Wonder if the cops are really doing their job about a fraud case?

[WhyMeAgain30]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? FL
An ex-employee obtained a large amount of money from me by fraud.I wrote him about 8 checks for what turned out to be fictitious deals.I went to the cops but the Detective basically told me in order to convict him they need a video/photo proof from the bank of him actually depositing/cashing the checks. According to the Detective that proof needs to be in the form of "certified documentation'' from the bank "attesting the video/stills are true and accurate under oath". Which apparently also takes up to 3 months or even longer?!..
I was kind of shocked by that whole thing 1st cause I didn't think they will actually need a video/photo proof but the Detective said "Whose to say he didn't lose or had those checks stolen"?! Well...we are not talking about a check or two but 8 !, all of them signed by him on the back of the check, all signatures match! Plus if he had a $5,000 check stolen or lost for example he'll be calling me to let me know so I can put a stop on that check,correct?..Nothing like that ever happen! I even straight up asked Detective I mean come on now, what are the chances I write 8 checks to the same person and all 8 of them are lost/stolen and btw cashed/deposited by him at the same time?." It's absurd !!Impossible !
2nd thing I have an issue with is the amount of time according to the Detective it takes for the bank to provide that info and the fact that it has to be "certified" and "under oath".?!?
Im not a cop but when I watch the "First 48" when Detectives need surveillance footage they just go and get it.Almost immediately, no certified documentation under oath,no bs?..
so is that for criminal cases only?..Is white collar crime not enough of a crime for them?
I don't understand?
Or it could be the fact that I got into a verbal fight with one of her fellow detectives from the same police department who basically threatened to retaliate against me just because I dared to disagree with her? WHich leads me to believe she stayed true to her promise and as a result of that they just give me the run around and don't really want to do anything about my case?
Thank you!

 

[justalayman]

The cops don't just go and get video surveillance. Unless the owner of the video willingly gives it to the police the police must obtain a warrsnt. To obtain a warrant there has to be probable cause it involves a crime. So far all you have said is you wrote 8 checks to somebody and they cashed them. Nothing illegal about that. Is there some reason you believe there is something illegal about him cashing checks you wrote to him?

Is there something that you believe is actually criminal in what has happened? Unless there is you are relegated to seek recompense through the civil courts. In other words; you sue the guy that you believe owes you money.

 

[CdwJava]

Contrary to what you see on TV, fraud cases can require a great deal of verification to make before a jury.

You say you wrote the checks for a "fictitious deal." This presents a number of challenges, not the least of which that the deal was "fictitious," and that the person you wrote the checks to intended from the start to defraud you (i.e to commit larceny). What you may believe is common sense is not necessarily sufficient proof in a court of law.

You also say they were signed by him. Well, it would help if he admitted to signing them. But, best if they have an admission AND a handwriting exemplar that matched.

Footage at the back showing that he deposited or cashed them will almost certainly be necessary. And, depending on the bank, they may require a search warrant (or just a subpoena) and may not honor a simple written or verbal request. This process might very well take a few months from the time of writing the warrant to approval to service to filling it. My average turnaround for such a warrant or subpoena might be 8 weeks or so. But, that can vary. What you see on TV like the First 48 is HOMICIDE. In murder cases there is an exigency. Time is important to find the killer. Property crimes are a different animal that lacks that sense of urgency, not to mention that it can potentially infringe upon the rights of the bank's customers.

Unless you have PROOF that the police are refusing to investigate as a result of some slight they feel you offered one of them, then I would just stay silent on that. Repeating such a thing will do you no favors.

A financial crime investigation can and likely will take months before it gets to the DA, if it gets there at all. They sound so much better on TV, and what you might KNOW and what the state can PROVE can be two different things.