King forgot his crown
-
I do Not See the fraud here. If He would have given the Girls His real Birthday, He would have still received the Same amount of Gifts. Nothing would have changed in exchanging the Gifts.
The only Thing, which it probably helped at, was that He could plan ahead for the birthdays, avoiding a Potential meet-in of each girl, that He dated on the Same Day.
The only Thing He is gullible of ist deceiving the Woman on their Relationship. Which is Not an offenes in a legal Sense. There is no punishment for 2-timing, so 35-timing should Not have eitherWhat’s going on with your capitalization? I spent way too much time looking for hidden messages and came away with nothing except the - entirely unrelated - hypothesis that you are German.
-
What’s going on with your capitalization? I spent way too much time looking for hidden messages and came away with nothing except the - entirely unrelated - hypothesis that you are German.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Not OP:
In other languages (like German) nouns are capitalized.
I often write mails inside Europe that way to make it easy readable and put focus on the stuff I find necessary.For English native speakers it's probably really looks like hidden code ;-)
Edit: ok, read said comment and you're right. That's just like throwing a dice...
-
It’s a poor definition because gift exchanges are strictly voluntary and non-reciprocal engagements. I’m not saying what he did was ok or even legal in other contexts. My only point is that I wouldn’t consider this fraud because the victims were not compelled to give. This isn’t a Nigerian prince scam where the victims were promised greater returns at a later date. These victims gave with the expectation of monetary loss.
So, it's not fraud if I tell my grandma with dementia that it's my birthday once a week so she keeps giving me birthday checks?
-
Seems to fit the official definition pretty neatly. Colloquially, I tend to agree with you, there's a spectrum for fraud. But this still counts as fraud. It's a fraudulent misrepresentation of the truth to convince others to part with something of value (a gift).
The fact that it's a gift doesn't change that this is fraud, only the severity of fraud in a legal sense.
intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value
Advertising and politics?
-
It's pretty much the textbook definition of fraud. What are you talking about?
Fraud is defined as intentional deception to deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim.
He intentionally deceived 35 people for material gain. It's even more fraud if he deceived each one about only dating them.
In the US that could also potentially be rape by deception if any of them slept with him because they thought they were exclusive.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]It's pretty much the textbook definition of fraud. What are you talking about?
Fraud is defined as intentional deception to deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim.
That's what most politicians do every election. Just saying.
-
There is no mention of any consideration (a legal term meaning he didn’t promise them anything in return) provided by the “boyfriend”.
This would not be fraud under English common law.
You don't have to promise anything in return for it to be fraud. If I start a Go Fund Me because I have cancer when I really don't have cancer, the people donating aren't promised anything in return. It's still fraud.
-
It's pretty much the textbook definition of fraud. What are you talking about?
Fraud is defined as intentional deception to deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim.
That's what most politicians do every election. Just saying.
Most politicians are absolutely guilty of fraud.
-
As I said in another reply, my thinking is thus:
It’s a poor definition because gift exchanges are strictly voluntary and non-reciprocal engagements. I’m not saying what he did was ok or even legal in other contexts. My only point is that I wouldn’t consider this fraud because the victims were not compelled to give. This isn’t a Nigerian prince scam where the victims were promised greater returns at a later date. These victims gave with the expectation of monetary loss.
Just because these were voluntary non-reciprocal dispositions of wealth would not automatically make this not fraud in Germany at least.
I talked with a few fellow students and their gut feeling was that this could be fraud as well. After talking a bit about the matter we had quite a few issues apart from the voluntary aspect as well.
All dispositions in fraud are voluntary for one, otherwise this would be in the ballpark of robbery and the like (as in involuntary dispositions).
The act of giving a gift is not necessarily irreversible as there are ways to fight the disposition on grounds of fraud for one. Which would tick one of the requirements of fraud: the disposition needs to be unlawful.
Anyway you're right in that there are quite a few reasons to conclude this isn't fraud. If it is, it would be a very "heavy" case which would make this a felony in Germany.
-
Hoping that isn’t real because that’s kind of an f-ed up definition for fraud. Also, what a legend.
Found the guy with 35 girlfriend.
-
At the same time?
In one bed no less. Must be an Alaska king
-
So, it's not fraud if I tell my grandma with dementia that it's my birthday once a week so she keeps giving me birthday checks?
Your grandma having dementia changes the formula a bit.
-
Just because these were voluntary non-reciprocal dispositions of wealth would not automatically make this not fraud in Germany at least.
I talked with a few fellow students and their gut feeling was that this could be fraud as well. After talking a bit about the matter we had quite a few issues apart from the voluntary aspect as well.
All dispositions in fraud are voluntary for one, otherwise this would be in the ballpark of robbery and the like (as in involuntary dispositions).
The act of giving a gift is not necessarily irreversible as there are ways to fight the disposition on grounds of fraud for one. Which would tick one of the requirements of fraud: the disposition needs to be unlawful.
Anyway you're right in that there are quite a few reasons to conclude this isn't fraud. If it is, it would be a very "heavy" case which would make this a felony in Germany.
I’m no legal scholar by any means but I think in America this would be a civil suit not a criminal case unless the amount of money involved was tremendous.
I won’t even try to guess how it would shake out in Japan.
-
This guy cheated on 35 different women for gifts and you go:
Also, what a legend.
I hope that's a /s
I mean the article itself is apparently satire so yeah.
-
Seems to fit the official definition pretty neatly. Colloquially, I tend to agree with you, there's a spectrum for fraud. But this still counts as fraud. It's a fraudulent misrepresentation of the truth to convince others to part with something of value (a gift).
The fact that it's a gift doesn't change that this is fraud, only the severity of fraud in a legal sense.
Fraud in the sense that the guy is lying and profiting from it, sure. But the common / google definition of a word and the legal definition/ application of that word are two completely different things.
-
Take it he wasn't reciprocating the gifts?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I think the only way this makes sense is that he'd start dating someone, say his birthday is coming up, dump them after receiving the gift and repeating the process.
-
This post did not contain any content.
We need to ban birthdays so this never happens again.
-
I think the only way this makes sense is that he'd start dating someone, say his birthday is coming up, dump them after receiving the gift and repeating the process.
Do you get someone a gift if you're only known them for a week? Serious question.
-
Found the guy with 35 girlfriend.
I’m down to 28 now. Apparently some of them saw this thread …
-
We need to ban birthdays so this never happens again.
Monkey's paw curls. Now abortions are legal and forced.
-
Most politicians are absolutely guilty of fraud.
I'd even go so far as saying that fraud is pretty rampant in all levels of society.
