IMPD officers arrested.

[churchmouse]

If it wound up in the IMPD property room the owner would never get it back anyway.

OK. Why in the hell was it not reported stolen by the owner. This is an issue with me. A serious one. Way to many loose ends here by what we have so far.

 

[MarkC]

Can you quote the IC? I can't find anything related to 34-4-4

I think he meant to cite to IC 32-34, the unclaimed property Article of the Indiana Code.

IC 32-34-4-4 is the statutory definition of "vehicle" for unclaimed property law:

[FONT=&quot]IC 32-34-4-4"Vehicle" defined
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Sec. 4. As used in this chapter, "vehicle" means a motor vehicle or a watercraft.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][Pre-2002 Recodification Citation: 32-9-9-4.][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.19.[/FONT]

 

[Dutchisaurus]

Because most people think we are a finders keepers state. As far as the owener was concerned it wasn't stolen it was lost.

Most people assume if a vehicle gets repo'd they lose what ever they had in it; people believe the same thing about evictions.

If the guns in question turned up in evidence or with the attorney general no big deal.

The problem is they didn't show up at either place, and instead of if you find a gun call non emergency it was if you find a gun call me direct.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[Dutchisaurus]

I think he meant to cite to IC 32-34, the unclaimed property Article of the Indiana Code.

IC 32-34-4-4 is the statutory definition of "vehicle" for unclaimed property law:

[FONT=&quot]IC 32-34-4-4"Vehicle" defined
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Sec. 4. As used in this chapter, "vehicle" means a motor vehicle or a watercraft.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][Pre-2002 Recodification Citation: 32-9-9-4.][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.19.[/FONT]

Thanks I must have fat fingered 34. I guess that's what I get for typing and eating kangaroo jerky

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[Cameramonkey]

I think he meant to cite to IC 32-34, the unclaimed property Article of the Indiana Code.

IC 32-34-4-4 is the statutory definition of "vehicle" for unclaimed property law:

[FONT=&amp]IC 32-34-4-4"Vehicle" defined
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp] Sec. 4. As used in this chapter, "vehicle" means a motor vehicle or a watercraft.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp][Pre-2002 Recodification Citation: 32-9-9-4.][/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.19.[/FONT]

We arent talking about the car though. He didnt keep a car. He was given something inside the car.

 

[Dutchisaurus]

We arent talking about the car though. He didnt keep a car. He was given something inside the car.

That's just the start of the IC the definitions section..it later goes on to talk about property left in cars over $50 in value.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[Cameramonkey]

That's just the start of the IC the definitions section..it later goes on to talk about property left in cars over $50 in value.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

Gotcha. I kept hitting findlaw, which only displays the exact part of the code. The subsequent parts are behind a paywall. Original post about it wasnt clear.

 

[Rookie]

Sec. 5 . (a) If items of personal property having an estimated aggregate value of at least ten dollars ($10) are discovered within a vehicle that has been lawfully repossessed, the creditor must notify the debtor as follows:

(1) The notice must be written.

(2) The notice must list each item of personal property having an estimated value greater than five dollars ($5).

(3) The notice must include the estimated aggregate value of all of the items of personal property.

(4) The notice must include a statement that if the debtor does not claim the property within thirty (30) days after the notice was sent, the personal property will become the property of the creditor with no right of redemption by the debtor.

(5) The notice must be sent by certified mail.

(b) If the debtor does not claim the items of personal property included in a notice given under subsection (a) not more than thirty (30) days after the notice was mailed, the items of personal property become the property of the creditor with no right of redemption by the debtor.

That shows what the creditor is obligated to do. According to the article, the vehicle was the property of the auction in March, they notified the officer in May, which is past the 30 day mark.

 

[Dutchisaurus]

Gotcha. I kept hitting findlaw, which only displays the exact part of the code. The subsequent parts are behind a paywall. Original post about it wasnt clear.

That's my bad. The problem with ,32-34 is it talks about repossessed cars..

But if a creditor is required to report it, I would assume so would an impount yard, auction yard and definitely a police officer.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[Rookie]

So, assuming the auction did their job, it becomes their property to do with as they please. Correct?

 

[Sigblitz]

If it wound up in the IMPD property room the owner would never get it back anyway.

OK. Why in the hell was it not reported stolen by the owner. This is an issue with me. A serious one. Way to many loose ends here by what we have so far.

It's a crime to possess a gun while drinking alcohol.

 

[Rookie]

It's a crime to possess a gun while drinking alcohol.

But that doesn't answer why the vehicle ended up in auction.

 

[HoughMade]

It's a crime to possess a gun while drinking alcohol.

 

[KG1]

Sec. 5 . (a) If items of personal property having an estimated aggregate value of at least ten dollars ($10) are discovered within a vehicle that has been lawfully repossessed, the creditor must notify the debtor as follows:

(1) The notice must be written.

(2) The notice must list each item of personal property having an estimated value greater than five dollars ($5).

(3) The notice must include the estimated aggregate value of all of the items of personal property.

(4) The notice must include a statement that if the debtor does not claim the property within thirty (30) days after the notice was sent, the personal property will become the property of the creditor with no right of redemption by the debtor.

(5) The notice must be sent by certified mail.

(b) If the debtor does not claim the items of personal property included in a notice given under subsection (a) not more than thirty (30) days after the notice was mailed, the items of personal property become the property of the creditor with no right of redemption by the debtor.

That shows what the creditor is obligated to do. According to the article, the vehicle was the property of the auction in March, they notified the officer in May, which is past the 30 day mark.

The only question is was the debtor notified before the 30 day mark prior to becoming the property of the auction house. as outlined in the IC?

 

[Rookie]

The only question is was the debtor notified before the 30 day mark prior to becoming the property of the auction house. as outlined in the IC?

I'm not a lawyer, but that's what it looks like to me. If so, how would that fall on anyone but the auction house?

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

It's a crime to possess a gun while drinking alcohol.

Citation please.

 

[Alamo]

OK. Why in the hell was it not reported stolen by the owner. This is an issue with me. A serious one. Way to many loose ends here by what we have so far.

Maybe it wasn't stolen and the owner doesn't realize it's missing. IIRC from the linked article the car was impounded because it was seized in a DUI case -- maybe Mr. DUI forgot that the gun was in the car, or he figures he lost ownership of everything in the car when it was seized. Or he borrowed it from someone, and either forgot or was to embarrassed to tell them he lost their gun when his car was grabbed.

 

[Dutchisaurus]

So, assuming the auction did their job, it becomes their property to do with as they please. Correct?

If they did their due diligence and sent a certified letter to the owner. But would they be required to send one to the vehicles owner or the guns owner?

My guess is that the due diligence wasn't done and it was just turned over under the impression that is what was required.

Any other thing I noticed is if you look at the mycase it says he was granted bail as to this case only.

Are there other cases?

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[Dutchisaurus]

Maybe it wasn't stolen and the owner doesn't realize it's missing. IIRC from the linked article the car was impounded because it was seized in a DUI case -- maybe Mr. DUI forgot that the gun was in the car, or he figures he lost ownership of everything in the car when it was seized. Or he borrowed it from someone, and either forgot or was to embarrassed to tell them he lost their gun when his car was grabbed.

This

This is very quite possible.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[HoughMade]

Y'all are making this a lot more complicated than it is.

First of all- not a repossession...