift a little, but I'm a whore not a thief - and after his shower, he came out picked up his wallet, and counted out a $1,000 tip above the $400 date rate.

Moral to the story - honesty does pay!

Giggle,
TS Jamie

I don't turn things over to the authorities, I find the proper owners on my own and give it directly to them.

b-

California Penal Code section 485:
One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft.

The subjects of the news article were arrested for grand theft, Penal Code section 487.

Civil Code section 2080.7 only applies to Civil Code sections 2080-2080.10, not to the Penal Code. Also, the property was not intentionally abandoned. Abandonment requires no intention to reclaim the property.

as to the incredible energy that is put into devising artificial entrapment setups...  which have no way of verifying intentions.... and in this instance the interpretation of a reasonable expectation (length of time to turn over - and proper authorities) is very vague.  Would YOU turn over something to "mall cops?"   How long would it take you?  

Seriously, while I would do one thing (that would be totally legal, others would do other things....  I agree, this will be easily dismissed by the court, BUT the people will have the expense and totally wasted time having to go to court....  we really do not need this type of LE.-- This is sooooo keystone cop-ish that it belongs on candid camera....