The Experts below are selected from a list of 48 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Dean Lanter - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • "In the Business" of Fencing: Making Sense of Federal Sentencing Enhancements for Dealers in Stolen Goods
    Texas Law Review, 1999
    Co-Authors: Dean Lanter
    Abstract:

    "[W]hat you gotta remember is that the fence is a businessman. He knows all about business. The thief don't know nothin' about it. " I. Introduction The dealer in Stolen goods (the fence2) is a person who buys Stolen property from thieves and resells it for profit. As such, the fence is a businessman, regardless of whether he also operates a legal commercial business.3 He serves as the middleman between the thief, whose goal is to quickly convert the goods he steals into cash,4 and the willing consumer,5 who is always in search of a discount.6 Simultaneously operating in both the legitimate retail world and the criminal underworld, the fence applies his many skills to successfully exploit both for financial gain. According to one criminologist, the fence could be considered the quintessential businessman.' As surely as the fence is a businessman, the criminal redistribution of Stolen property is a very big business. In 1996, nearly twelve million property offenses were reported, accounting for eighty-eight percent of all crimes reported to law enforcement authorities nationwide.8 Indeed, one reported property crime occurred every three seconds: one burglary occurred every thirteen seconds, one larceny-theft occurred every four seconds, and one motor vehicle theft occurred every twenty-three seconds.9 While this criminal activity translated into an estimated total value of $15.5 billion of property reported Stolen, law enforcement agencies recorded only a thirty-eight percent recovery rate for dollar losses in connection with Stolen property, leaving approximately $9.61 billion of Stolen property successfully redistributed throughout the economy.10 Worse still, even the Justice Department admits that the above statistics of reported theft most likely vastly underestimate the true size and extent of the property crime problem in America." For while the overall clearance rate'2 for reported property crime in 1996 was a mere eighteen percent,'3 the number of property offenders that successfully distribute Stolen Merchandise through fences may be much greater than these figures indicate because many property crimes are never reported. In fact, the most recent figures from the National Crime Victimization Survey indicate that in 1995 just over twenty-eight million property crimes occurred,'4 over twice the official number reported to law enforcement authorities.'5 As a result, there is no way of knowing exactly how many billions of dollars in Stolen property pass through fences annually. While not all Stolen goods are fenced,'6 it is clear that fences do distribute a sizable amount of the fruits associated with minor thefts, are the main outlets of property for thefts involving moderate to large quantities of Stolen Merchandise, and handle many of the high value, small quantity thefts." The same individual who is more than willing to patronize the fence might also call the police,'8 thus making the fence "the underworld's indispensable man" in the distribution of Stolen goods. 19 In 1967 the President's Crime Commission, suspecting that the fence played a much larger role in the world of property crime than had previously been believed, issued the following call to arms: Little research has been done on fencing, despite its central role in professional crime. More information is needed about the nature of the market for illicit goods and the extent to which the demand for various types of goods affects the incidence of theft. More should also be learned about the relationship of legitimate and illegitimate markets. . . . The redistribution of goods through theft might constitute a significant subsidy to certain groups in our society; its curtailment might have significant side effects which should be explored. Finally, it would be desirable to have more information about the organization and operations of large-scale fencing operations, to aid in the development of better law methods of enforcement. …

Karen Mcelrath - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Buying Stolen Property: An Opportunity Perspective
    Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1994
    Co-Authors: Paul F. Cromwell, Karen Mcelrath
    Abstract:

    This study is based on findings from a self-report survey regarding participation in the crime of knowingly buying Stolen property by ordinary, otherwise honest individuals. Of the sample, 17% reported having bought Stolen goods in the past; 12% reported being motivated to buy Stolen Merchandise; another 15% were unsure whether they would buy Stolen property if offered. The data support an opportunity perspective of the crime of knowingly buying Stolen goods. Having previously purchased Stolen property was significantly related to whether the respondent had an opportunity to buy (had been offered) and whether one was motivated (would buy if offered) to buy Stolen goods.

Paul F. Cromwell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Buying Stolen Property: An Opportunity Perspective
    Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1994
    Co-Authors: Paul F. Cromwell, Karen Mcelrath
    Abstract:

    This study is based on findings from a self-report survey regarding participation in the crime of knowingly buying Stolen property by ordinary, otherwise honest individuals. Of the sample, 17% reported having bought Stolen goods in the past; 12% reported being motivated to buy Stolen Merchandise; another 15% were unsure whether they would buy Stolen property if offered. The data support an opportunity perspective of the crime of knowingly buying Stolen goods. Having previously purchased Stolen property was significantly related to whether the respondent had an opportunity to buy (had been offered) and whether one was motivated (would buy if offered) to buy Stolen goods.

John Hadreas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ADDICTS, FENCES, AND THE MAR KET FOR Stolen GOODS
    2016
    Co-Authors: James Roumasset, John Hadreas
    Abstract:

    8 Examination of the literature of the heroin problem in the United StatesAbstract reveals that there has been scant attention paid to the type of propertycrime specialized in by addicts or to the marketing network of addict-Stolen goods. This paper begins to remedy both neglects by focusing on Merchandise theft as a primary source of income for the heroin addict. A methodology is developed for estimating the income addicts receive for Merchandise that they steal. Next a method is discussed for determining the type of middlemen who purchase Stolen Merchandise from addicts and how much they mark up the items before retailing them in the secondhand goods market. This yields estimates for the retail value ofgoods Stolen and the gross revenue to middlemen. Since addicts tend to sell Stolen items to otherwise legitimate businessmen, not underground fences as is widely believed, there appears to be substantial scope for reducing Merchandise theft by instituting stricter regulations on the saleof secondhand goods. A system for providing middlemen with telephone access to a computerized "hot-list " is recommended. Stricter regulation of the middlemen would lower the effective wage of stealing and raise the relative price of heroin. Under reasonable assumptions about addict preferences, it is shown that such a policy would result in a decrease in the total amount of theft

Vallejo Galvis, Yanina Alejandra - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • La responsabilidad civil en el transporte de mercancías
    Facultad de Ciencias Juridicas y Politicas de la Universidad Nacional del Altiplano de Puno, 2016
    Co-Authors: Vallejo Galvis, Yanina Alejandra
    Abstract:

    El presente escrito pretende evidenciar las diferentes posturas que la Corte Suprema de Justicia ha adoptado en cuanto a los casos en los la figura de remitente de la mercancía se ha visto confundido con la de transportista y por ende se revisan las características del contrato de transporte. De igual manera, se estudia el caso en el que quien obra como transportista y le es hurtada la mercancía, alega caso fortuito o fuerza mayor y si dicha excepción es considerada válida para la misma Corte. Adicionalmente, se analiza un fallo en el que el citado tribunal revisa la posibilidad que quien no tiene derecho de dominio sobre la mercancía pero si interés negocial sobre la misma, pueda alegar interés asegurable.This paper aims to show the different positions that the Supreme Court has taken regarding the cases analyzed the figure of the sender of the goods has been confused with the carrier and therefore the characteristics of the transport contract are reviewed . Similarly, it analyzed the case in which who works as a carrier and is Stolen Merchandise to him, claims fortuitous event or force majeure and if the exception is considered valid for the same Court. Additionally, this paper discusses a judgment, in which the court reviews the possibility that those who have no right to rule over the good but bargaining if interest thereon, can claim insurable interest