thats what i dont understand and really the only reason i began posting. i agree that the lady was a bit careless with someone else's property but he was so insistent on blowing something so small into a 20 page debate. just get over it dude.
Op and Op's wife sound like a dramatic couple. Be glad you got your camera and move on. I don't feel bad that it took a month to return to him, if you lose something you should be greatful if you ever find it again, whether that takes a day or 10 years. It is no one's fault by the irresponsible party that loses it, unless it was personally stolen. Kiss the finder's ring and move on with your life. I know I am repeating what a majority have said here but after 20 pages I felt obligated to include my 2 cents.
This thread could explode if all who have disagreed with giddyup tried to apologize without knowing the labyrinth of a giddyup defined apology...
If people weren't trying to obstruct my criticism of her choices and her behavior so constantly and unreasonably, this thread would not have seen a second page. I've been painted as this Angry Man. The truth is that it went on so very long because I forgot about it for a couple of weeks. Then I realized that we had some events coming up for which we needed the camera, so I wrote the letter that I had suggested a couple of weeks earlier that my wife write. And it worked. I think the lady is irresponsible, but I didn't really have a second thought about her until she treated my wife shabbily. There are two sides to this issue. I don't blame anyone for not being enthusiastic about stepping up for the defense of doing the right thing and doing it promptly. The constant harangue from the Peanut Gallery is deafening. Sometimes you're funny but mostly you're just ugly. If I have to step up, I will. If "my" side doesn't get the last word, "your" side does. Why is it wrong for me to get the "last word," but okay for you to? This is like the myopia charge. I dont' change my mind, I'm myopic. You don't change your mind, you're.... what... right? strong? I say unethical.
This thread is ****ing ridiculous. 21 pages?! All about a couple women and a camera? Geezus Christ. Giddyup, stfu and get over it.
I'm the broken record; the drama is introduced by all the hypotheticals introduced (some of which are not even remotely attached to anything factual) and the excuse-making for her negligence and the high level of unnecessary insult that was introduced.
My main problem was that you and your wife never thanked her for the camera she had returned. I understand that the process was bit inconvenient (it wasn't THAT bad), but the process and the result here seem to be two different issues. You can b**** all you want about the process you had to go through but you got your camera back. Mrs camera lady messed up in the process, but she delivered regardless. I think people here are not siding with you because you are not giving her the credit for the valuable product she had returned, non-damaged.
You are an idiot. Then it really wasn't a big deal that a month passed? That makes you a major dramatic fool. I don't believe you. I am sure in your pathetic little head you let anger build. Yes there are two sides... the your wife and you take.... and then the right side. I just broke your camera. It all comes full circle... you are an idiot.
I read the original post, then decided not to check back into this thread until now... WOW WHAT HAVE I BEEN MISSING, I'm currently on page 11 and will finish this thread by end of day, but just had to chime in. Epic thread. Equally as good as Almu's thread years back. While I agree with Giddy's anger in this matter, the end result is what matters, you got an expensive piece of equipment back, albeit, in a painstaking manner. The Girl Scout camp does not have to help you, be glad they did. The person who took/stole the camera did not have to entertain you either. No harm, no foul.
Read the Law Got this from a friend of mine who is a lawyer in NC: "Once she realized the camera was not hers, she would have committed conversion (wrongfully depriving another of property they have a lawful right to possess). Conversion is both a crime and a civil cause of action. On the civil side, damages for conversion are the fair market value of the property converted calculated at the time of conversion. If she took it thinking it was someone else’s camera, but with the intention of returning it to them, there is no conversion unless she refuses to return it. If she refused to return it upon learning she was mistaken, conversion would occur at the moment of refusal. Refusal to return can take the form of an outright refusal or can be demonstrated through facts and circumstances. Hope this helps." Have no doubt that the facts and the circumstances were turning against her as the days passed. Good thing for her that she didn't actually refuse to return it...
She reported it to the Girl Scouts which showed a clear intention to return the camera. Especially since you got the camera back within 1 day of contacting her. Based on your buddy's legal advice, there's no indication of conversion. I'm guessing that when you tell this story to your friends, you bias it in a manner that favors you. Additionally, they're your friends so they will look at events through your eyes. No one on this board is your friend. We looks at the facts objectively. And when so many people disagree with you, you should probably take a step back and re-evaluate your position.
I would daresay that refusal to return phone calls and emails is a circumstance that the police would consider indicating refusal. That occurred over a 23 day period. Here's a copy/paste of my summary of the facts: "1. Mrs. G left her $1000 camera at Girl Scout Camp when they left a sleepover there on Sunday, May 1. 2. On Monday, May 2nd, she calls the GS Camp; no one has turned in a camera 3. She calls a couple of more times over the next week: still no camera reported 4. About Day 10, GS Camp calls Mrs. G to tell her that someone has called in with her "found" camera. The story is that one of the mothers thought she knew to whom it belonged, but it turns out she was wrong. 5. In the interim, Mrs G calls the Camp a couple of times inquiring about instructions on how to retrieve the camera. The GS Camp would never give Mrs G the name of the person who had taken the camera and that person had not returned phone calls or emails-- according to the GS Camp staff 6. About Day 32 (Thursday), I call the GS Camp and spoke to the Head Administrator expressing my disappointment that this was taking so long to resolve. She said she would call me back that afternoon. She didn't call, nor did she call on the next day. 7. On Day 34, I send a letter to the GS Camp administrator informing her that should I not hear from her by the following Tuesday, I would be calling the police to have them investigate. I assured them the GS Camp staff was, in my mind, merely material witness to what I thought was a theft-- knowingly taking property that doesn't belong to you and not returning it. 8. On Day 36 (Monday), the GS Camp calls me with the Name, Address and Phone Number of the lady with the camera. Mrs G calls her that day to arrange an exchange on Tuesday. 9. On Day 37, Mrs. G meets the lady to receive the camera. My question is this: what crime, if any, would the lady have committed had she never returned the camera? Did she commit any crime by mistakenly taking the camera in the first place while being less than diligent about returning it?"
