Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy1375
Judge Judy deals in civil issues. You are talking about a criminal act. The burden of proof is not the same. You're talking a big game and you've got zero skin in the game. All golden has to do is show communication between himself and the seller and the issue about it being stolen is dead. Any text, voicemail, online communication would be evidence. It's very heartwarming to see how you're willing to risk him perjuring himself so you can be right. Mob mentality is currently in force on the issue.
|
So you're recognizing this verbal agreement. So, is that agreement not a two way street? Why does it sound like you're saying the one who did not fulfill his half of the agreement is protected? Not fulfilling his portion, how is that not stealing? Makes no sense to me. If I go buy a TV, act like I have full intentions of paying for it, but write a check that bounces 2 days later after I already brought the TV home. That's not stealing? I can just keep on living my life and never expect police to show up at my door?