4d6e607f   
   From: dawgface@ten.hut   
      
    wrote in message   
   news:5e396547-bd0f-4bef-8753-2d6a2c2baaa6@r15g2000prd.googlegroups.com...   
   > "Frank" wrote:   
   >   
   >> You cannot file a claim for a crime, the law has not yet made a   
   >> choice   
   >> regarding any civil infraction in the cases you are mentioning in   
   >> this thread.   
   >   
   > Diana wrote:   
   >   
   >>You most certainly can file a civil lawsuit against a person who   
   >>commits a crime against you whether or not they were prosecuted   
   >>for it. In fact, one can file a civil claim against someone who   
   >>merely files a false police report abut you, as is the case with   
   >>Michelle Devereaux, which is one of the reasons why, among many,   
   >>I am suing her.   
   >   
   >>Yes, anyone can file a civil claim for damages incurred as a result of   
   >>a   
   >>crime, not for the crime itself.   
   >   
   > Some people might consider imprisoning someone for a criminal offense   
   > to be a stiff penalty alone.   
   >   
   >>Regarding Michelle D., I know nothing of your claim or what you allege   
   >>to be a false report. Are you stating that you were damaged somehow?   
   >>It   
   >>is a real stretch in 95% of the cases where a false report was claimed   
   >>now if there were numerous such reports you may have a case, but based   
   >>on one "false" report it is highly unlikely you could substantiate a   
   >>claim for a loss or damages. People sometimes make mistakes, simple   
   >>mistakes which is why you would need multiple such events to show   
   >>cause.   
   >>I'd be interested in your reasoning.   
   >   
   > That did not make a whit of sense, "Frank." No, a victim does not   
   > need numerous instances of false police reports before claiming   
   > damages. Nobody has to show a pattern of behavior before claiming   
   > damages in a single instance of a false report, although it might be   
   > useful in general in proving an overall pattern of behavior that is   
   > maliciously based.   
   >   
      
   OK, let me rephrase that somewhat. A "false report" would be difficult   
   to prove as an intentionally false report. One report made whether false   
   or not is normally accepted unless blantantly obvious as harrassement,   
   etc.. One would have to prove malicious intent.in order to gain   
   recompense. Of course you could file against her for any cause which you   
   have already established with your multiple complaints. I doubt you have   
   the grounds available to you to prove malisciousness but dare I say that   
   based on your previous testimony and current actions with a brief   
   interlude of psychological counseling your cases would be made weak and   
   perhaps easliy dismissed based on your priors.   
      
   Anyhow, it would seem you would have to prove maliscious intent and that   
   is a very difficult thing to do in any circumstance short of threatening   
   someone with a gun or simulation thereof.   
      
      
   > In Michelle Devereaux's case, she filed a false police report in San   
   > Francsico which was then instrumental in having SDSU identify me,   
   > based on that false police report. That is fraud, yet again. As a   
   > result   
   > of that identification,  I suffered real damages. I did attempt to   
   > have   
   > the SF prosecutor file a criminal charge against her (misdemeanor)   
   > based on that  false report but I couldn't due to the statute of   
   > limitations.   
      
   I don't understand, did you file after Michelle filed her report? I am   
   also missing something here as to your point of fraud. Normally there is   
   a hearing which would preclude actions on a fraudulent report at which   
   point the filing party could be in trouble. Are you able to prove   
   fraudulent behavior with intent? I'm assuming so since you have filed or   
   served the papers already.   
      
      
   > Of course, Ms. Devereaux must know that otherwise she would make   
   > herself available to be sued.   
   >   
   > Diana Napolis   
      
   To be honest, if I were in such a position I would make the other person   
   work for it and work it hard, especially if I knew I would be exonerated   
   but would have to go through the expense of court, filings, loss of   
   employment, food, lodging, and all the aggravation associated with such   
   an event.then I would make sure it cost the offending party hard monies   
   and time.   
      
   I do not understand how you could have been harmed by a simple report   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)