i think you're putting way too much blame on this lady who met up with your wife the day after you were first put in contact with her. if you want to focus your anger at someone, it should be the girl scouts.
How dense are you? I've pointed out that that is a logical conclusion to reach based on her actions, but I've flatly stated numerous times that I don't think that was her intention. For the protection of her reputation alone, she should have gotten in high gear. Several people knew she had a camera that didn't belong to her: the Scouts, the woman she thought she was helping.... who else got in on that grapevine? So she sits on her hands...
She should have been seeking out the proper owner of the camera. Hey, everyone's to blame: my wife, this lady, the scouts. She walked off with $1000 of property that wasn't hers. And then it wasn't the property of the person to whom she thought it belonged. 26 days later we smoked her out.... Isn't that just a tad irresponsible and inconsiderate?
I'm not dense. You're simply an idiot. It's illogical to think she had any intention of stealing the camera since she reported it to the Girl Scouts.
do you know how long it took her to get in touch with her friend whose camera she thought it was? the only facts you know about this woman were a) she contacted the girl scouts about this camera after she determined it was not her friends (and could've easily kept it at that time and no one would have had any idea) and b) she met up with your wife first day after you finally talked to her. everything other than that seems like pure speculation on your part and you're probably biased due to the way your wife says she treated her.
Mrs. G called the Scouts on Monday, May 2nd after leaving camp on Sunday, May 1st. The Scouts had no camera and had heard from no one. My wife called a couple of more times and then about May 10th, the Scouts told my wife that they had heard from someone who had the camera, but the Scouts would not release her name/address/phone to us. It took 26 more days to get the camera back from that point. The only activity was spurred by stating my intentions of bringing in THE AUTHORITIES.
Hey, El Stupido, shall we go back and count how many times I stated that it's my opinion that she didn't intend to steal the camera? Her lack of follow-through in fixing her contribution to the problem is what raises suspicions. The Scouts had stopped pursuing the matter...
She sought out the proper owner when she notified the Girl Scouts she had the camera. Smoked her out? Quit being a drama-queen. She reported it to the Girl Scouts. All things considered, you were lucky that the camera was taken by someone who had no intention of stealing it. How considerate do you expect her to be when you threaten police action when she's done nothing wrong?
The Scouts knew and the friend on whose behalf she acted would know. I don't know who else was in that chatter. It's not hard to imagine her calling a couple of other folks in the troop: "Hey Karen, this is Beth. I picked up this camera thinking it was Hazel's.... but it's not. Has anyone else mis-placed a camera... that you know of? Then of course, she could just be motivated to do the right thing apart from considerations of getting caught or not.
so do you know that on may 10th, the girl scouts made actual contact with this lady? i think you want to be mad at the girl scouts, but know that you can't cause your wife/daughters want to be involved with them, so you're directing your anger towards someone who really did nothing wrong other than get snippy with your wife after agreeing to meet with her the very next day after you were directly in touch with her.
I don't care what your opinion is. Every time you "logically deduce" that she intended to steal it, you deserve to be called an idiot. Ok, the Scouts had stopped pursuing the matter. Blame the scouts. Why are you holding it against the Good Samaritan? She reported it. There's nothing more you could've reasonably asked of her since you didn't have her contact info and she didn't have yours. And once you established contact with her, your camera was returned in one day, right?
Summertime is here; make some time for remedial reading lessons. She did not seek us out when she notified the Scouts; she did nothing for 26 days. In fact, she stopped communicating with the Scouts by phone and by email. She only turned on the afternurners when, apparently, the Scouts told her that we intended to consult the authorities. If she did nothing wrong, she should have nothing to fear, right? Yes, we were lucky that an out-and-out thief didn't take the camera. It is, unbelievably to me, apparently a matter of opinion whether or not she did something wrong. I treat people better than that so I expect the same.
We'll just have to agree to disagree. It is my opinion that it demonstrates horrible judgement to sit around and do nothing for 26 days when you know that you walked off with $1000 of someone else's property. Getting snippy is just the last thing she did wrong. If she did nothing wrong (besides getting snippy) why should she fear the involvement of the police? That's the only thing that spurred her to conclusive action. Don't forget: she walked off with our camera; she has a share in this confusion. The next person to come upon it would probably do the sensible thing and turn it in to the authorities at the Camp not just take off with it without telling anybody.
Yet another example of American children getting an over blown sense of self-worth and importance. When you make everything a child does into an accomplishment, it makes nothing they do special. This attitude has trickled down since the 70's. I now have attorneys that are fresh graduates from law school bringing their parents to interviews and thinking that they are all special, individual snow flakes.
How will my reading books make your dumbass any smarter? Notifying the Girl Scouts = seeking you out. Earlier, you stated that the Girl Scouts seemed disinterested in your situation. How certain are you that the Girl Scouts kept trying to reach her? You seemed to have gotten in touch with her pretty easily once you had her contact info. You threatened her with police intervention... Out of curiosity, let's say you lose your wallet at Target, and it has $200 cash in it. Target customer service calls you and says your wallet has been found. Do you expect the cash to still be in there?
I never "logically deduced" that she intended to steal it. I said that is a logical conclusion that could be reached upon realization that she initiated no effort to return the camera that she walked off with and that she also had cut off communication with the Scouts. You just go on living with your Third World mentality and I'll stick to civilization, thank you! :grin:
