You are a seasoned judge but have never seen such a case before. The cops found a beggar who was being mugged by other beggars because he had an extremely large amount of money with him.
They questioned him about it because they suspected that he had stolen it from someplace or has been selling drugs or doing something else like that.
He told them that he had been begging for 30 years and this is the money he has saved in that time. He said that he didn’t drink or smoke and has no family so there is nothing to spend on. He has been saving for the last 30 years and his income is especially good during holidays. He further informs them that he also has a bank account and has a lot of money in the bank too.
The police investigate and find that he has a lot of money in the bank and that he has been the customer of this bank for more than 30 years.
They see that the beggar makes regular deposits in his bank and has made small transactions for the last 30 years or so. The deposits have never been big enough to raise suspicion, but they do rise during holidays, when people are in a giving mood.
When the cops investigate and ask other beggars about the rich one, they tell them that the rich beggar drinks often and he is lying to them. In cross examination, he admits that he was lying about drinking, but hadn’t done anything illegal to get the money.
Will you charge him guilty or not guilty?
6 thoughts on “Guilty or not guilty?”
Thanks for your replies everyone, even though I didn’t provide enough detail. The questions is based on this story:
I have read different versions of the story in different places and I kept wondering whether its really possible to earn such a large sum of money just by begging, so I had to ask you 🙂
Both guilty and not guilty. Not enough facts provided in the story. You could say guilty for obstruction of justice, since he is lying to police. Then again that could be wrong because we do not know what he was lying about. Lying about drinking, or not drinking, hmmm? He could be not guilty because all he does, seems like, is roam around collecting money and depositing it in a checking account, which he has been doing for 30 years.
He should be left alone. The dude is cool, he just figured out a way to beat the game that the rest of us could not. For all we know he could have collected large sums of money for the past 30 years, which would be as same as me figuring out a way to trade stocks and not tell anyone but be making a shit load of money on a daily basis…
Good question though.
Not sure, if facts are complete. But whatever is given, I don’t find anything against the beggar who has been mugged. Fine, he has told lies to the cops but believe, you can’t prosecute him just for doing that !
Doesn’t matter what I think (I believe him). There is no evidence he stole it. There is evidence that he accumulated it steadily over the years.
Thus, as judge, I throw this case out with extreme prejudice against he prosecutor and warm him/her there will be consequences if he/she ever brings another frivolous case to my courtroom.
Ah, I should have clarified that, sorry.
Guilty of stealing the money. Do you think that he just saved the money over 30 years or did something illegal to get hold of such a large sum of money.
Guilty of what? Of being mugged? Or panhandling? Of having money? Of impersonating a pauper?
I don’t get the question this time.