Facebook Group - We Buy Any Debt

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I'm wondering if one of the 30 businesses in Samos that she claims were accepting Kindness Credits for goods took exception to giving away stuff for free!

[exiledscouser]

And yet her supporters seem to think people will donate to pay her fine.

So it would seem.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... =828404230

This is a link to Tim Wilson who is flogging a butty van to raise five and a half grand towards paying the “ransom” and getting Liz OTF Nolson out of clink.

[Siegfried Shrink]

The idea of buying of prison time for a mere 5 Euros a day is appealing, it adds a new dimension to sentencing tariffs and most folk could earn much more than 5 Euros a day if not jailed.

It may only apply if it is a sentence for an unpaid fine, though, not something where you could calculate the cost of an armed robbery going wrong before actually doing it, to see if it is worthwhile taking the risk.

[Gregg]

Sounds like she is in whole heap of trouble to say he very least. I can't imagine the Greek prisons are exactly a picnic.

As was mentioned, the Olive Oil is very good, but they failed to mention its used primarily as a lubricant.

I'll get me coat...

[KickahaOta]

IANAL, and I am certainly no expert on British Legal Jurisprudence, but being that the UK, despite the FOOTLs insistence otherwise, is governed by the rule of law and is generally seen as a place where a criminal defendant can get a fair shake, I doubt that there isn't some version of the US prohibition against double jeopardy.

The double jeopardy doctrine does exist in various forms in various parts of the UK, but it is rather different from the US version. It lacks the "dual sovereignty" exception, but does have various exceptions that the US version does not. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_je ... ed_Kingdom .

[JimUk1]

Sounds like she is in whole heap of trouble to say he very least. I can't imagine the Greek prisons are exactly a picnic.

As was mentioned, the Olive Oil is very good, but they failed to mention its used primarily as a lubricant.

I'll get me coat...

The Cretans will be spitting blood if their sacred olive oil is used for anything other than an tomato, oregano and feta drizzling compliment.

Can’t rule out what happens with olive oil soaps however

[ArthurWankspittle]

I don't know any Greek, but the entry you have labelled 'Duplicate End' is listed as 2% and indeed the amount is 2% of the original including the 110% 'increment'. It could be some sort of surcharge for payment by bank transfer or something. And the fact it has 20% VAT ("OGA") added also suggests this is some sort of commercial charge rather than part of the official charges.

My guess is it's 9k euros cash now or +110% for credit.

[TheNewSaint]

I think Nolson was initially given only a fine, which turned into a greater fine and a prison sentence only when she didn't pay it. My reasoning is:

1. The document indicates a conviction date of two months prior.
2. There's a line item that appears to be for payments made towards the balance.
3. The prison sentence is based on the fine amount, not the crime committed. (Maybe it's both, but 5 1/2 years for peddling kindness credits seems harsh.)

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Impeccable logic, and I was thinking that too. However, I do now think it's a case of you get a choice of fine or prison. I've found it hard to pin down a page explaining Greek law, but I did find a case of a British man convicted in his absence who faced either a 3,500 fine or 15 months in prison, so it does appear that you get a choice.

You say peddling kindness credits. I say fraud. But I think we're splitting hairs here

[letissier14]

This link may show you how the Greek legal system works with regards Financial Fraud

https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters. ... rue&bhcp=1

Fraud
Under Article 386 of the Criminal Code, fraud is defined as enriching oneself or a third person by knowingly representing untrue facts as true or by illegally concealing or suppressing true facts and persuading another to act or omit to act, so as to cause financial damage. An intention to enrich oneself or a third party is required.

Penalties. Under Article 386 of the Criminal Code, the following criminal sanctions can be imposed:
Prison sentence of three months to five years and of at least two years in cases of substantial pecuniary damage (the latter is defined on a case-by-case basis).

Where the offender commits fraud as a profession or habitually and the total pecuniary damage suffered or the total enrichment exceeds EUR30,000 or the total pecuniary damage suffered or the total enrichment exceeds EUR120,000, a prison sentence of up to ten years.

[notorial dissent]

Just a thought, if someone violate a law of England, as well as a similar law of Scotland, could they not be tried by both a Scottish court as well as the English one? Devolution and all that?

[aesmith]

Just a thought, if someone violate a law of England, as well as a similar law of Scotland, could they not be tried by both a Scottish court as well as the English one? Devolution and all that?

You're thinking of a certain HHJ Smith? I think the only way to break both an English and a Scottish law would be as two different offences, one in each jurisdiction.

[notorial dissent]

Carrying out a fraud in Scotland while living in England, vice versa? Or the same fraud in both countries?

[aesmith]

Good point, I'm not sure if you'd be prosecuted in the jurisdiction where the crime was committed, or based where you were in person at the time. And come to think of it let's say the crime was sending abusive or defamatory material, would the offence be committed when it was posted in Scotland, or when it was received in England?

[ArthurWankspittle]

Good point, I'm not sure if you'd be prosecuted in the jurisdiction where the crime was committed, or based where you were in person at the time. And come to think of it let's say the crime was sending abusive or defamatory material, would the offence be committed when it was posted in Scotland, or when it was received in England?

Surely it would be where it was committed?

[Siegfried Shrink]

Surely it would be where it was committed?

Ah, but is it comitted when the abuser sends the item, actually transmits or posts it, or when and where the abusee recieves it?

If it never arrives was it a crime? This is the sort of hair splitting that buys lawyers country houses and small tropical islands.

There is probably some established jurisdictional rule to save a lot of time wasting over this point. It will be in the 'boring laws I never bothered with' section of the library.

[aesmith]

Thought of an example .. Pan Am flight 102, the bomb was placed in the aircraft at Heathrow (England) but exploded over Scotland. The case we prosecuted in Scotland.

[Gregg]

This is the sort of hair splitting that buys lawyers country houses and small tropical islands.

That's just a beautiful thought.

[Tevildo]

Ah, but is it comitted when the abuser sends the item, actually transmits or posts it, or when and where the abusee recieves it?

If it never arrives was it a crime?

There are at least twelve possible loci in this sort of case:

1. Where the fraudster is domiciled
2. Where the fraudster is resident
3. Where the fraudster was when the agreement was made
4. Where the victim is domiciled
5. Where the victim is resident
6. Where the victim was when the agreement was made
7. For cash payments, where the money was handed over (see 9-12 below for non-cash transactions)
8. Where the (ex hypothesi inadequate) consideration for the money was physically recieved
9. Where the fraudster's bank (or, at least, the bank into which the funds were paid) is registered
10. Where the fraudster's bank's head office is registered
11. Where the victim's bank is registered
12. Where the victim's bank's head office is registered

And, of course, there may be an entirely different jurisdiction which is more closely connected with the case than any of these for fact-dependent reasons.

This is the sort of hair splitting that buys lawyers country houses and small tropical islands.

Can't disagree with you on that one.

[notorial dissent]

Yes, but if he commits the same fraud in both jurisdictions?