If Warren's crewmembers are there as his employees, I think that does make him somewhat legally responsible for what they do. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I think it does. You can't hit me as an employee of McDonald's, and then have that store get out of it by simply saying "We didn't tell them to do that."

I noticed some of the statements in the article seem a little weird.

It doesn't matter whether or not an officer leaves a case "open." It matters how long the statute of limitations are in that state. It's not up to an officer's decision.

The word "or" seems strange. Something can be criminal AND civil. Ask O.J.

I know in Tennessee the statute of limitations are one year for criminal, two for civil. If you hit me, I can press criminal charges 364 days later and take out a warrant for your arrest. I can still sue you for money for up to two years after.

I actually think there's a chance that a good attorney might get Warren and company somewhere in this. Jerry says it was still his property, even though he left it on someone else's property. Saying what everything on or in it was worth doesn't keep it from fitting the definition of having been abandoned. I don't notice him saying that anyone told anybody so much as "We're coming back to get that." Sounds like he ASSUMED people would think that.

__________________
I'm an optimist. My glass is 1/4 full, not 3/4 empty!

[quote=Ron Dunlap;89684]even though he left it on someone else's property. Saying what everything on or in it was worth doesn't keep it from fitting the definition of having been abandoned. QUOTE]

The laws spell out abandonment in days, not hours.

Not that I know anything, but I would guess that if a truck was being sent to pick up the body, there would be some record of WHEN that truck was hired to do that... At that point, it would establish a moment when Jerry would be able to prove that he didn't abandon the body, even though any time between the time the transporter left the track up until the call arranging the truck (IF it happened in that sequence, and not the other way around) would put the body in the limbo that there was no owner (even though Jerry's name was still on the body )...

__________________
a.k.a. 98percentnitro

http://www.myspace.com/relentlesslightingdesign

What is left behind at the track is trash or junk unless it is marked. If the clean up crew had got there first it would have been in the dumpster. Toliver has no case. No one in there right mind would leave a FC body on the ground with out marking it or moving it to a safe place. This is no different than anything else left in the pits when you pull out.

[quote=Ian Sweeney;89689]
That's what I don't/didn't know. How long can it sit there before it's legally abandoned?

__________________
I'm an optimist. My glass is 1/4 full, not 3/4 empty!

Seems to me like you would need to notify the owners of the property that you're temporarily leaving it on, or at least one of their employees. Would have changed the entire picture if one track worker had been able to say "Hey, they said they're coming back for that." Jerry seems to act like everyone is stupid for not knowing what he ASSUMED.

__________________
I'm an optimist. My glass is 1/4 full, not 3/4 empty!

Like has been said before, it's supposed to be worth umpteen thousand dollars, but you don't leave one guy behind to keep an eye on it. How many parts HAVE been stolen by fans in the past? Just seems to me that for every act of ignorance Jerry's accusing Warren's people of here, he's guilty of at least one. Not leaving someone and not notifying anyone just seems to support Warren's guys, IMO.

__________________
I'm an optimist. My glass is 1/4 full, not 3/4 empty!

What if it was a complete super comp dragster? Would it be OK to load it up in your trailer or pick it clean? Do you think the clean up crew would have crushed it and put it in a dumpster? One of those is approximately the same value as a FC body.

I keep hearing people say that there had to be something wrong with Warren's people for thinking that the body was abandoned.

Does anyone REALLY think they thought anything like "Hey, Jerry's left that body here and will probably be having it picked up. Let's hurry up and STEAL the tree for the titanium tubing and hack off whatever other parts we can before they get back." Just who does this malicious intent make more sense to?

If the body was as complete and intact as the super comp dragster example given above and someone had bad intentions, they'd steal the whole car! For however incorrect they may have been, I do think they thought they were stripping a junk, abandoned body.

What we're debating here are intentions, and that's what Jerry's arguing. He and others here seem to be saying that nobody should have been able to to think that the car was abandoned, that whoever did what they did, did it knowingly with bad intentions.

I think the only people who can speak for their intentions are the ones who did it, and that whatever they say, when and if they do, is what you have to go on unless you can prove otherwise. Whether they would still be found to be liable in a criminal or civil court?

__________________
I'm an optimist. My glass is 1/4 full, not 3/4 empty!

The truth is WJ doesn't pay his employees or feed them. They were hungry and saw an opportunity to make a little extra change stripping the car. As somebody previously posted,intent,intent,intent is the question. I think this is the question that will decide this IF it ever makes it to court. How is it going to look when the track employee testifies that he too thought it was abandoned and was on the verge of putting in the dumpster. I'm not saying the best of judgement was used by WJ's guys but it's far from criminal intent. Beat this horse all you want,it's a moot point.

It was a wrecked body left behind not a complete car. The way people are talking on here all the used oil, clutch plates, brake pads, tires, or anything else should be there when they come back next year.

Yeah - remember a fan trying to make off with one of WJ's doors a couple years ago?

I don't even think intent will come into play in a courtroom. I don't think anyone could prove they had bad intentions unless they, themselves admitted it to anyone.

I think it comes down to leaving a damaged body behind and how long it's still yours and not legally abandoned. If it was legally still Jerry's, then they're guilty of doing wrong, good intentions or not, and will be found liable.

What seems ridiculous to me is that Jerry and others seem to keep trying to make the case for their intentions when, again, unless they told someone what they were, nobody could know. If Jerry continues to go overboard on that one, I think he could find himself in a lawsuit. He doesn't have to make the case that they did it. He seems to be trying to say that they couldn't have thought it was abandoned, meaning that they DID knowingly have bad intentions. If I were one of the crewmembers and you said that about me, I'd certainly be finding out what my legal options were. He could lose whatever he got for the body and then some.

It seems to me that if you publicly accuse someone of having malicious intentions without having a way to know it, that you are then the one being malicious.

__________________
I'm an optimist. My glass is 1/4 full, not 3/4 empty!