Off the back of a truck....

[jungleland26]

Someone that I know through the local photo circuit is offering a few bodies for sale

1d MKIII, 7d, 50d etc etc....


I suspect that these "fell off the back of a truck" (based upon REALLY low pricing and the person that is selling them)...... let say someone is dumb enough to purchase one of these "deep discounted" bodies..... What happens if and when they have to send it in to canon for repair?

Canon: sir, we have this body listed as stolen

sucker: uhh, I bought it from someone at a trade fair...

NOW WHAT?


and yes, I'm debating alerting canon of this...

[TeamSpeed]

Someone that I know through the local photo circuit is offering a few bodies for sale

1d MKIII, 7d, 50d etc etc....


I suspect that these "fell off the back of a truck" (based upon REALLY low pricing and the person that is selling them)...... let say someone is dumb enough to purchase one of these "deep discounted" bodies..... What happens if and when they have to send it in to canon for repair?

Canon: sir, we have this body listed as stolen

sucker: uhh, I bought it from someone at a trade fair...

NOW WHAT?


and yes, I'm debating alerting canon of this...

What good will this do? Canon does not maintain a master db of stolen goods, and most likely they will tell you to contact local authorities to investigate.

[reddyroc007]

contact info?

[crotter]

Someone that I know through the local photo circuit is offering a few bodies for sale

1d MKIII, 7d, 50d etc etc....


I suspect that these "fell off the back of a truck" (based upon REALLY low pricing and the person that is selling them)...... let say someone is dumb enough to purchase one of these "deep discounted" bodies..... What happens if and when they have to send it in to canon for repair?

Canon: sir, we have this body listed as stolen

sucker: uhh, I bought it from someone at a trade fair...

NOW WHAT?


and yes, I'm debating alerting canon of this...

Whats "really low" pricing, out of curiosity?

[Snydremark]

Sure they aren't just grey market cameras that someone's trying to offload? Online these are frequently the models that shadier resellers will give deep discounts on. The down side to them is that since they're foreign models, you have to have them serviced by the Canon branch in that country (Japan, China, etc). They aren't necessarily bad, stolen or anything else but you pretty give up "local" support for them when/if they go bad.

[speedline_fc]

contact info?

:lol:

[lgunnz]

+1 for clearification on "really low"

[charliec]

This is like asking meth addicts for advice on a bag of meth you just found...

[jungleland26]

+1 for clearification on "really low"



MKIII 1D (1.3x) $1899...

and I'm am quite certain they are off the back of a truck....I need not say anymore

and for the record, if I did not say it before...Because I know the type of sh#t this guy is usually in to....I will NOT be buying any of this stuff...

[tun]

how much for a 7D and 5d mark ii?

[triphop718]

MKIII 1D (1.3x) $1899...


I'll take 2 and in all seriousness just stay away.

[mikekelley]

I'd try to talk him down

[05Xrunner]

what was the 7D price?

[jungleland26]

getting off topic here....The purpose of this thread was to figure out what happens to the person that thinks they're buying a camera that they believe to be legit, when in fact, it is HOT? and assume canon is aware of the HOT serial number or range of numbers and a person brings it in for repair/service etc....

[stax]

getting off topic here....The purpose of this thread was to figure out what happens to the person that thinks they're buying a camera that they believe to be legit, when in fact, it is HOT? and assume canon is aware of the HOT serial number or range of numbers and a person brings it in for repair/service etc....

what could possibly happen (i suppose): if there is sufficient evidence of criminal intent, and assuming Canon gets involved with the authorities regarding stolen cameras, you might get charged with receiving stolen goods, you certainly don't get warranty coverage and Canon might refuse to service the camera.

what I suspect would happen: Canon would treat the camera as any other out-of-warranty camera.

[OceanView]

When you get caught with stolen merchandise, it will be confiscated and you will not have any recourse.

[stax]

When you get caught with stolen merchandise, it will be confiscated and you will not have any recourse.

true.

[crotter]

I would imagine Canon is probably not out any money anyways, I bet they were already paid for, and the store or business that was reselling them is who's really getting screwed here...

[speedline_fc]

I would imagine Canon is probably not out any money anyways, I bet they were already paid for, and the store or business that was reselling them is who's really getting screwed here...

Actually, it'd probably be the insurance company who is getting screwed.. and since insurance companies are bad, I'll take two (2) 1D3s :lol:

If the cameras were "removed" from Canon directly, then I could see them being a little more proactive about trying to track down who is involved in the heist and whatnot (although I doubt they even would then). But if the items were from a vendor who bought them from a distributor who bought them from Canon, I just don't think they (Canon) would give a crap. If a company like Canon is not legally obligated to do anything in these types of matters, then I seriously doubt they will.

[rklepper]

Not sure about other states but here it is a crime to possess stolen merchandise, regardless of what a person knows about it.

[stax]

Not sure about other states but here it is a crime to possess stolen merchandise, regardless of what a person knows about it.

That doesn't seem right to me. Almost all crimes require proof of criminal intent. I had to check Iowa.

Iowa Code 714.1

A person commits theft when the person does any of the following: ...

(4) Exercises control over stolen property, knowing such property to have been stolen, or having reasonable cause to believe that such property has been stolen, unless the person's purpose is to promptly restore it to the owner or to deliver it to an appropriate public officer. The fact that the person is found in possession of property which has been stolen from two or more persons on separate occasions, or that the person is a dealer or other person familiar with the value of such property and has acquired it for a consideration which is far below its reasonable value, shall be evidence from which the court or jury may infer that the person knew or believed that the property had been stolen.

http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/2003/714/1.html

[jungleland26]

That doesn't seem right to me. Almost all crimes require proof of criminal intent. I had to check Iowa.

Iowa Code 714.1

A person commits theft when the person does any of the following: ...

(4) Exercises control over stolen property, knowing such property to have been stolen, or having reasonable cause to believe that such property has been stolen, unless the person's purpose is to promptly restore it to the owner or to deliver it to an appropriate public officer. The fact that the person is found in possession of property which has been stolen from two or more persons on separate occasions, or that the person is a dealer or other person familiar with the value of such property and has acquired it for a consideration which is far below its reasonable value, shall be evidence from which the court or jury may infer that the person knew or believed that the property had been stolen.

http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/2003/714/1.html


Ever heard of the saying ignorance is no excuse? ;);)

[stax]

Ever heard of the saying ignorance is no excuse? ;);)

yes. that phrase only means that the commission of an outlawed act is still a crime even if the accused didn't know its commission was a crime. what I am saying, however, is that almost all crimes require proof that the accused intended to commit the outlawed act. these are two different things.

for example, most people know that possessing stolen property is a crime. nevertheless, possessing stolen goods is not a crime if the accused reasonably did not know that goods were in fact stolen. if, however, the accused knew that the goods were stolen, but did not know that intentionally possessing the stolen goods was a crime, he would still be guilty. hence the saying "ignorance of the law is no excuse."

[neilwood32]

That doesn't seem right to me. Almost all crimes require proof of criminal intent. I had to check Iowa.

Iowa Code 714.1

A person commits theft when the person does any of the following: ...

(4) Exercises control over stolen property, knowing such property to have been stolen, or having reasonable cause to believe that such property has been stolen, unless the person's purpose is to promptly restore it to the owner or to deliver it to an appropriate public officer. The fact that the person is found in possession of property which has been stolen from two or more persons on separate occasions, or that the person is a dealer or other person familiar with the value of such property and has acquired it for a consideration which is far below its reasonable value, shall be evidence from which the court or jury may infer that the person knew or believed that the property had been stolen.

http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/2003/714/1.html

I think you forgot to read this bit(highlighted in red) - basically if it can be inferred that you had knowledge of the true value, then you are liable "having reasonable cause to believe that such property has been stolen".

So with that in mind, I wouldnt touch this with a very long bargepole!

[stax]

I think you forgot to read this bit(highlighted in red) - basically if it can be inferred that you had knowledge of the true value, then you are liable "having reasonable cause to believe that such property has been stolen".

So with that in mind, I wouldnt touch this with a very long bargepole!

:lol: Not sure I get your point. I only said that it is not a crime to possess stolen property if you "reasonably" did not know the goods were hot. If a reasonable person would have known the goods were stolen (i.e., because of the very low price or because you knew the person selling the goods from was a thief, for example), then, yes, you are in trouble.

I will say it again, though. If you have no reason to believe the goods are stolen, it is not a crime to buy or possess stolen property. Please cite authority to the contrary, however, if you have it.

In any case, it's neither here nor there because I have not been advocating that the OP buy a camera that he believes might be stolen.

[Noise_Ninja]

Just for your information: Garmin maintains a list a of, reported stolen, gps serial# and those cost a couple of hundred bucks. (and they get to know where you are ;) ) So, knowing that for a fact, I'm pretty certain Canon has a list of, reported stolen, serial #, since their gear easily cost a couple of grands.

Anyone know if the serial number of a camera body get discretly uploaded to canon?

[Noise_Ninja]

...I will say it again, though. If you have no reason to believe the goods are stolen, it is not a crime to buy or possess stolen property...

I agree it might be a crime as long as: if your a caught with stolen goods you have to reveal the source you bought it from. That in mind I'm not excited a bout the idea of ratting out an angry crack head.

[shannyD]

HAH HAH HAH... someone offered me a deal like this last time i was in jersey.. a 1dmk3 for 950 new. everything.. had it in my hands.. "Fell of the back of a truck on the turnpike".

But let me tell you.. something in my gut just told me to walk away. But darn was it tempting.

[tsw910]

HAH HAH HAH... someone offered me a deal like this last time i was in jersey.. a 1dmk3 for 950 new. everything.. had it in my hands.. "Fell of the back of a truck on the turnpike".

But let me tell you.. something in my gut just told me to walk away. But darn was it tempting.

that is tempting .. and i would've gave in :p

[stax]

I agree it might be a crime as long as: if your a caught with stolen goods you have to reveal the source you bought it from. That in mind I'm not excited a bout the idea of ratting out an angry crack head.


:lol: Yes, there's that. And if you are caught with stolen property you can be arrested, even if it was acquired innocently. Conviction requires proof of more than mere possession, however.

[footballdude2k3]

if they ask you how you got it, umm....CRAIGSLIST, honestly, what could they do? Also, just look at it as something that you cannot get serviced by Canon, if it is that much cheaper you would get your use out of it that much faster....

[DeaconG]

Is he selling speakers too?:p:lol:

[Noise_Ninja]

My 2 cents..... let's gang-up on him and steal everything back (for us:lol:). That way, we would teahc him a lesson that it doesn't pay to steal, and I would finally have a 1DMkIII. ;)

[footballdude2k3]

My 2 cents..... let's gang-up on him and steal everything back (for us:lol:). That way, we would teahc him a lesson that it doesn't pay to steal, and I would finally have a 1DMkIII. ;)


count me in, just let me know when/where we are meeting, and i call dibs on one of the 5d2s :)

[Sean]

This is like asking meth addicts for advice on a bag of meth you just found...

Are you hiding something. You come here and don't offer to share. It's not nice when you find a bag of meth, since it was mine! :p;)