reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by Pontius
are you guilty if you rent your property to some guy and he beats his wife there? no. are you guilty if you rent your property and some guy GROWS drugs there? yes. unless of course you can prove that you didn't know about it at all. what the land is used for is the owner's responsibility. thus the saying "possession is 9/10s of the law". so is he guilty because a very large dogfighting ring was run on his property? yes. unless of course there's any way possible he can prove ignorance. and considering he owned not one, but two dog breeding businesses, I think it'll be next to impossible for him to prove he didn't know there were dogs being fought on his land. and again, this is the feds, they don't go for federal indictments unless it's pretty much an airtight case. I doubt he'll do any significant amount of prison tight, but I'll bet a hundred dollars to a jelly donut that he WILL be found guilty and will very likely plead guilty rather than go to trial.
I happen to know someone who had two different rental properties busted because his tennents were growing pot. That's two within a few months of each other. The cops didn't question him on either one. I remember because he was steamed because he was questioned about a tennent who was accused of operating a daycare without a license. They questioned him about that but not the drugs.
I don't know why you keep bringing up "possession is 9/10th of the law", it means nothing unless you are talking about street justice. Even then the most important part is the last 10th, KEEPING IT. To be prosecuted it would have to be proven the landlord knew about the activity. The law of the land is still "innocent until PROVEN guilty"
For what its worth I don't think anyone found guily in this case will get a slap. too much publicity and this goes beyond dog fighting. They way they are supposed to have put down the dogs (hanging, drowning, slamming on the ground) is so out there I seriously doubt the prosecutors are going to be willing to plead it down.
are you guilty if you rent your property to some guy and he beats his wife there? no. are you guilty if you rent your property and some guy GROWS drugs there? yes. unless of course you can prove that you didn't know about it at all. what the land is used for is the owner's responsibility. thus the saying "possession is 9/10s of the law". so is he guilty because a very large dogfighting ring was run on his property? yes. unless of course there's any way possible he can prove ignorance. and considering he owned not one, but two dog breeding businesses, I think it'll be next to impossible for him to prove he didn't know there were dogs being fought on his land. and again, this is the feds, they don't go for federal indictments unless it's pretty much an airtight case. I doubt he'll do any significant amount of prison tight, but I'll bet a hundred dollars to a jelly donut that he WILL be found guilty and will very likely plead guilty rather than go to trial.
I happen to know someone who had two different rental properties busted because his tennents were growing pot. That's two within a few months of each other. The cops didn't question him on either one. I remember because he was steamed because he was questioned about a tennent who was accused of operating a daycare without a license. They questioned him about that but not the drugs.
I don't know why you keep bringing up "possession is 9/10th of the law", it means nothing unless you are talking about street justice. Even then the most important part is the last 10th, KEEPING IT. To be prosecuted it would have to be proven the landlord knew about the activity. The law of the land is still "innocent until PROVEN guilty"
For what its worth I don't think anyone found guily in this case will get a slap. too much publicity and this goes beyond dog fighting. They way they are supposed to have put down the dogs (hanging, drowning, slamming on the ground) is so out there I seriously doubt the prosecutors are going to be willing to plead it down.
