[Boatanchors] Missing hallicrafters SX 88

[Barry H]

Hi Crimestoppers

I also have to agree with Joe and Duane -- and add a possibility that seems to have been missed thus far.

John mentioned that the gentleman was unable to accompany him down to the basement.  He said he had an SX-88 that John could not find.  Everyone is riveted on the SX-88 business as that's a combination of grand theft auto and high treason to those of us who care.  However, it may well be that the owner was mistaken and referring to an SX-something else which may well have been still there.  Had he been able to go down to the basement to look, he might have pointed out the radio and said - "There it is - oops, right it's an SX-28" or SX-99 or whatever.  I don't know how many times someone told me they had an RBH, when it was an HRO, or an RBL or some other alphabet soup.  Maybe it was an S-108 or an SX-99?  99 is just one count higher on each digit.

So, for all we know, the missing SX-88 wasn't missing and wasn't an SX-88.

And maybe there's a big box of NOS 6V6's down there also.  That's not to dismiss it, but it's not a basis, nor the venue to initiate an APB for all shifty looking hams in Missouri.

To keep things in perspective, it's good to remember that joke by Stephen Wright -- "Somebody broke into my apartment last night and replaced everything with an exact duplicate."

Barry  








-- carolew <carolew at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
Duane's right. These are difficult crimes to prove. In fact, it is often
difficult enough to determine if a crime occurred.

Here are some things to think about:

1. Probable cause is needed for an arrest. That's roughly more probable than
not. Guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a high standard.

2. The first issue is whether a theft really occurred. With an elderly victim,
perception and memory are issues. Was the SX-88 really there when the suspect
ham was there? How would we prove that? Can any third party verify its presence?
When did the owner last see it? How much time elapsed between the suspect ham's
visit and the discovery that the SX-88 was missing? How many people had access
to the storage area during the period when it might have been stolen? How many
caretakers has he had during that period? How many other hams etc. have been in
the house to buy things? Why the focus on this particular ham rather than others
who had access to the storage area? Is the layout of the house such that someone
could have snuck an SX-88 out without the victim seeing him (e.g., an outdoor
exit from the basement)?

3. Does the elderly victim have a serial number for the SX-88? If not, did the
radio bear any distinguishing characteristic that would make it unique (e.g.,
call sign written somewhere on the set)? If not, we might be SOL even if we
found an SX-88 in the shack of the suspect ham. It would certainly raise some
suspicions but probably not much more.

4. Can the elderly victim identify the suspect ham? How did the victim and the
suspect ham link up? Did he pay in cash or by check? Did he leave a business
card etc.? Did he leave a phone number? Would the victim recognize him if he saw
him again? Was any third party present at the same time as the suspect ham?

5. The bitch of these cases is that the precise facts that make the elderly so
vulnerable make it very difficult to prosecute the cases in which they are
victimized. .

6. The best bet is to have the victim contact the local police. Most cops have
elderly relatives and are sympathetic to elderly victims. They'll go the extra
mile to help this fellow. If the local police won't help, call the local DA's
office.

7. I share John's anger, as I think we all do. I don't sense that John was
advocating a lynch mob. As I re-read his original post, I see that he chose his
words very carefully. He lays out his case by setting forth the facts that cause
him to suspect the particular (and, more importantly, unnamed) ham. I sense that
he wants to gather the facts before taking any action. I have no reason to
believe that he would take any action other than a lawful and proper one.

8. I see Duane as reacting more to the direction in which this thread appeared
to be headed than in what John or anyone else had already said. I don't see his
comments as critical of John or anyone else. If John's suspicions are true, I'm
sure Duane would be as PO'd at this ham as the rest of us would be.


Joe Connor


_______________________________________________
Boatanchors mailing list
Boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
** List Administrator - Duane Fischer, W8DBF/W9WZE **   
** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com **         
$$ For vintage radio info, see the HCI web site $$      
http://www.w9wze.org