How to drop charges against my boyfriend for taking my truck

What is the name of your state? Wyoming

I want to drop charges against my boyfriend for taking my truck. but when i went to the cops to do it they said i could not or i would be charged with a false report what can i do to help my boyfriend and not go to jail

loverofcoffee said:

I want to drop charges against my boyfriend for taking my truck. but when i went to the cops to do it they said i could not or i would be charged with a false report what can i do to help my boyfriend and not go to jail

Click to expand...

Simple question....
Did he take your vehicle without your permission??
If so, that is theft.
If he didn't, that is filing a false report.

I know, not what you want to hear... but that is the truth. You cannot 'unring' a bell.

If the police have enough evidence of his crime without you.. then they can proceed with the prosecution.

loverofcoffee said:

I want to drop charges against my boyfriend for taking my truck. but when i went to the cops to do it they said i could not or i would be charged with a false report what can i do to help my boyfriend and not go to jail

Click to expand...

I imagine that at the time of the auto theft report you signed a document indicating that your truck was stolen and that he stole your truck. As JetX said, either he stole your truck, or you filed a false report. At this point it is likely the state has enough evidence to proceed against him for the theft.

In the future, if you and your boyfriend get into an argument and you do not want him to get arrested and prosecuted, do not call the police and tell them he committed a crime.

- Carl

He stole your truck and he still is your boyfriend. Wow. My advice to you would be to find a new boyfriend.

You're pathetic

So lets get this straight - you called the police and reported that your boyfriend stole your truck. So the police expend public resources taking a report, investigating the incident, and arresting your boyfriend. So now you want to drop the charges.

There are two possible explanations for your immature behaviour: First, you lied to the police in the first place about the truck being stolen. 2) You think the taxpayers should have to finance your silly games.

In my 20 years as a prosecutor, I've had many twits like you, and my solution is simple. Either you testify consistently with the theft report you filed, and help us convict your boyfriend, or I'll charge you with filing a false police report AND perjury. And after you're convicted, we'll seek restitution for the cost of prosecuting you, and for the original false report.

Then, your name would be flagged so that if we ever get another case in which you claim to be a victim, we won't pursue it. The system is to overworked for us to waste resources on losers like you.

The State said:

In my 20 years as a prosecutor, I've had many twits like you, and my solution is simple. Either you testify consistently with the theft report you filed, and help us convict your boyfriend, or I'll charge you with filing a false police report AND perjury.

Click to expand...

You're no more a 'prosecutor' than I am a neurosurgeon. If you were a prosecutor (or even an attorney), you would realize that a police report is NOT given under oath... and therefore is not sufficient to support a perjury charge. In fact, most police report forms I have seen don't even have a place for the complainant signature.

The only thing that this idiot could be charged with (based on her own post) MIGHT be filing a false report. You, however, could be charged with being an idiot.

Florida Statute:
92.525 Verification of documents; perjury by false written declaration, penalty.--
(1) When it is authorized or required by law, by rule of an administrative agency, or by rule or order of court that a document be verified by a person, the verification may be accomplished in the following manner:

(a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 to administer oaths; or

(b) By the signing of the written declaration prescribed in subsection (2).

(2) A written declaration means the following statement: "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing [document] and that the facts stated in it are true," followed by the signature of the person making the declaration, except when a verification on information or belief is permitted by law, in which case the words "to the best of my knowledge and belief" may be added. The written declaration shall be printed or typed at the end of or immediately below the document being verified and above the signature of the person making the declaration.

(3) A person who knowingly makes a false declaration under subsection (2) is guilty of the crime of perjury by false written declaration, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

You may not be a neurosurgeon, but I can assure you I am a lawyer - Board Certified in Criminal Trials as a matter of fact. Look me up in the Florida Bar Journal under both Board Certification, and as a member of the Bar Code and Rules of Evidence Committee. (Cross reference how many names appear in both lists. Then check Florida Bar member #0621765) I'm am a prosecutor, and have prosecuted for perjury under this circumstance - and here's how its done.

Bring the "victim" in pursuant to a State Attorney's investigative subpoena (Chap 27.04), which is an "official proceeding". Place the victim under oath and ask if the the sworn theft affidavit given to the police was true. If they say "No", that's perjury under oath to me - the witnesses being the police officer who took the report, and the supervisor who approved it.
If the "victim" says "yes" then subsequently says "no" at trial, that is perjury by inconsistent statements in official proceedings.

Let me know next time you need an education in Florida law. I can't help you with your neurosurgeon career though.

The State said:

You may not be a neurosurgeon, but I can assure you I am a lawyer - Board Certified in Criminal Trials as a matter of fact. Look me up in the Florida Bar Journal under both Board Certification, and as a member of the Bar Code and Rules of Evidence Committee. (Cross reference how many names appear in both lists. Then check Florida Bar member #0621765) I'm am a prosecutor, and have prosecuted for perjury under this circumstance - and here's how its done.

Click to expand...

My challenge to your credentials was due to your ERROR in your post.
The FACT is... your post that a criminal complainant could be charged with perjury was NOT correct.

Bring the "victim" in pursuant to a State Attorney's investigative subpoena (Chap 27.04), which is an "official proceeding". Place the victim under oath and ask if the the sworn theft affidavit given to the police was true. If they say "No", that's perjury under oath to me - the witnesses being the police officer who took the report, and the supervisor who approved it.
If the "victim" says "yes" then subsequently says "no" at trial, that is perjury by inconsistent statements in official proceedings.

Click to expand...

Your attempted subsequent SPIN to change the facts of your post (to later bringing the complainant under oath) does not remove your ERROR. There is NOTHING in this thread to even assume that such an oath or that a "State Attorney's investigative subpoena" was ever done. Nor is there anything to even suggest that a "sworn theft affidavit" was done.

Let me know next time you need an education in Florida law.

Click to expand...

And let me help you to understand your MISTAKE...

Seriously, I don't know who you are. You claimed to be an attorney, yet made a stupid error in your post that any real attorney should know better. That is why I 'challenged' your claim.

The question of whether you are a prosecuter/lawyer will be moot when you're disbarred for this.

The State said:

...if we ever get another case in which you claim to be a victim, we won't pursue it.

Click to expand...

Clt747 said:

The question of whether you are a prosecuter/lawyer will be moot when you're disbarred for this.

Click to expand...

Why would he be disbarred? Credibility is a HUGE issue when dealing with cases where the victim/witness statement is the only real source of evidence to one or more elements of the crime. It is only proper that the DA consider it when deciding to pursue a case or not. When a District Attorney reviews a case involving, as my DA puts it, "One set of liars and thieves accusing another set of liars and thieves", he has to consider the ability to convince a jury that these previously convicted liars/thieves are telling the truth THIS time.

If you as a prosecutor are considering placing a convicted or self-confessed liar on the stand, you have to assume that the defense is going to toss that out as ready-made "reasonable doubt". Why waste time pursing a case where your star witnesses' credibility is already in the toilet? Most prosecutors would rather expend the time and energy on a case that they could at least plea bargain.

Besides, if your start witness/complainant has a credibility problem, you might also face disbarment for moving forward on a criminal complaint where the minimum standard of probable cause may not be met (i.e. sort o like Mike Nifong in N. Carolina ...).

CdwJava, I don’t disagree that credibility is an important aspect of any case. Using Ms. Mangum as an example, the charges were of a sexual nature and so were the questions as to her character. I’m sure it would be difficult to successfully prosecute anyone for raping a stripper/prostitute who has a history of indiscriminate sex with multiple partners, has previously lied about other assaults, and has the DNA of several other men on her underwear at the time of the alleged incident. It would be difficult to defend a dog accused of having bitten someone if that dog has a proven history of biting people. If the OP sashays into a police station in the future and accuses her boyfriend of stealing her truck, I wouldn’t blame anyone for sending her on her way.

What our “prosecutor” said, however, was that he would not prosecute any case in which the OP is the victim. To continue with the lacrosse players case as an example, the idea of a woman claiming that kind of horrific abuse and being dismissed because she once lied about a stolen truck seems outrageous. Any prosecutor who would deny justice to anyone who is not squeaky clean or otherwise irreproachable is, in my opinion, a pretty sorry excuse for a prosecutor.

The disagreement was, however, that I said he would be disbarred and you said he would not be. It disappoints me to think that any prosecutor may choose to ignore evidence (and for the sake of argument, let’s call it compelling evidence) and refuse to prosecute because the victim once lied, but the more I think about it the more I realize you’re right. My statement was naïve and I concede to your more learned opinion--and that of those who will no doubt agree with you--that no, he probably would not be disbarred.

I’m not a liar and I take pride in my character but I’m no Mother Theresa, either. I wonder how vulnerable I really am to the criminals in North Carolina.