ignorance is no excuse

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Asguard, Feb 10, 2010.

  1. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    i have been watching Underbelly and the channel 7 show Gangs of OZ and i was wondering why there are no charges layed against the wives and girlfirends of these criminals. After all one of the main insentives for organised crime is the money to bring in the chicks and you cant seriously tell me they didnt know. As one women said "when he has a new wad of cash every day but he doesnt get up to go to work...". If the girls know that they will go to jail for reciving the procideds of crime then you cut out one of the main insentives to get involved in that life style.

    BTW im not gender biased, if there are female crime bosses and male partners then they should be held just as much to account for what there female partners are doing
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    It's wrong morally yet much too difficult to prove.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. desi Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,616
    You can't blame someone for a crime someone else commits just because they are having sex with them.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    well...thats what men signed up for when they were first born into this world. To deal with women.
     
  8. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Exactly. There is no statue what would find them guilty, unless they actually saw a crime commited. Even though legal spouses are not required to testify against their husbands...

    In short: Morally yes, legally, no...
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2010
  9. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    umm you have never herd of laws about reciving the procideds of crime? reciving stolen goods? ect.
     
  10. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    so the law in Australia considers money and stolen goods as the same thing?
     
  11. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Can't speak for other countries, but in the US one cannot be compelled to testify against one's spouse. So there's typically little that can be done to make such charges stick.
     
  12. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    procideds of crime legislation is seprate (and more broud) than the reciving stolen goods legislation if thats what your asking. It refers to ANY money obtained illegally (actually they have just changed this so its any money that cant be proven for certain groups to have come from a legitimate source), that means drug procideds, procideds of hitmen, extortion and any other criminal venture you can think of
     
  13. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    hehe, money is not stolen goods in this case if they got it for protection or running a betting agency...

    So no, I never heard of such a law. Also you have to PROVE the wife knew where the money came from. She can always pretend that she was lied to. I don't recall one case when a maffia wife was jailed just for living off of the income... It could happen but obviously they ain't scared...
     
  14. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    actually no you dont, in the case of stolen goods its enough to simply hold them (ask alot of former car owners who bought there cars honestly from ads on things like cars guide only to find out they no longer have a car because it was stolen and they cant get there money back)

    On finances, you dont have to prove SQUAT under SA legislation. THEY have to prove that the money was obtained legally, the burden of proof is on the person not the state anymore (the law was changed last year from memory). If you cant prove it then the assets get siezed by the state and sold and the procideds go into the victoms of crime fund. It can be cash, Shares, houses, boats, cars, TVs, ect ect, ie it can be anything. You have to prove where you got it from. Now a quite simple change to the law will remove the ability of criminals to hide assets in the spouses name. "You know that necklace that chopper ried gave you? can you prove where the money came from? no, fine its ours now, those tickets to the ballet you went to yesterday, where did the money come from? you dont know? you now owe us the cost of the tickets" ect ect

    This is how the law is written, its just not how its currently aplied and if it WAS then there would be a huge disinsentive to get involved with gangsters which itself would be a huge disinsentive to actually commit crime.

    Further more there is precidence for this, for instance if you lend your partner your car and they commit an offense under the hoon legislation the police can sieze and either sell your car (and again the procideds go to victoms of crime) or it can be crushed. Doesnt MATTER if you say you didnt know what they were going to do with it, you are deemed to have been irrisponcable in loaning the car to them and there for its "tough titties"
     
  15. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Who gives a squat about SA?(South Alabama?) On the internet only America counts.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    P.s.: Kind of funny to ask about legality of this and that when posters are from 4-5 continens...
     
  16. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    I didnt nessarly ask about the legalities of it, thats up to the courts and the goverment. Im more interested in why when the goverment proposes to be "tough on crime" to the point of having orders ripped right out of the anti terror legislation which forbid people from associating with someone conected to a bikie gang (that means that technically my partner cant go and see her friend ever because she is the daughter of a former bikie) that no one is willing to tackle the main insentive to comit these sorts of crimes, ie the sexual componant
     
  17. kororoti Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    252
    If you're going to outlaw association, you might want to start by outlawing gangs in the first place. Really, being a criminal's wife is not much different from being a member of a criminal's gang. In both cases you share some of the proceeds, and in both cases you indirectly participate by lending aid to the criminal.
     
  18. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    I thought I would resurrect (no chimpkin its not thread necromancy because its my own thread

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ) this thread because of a TV show on Foxtell called "Mob wives"

    The introduction is quite pointed "I knew he would go into the family business, I had everything I could want, furs... (sorry slightly tipsy so cant remember this bit) a million dollors at my fingertips"
     
  19. Anti-Flag Pun intended Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,714
    Generally I'd say they could count as accessories to commit the crime, but it may depend just how much they know. Might also depend if they have a history of being a partner to criminals.
     
  20. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Ignorance is always an excuse. I haven't even read this thread.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Agreed.

    I think I would hold the lot of them to account in front of a pockmarked brick wall.

    Leeches; parasites.
     

Share This Page