Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hardcase
What happens if the business doesn't maintain the record or doesn't produce it upon demand? The law states that failure to do so is prima facie evidence that the person who received the material knew that it was stolen.
|
I doubt that part would hold up if tested, either. Suppose I bring in a family heirloom and sell it to a pawn shop or thrift store or something of that nature, and the store subsequently sells it for cash. Store owner gets arrested. He's been a friend for 50 years, which is why I sold it to him rather than the guy across town. His lawyer puts me on the witness stand, where I testify as to the origin and authenticity of the item. "Stolen? Hawgwarsh. Thet thar thang has been in my fambly fer two hunnert 'n fifty yars. T'wasn't stolen, no how no way."
So how can a law declaring something "prima facie" evidence of a crime alter facts? How can a law invent a theft that never occurred?