TWeaK

You probably didn't see my edit, which is pretty relevant :o)

US law requires knowledge of the goods being stolen, not mere belief. You don't have to convince the jury you didn't know, the prosecution has to convince the jury you did. That's a very high bar to meet, and while it could go to trial it almost certainly wouldn't, not unless they had solid evidence of his knowledge (eg, if he said they were stolen on his stream).

The fact that they chose to go through the Pinkertons more likely points to the fact that they knew they wouldn't have charges thrown about if they involved the police. The buyer would have been less likely to cooperate.

Knowingly possessing stolen goods is a crime, however that law is about addressing the trade of stolen goods, ie fencing. Merely possessing the goods is unlikely to attract a criminal charge, let alone a conviction with jail time, as it will usually be impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the buyer knew the goods were stolen. A reasonable person might think it is likely that they were stolen but would not know for sure.

Like I say, they were after the person who leaked it from the supply chain. If the police had been involved, they too would have been interested in the leaker, not the one-time buyer.

Edit: It can also vary by jurisdiction. Looking into it, there's an interesting bit in the wiki for this in the UK section, where they distinguish between suspicion, belief and knowledge:

A person handles stolen goods if (otherwise than in the course of stealing), knowing or believing them to be stolen goods he dishonestly receives the goods

Belief ... is something short of knowledge. It may be said to be the state of mind of a person who says to himself, "I cannot say I know for certain that these goods are stolen, but there can be no other reasonable conclusion in the light of all the circumstances, in the light of all that I have heard and seen."

However I don't think the US makes this distinction, as the US version of the law does not include "belief".

I love it, it takes the whole goodie twoshoes Starfleet ethos and turns it up to 11, while still being the B-team crew on a B-team ship, making it into an excellent Star Trek themed workplace comedy.

Juuuuust keep circling.

It goes back further than that. Major General Smedley Butler wrote a book on it, "War is a Racket", back in 1935 - and I'm pretty sure he wasn't the first, either.

sending PIs to recover stolen property instead of the police is the nice route.

Exactly. However being in possession of stolen property is not itself a crime, you just don't have any right to keep it. If you paid for it, then your claim is against whoever you paid.

They could have got the police to reclaim the stolen property, however perhaps that might not have been as effective for them in investigating the leak. In any case, the stories about the Pinkertons threatening him might not be true, and he'd have every right to refuse them entry or even to speak to them. The fact that he did suggests he willingly complied.

People have been campaigning for peace in the Palestine region for longer than anyone's been alive. It's just that people pushing for war, driven by profit, have been far more effective.

What's interesting to look at, I think, is how restraint has been developed over the years. WW1 and WW2 were no doubt a big boon for the war industry, but at the same time because war was everywhere it had plenty of negative effects on the manufacturers and dealers themselves. Now, manufacturing and selling is kept safely away from the actual war itself.

It's definitely something of a gimmick, like 3D TV, and especially in its early iterations. However you did just list a genuine benefit of hybrid technology. Also, I know someone with a Mercedes hybrid and that will go up to like 50 mph on battery only, and also delivers ridiculous acceleration like that I've only previously felt on motorbikes, all the while keeping fuel economy above 90 mpg and never bothering to plug it in. The only real downside is how much space the batteries take up in the boot.

I have a friend who studied the Toyota Prius gearbox at university to try and figure out improvements, I can say for a fact that their drivetrain is trick as fuck. So in some sense it's reasonable for them to charge a higher price and profit from their R&D work.

Like I say though, I’m sure they stretch the pricing well beyond what is reasonable.

On lemmy they're called communities.

Also calling for a ceasefire is not a "pro-Hamas" position. It feels like you're showing bias here more than anyone else. The Independent is also a large and well respected news outfit, and while many such publications have a lot of opinion pieces that are basically blog posts, this isn't one of them and is in traditional news format - they're reporting on a planned protest likely to be attended by a considerable number.

I didn't realise Hasbro were the publisher, now I feel a little dirty. Those bastards ruined Super Soaker.

Well a hybrid car is significantly more complicated than a petrol car (multiple power sources that have to be integrated through the drive train), however I'm sure they stretch the pricing well beyond reasonable proportions.