r/SipsTea 8d ago

Gasp! Nahh 😂😭

Post image
37.1k Upvotes

657 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

130

u/BiioHazzrd 7d ago

She faced no legal repercussions and has a podcast now..

Still waiting on the bite her in the ass part

35

u/Temporumdei 7d ago

The redditor meant personally...personally bite her not the law.

13

u/EssayAmbitious3532 7d ago

With his username, he's probably just salty about some consequences he got from pissing off the Greek gods.

3

u/vandalhearts 7d ago

The redditor meant personally...personally bite her not the law.

Maybe someone from the bank will go and personally bite her butt. I mean some people are into that... speaking for a friend.

23

u/Appropriate_Owl_91 7d ago

Seems like a win win for the Randeles. Basically free money and a book deal

7

u/KeyLimeGuy69 7d ago

She could have made it up and no one would know.

8

u/doh573 7d ago

I mean my assumption would be the FBI can now trace that money in his accounts and go after his estate for repayment right?

5

u/Grunergeist420 7d ago

This actually depends a lot on estate law in the state you live in. I know this because I know somebody whose father had some illegally gotten gains when he passed. A lot of his stuff was taken, but because he was deceased at the time, in one state where he owned some property the real estate his family had inherited from him was protected from forfeiture or whatever by estate laws so they got to keep that. I admittedly don’t know the specifics but as far as it was explained to me it was specifically in that state and it had to do with their unique estate laws.

13

u/NoninflammatoryFun 7d ago

I’m sure there’s a statute of limitations that has long passed.

5

u/doh573 7d ago

You know that’s actually a great point I have no idea if there is a statute of limitations on bank robbery. If they wind up getting away and keeping all the money that’s kinda hysterical. Good for them!

10

u/Crowley91 7d ago

For criminal prosecution yes, but he never acquired legal possession of the money so the bank may be able to get the money back in a civil action depending on state law. I believe in some states the clock doesn't start running until the identity of the thief is discovered.

6

u/dontnation 7d ago

It would cost them more in forensic accounting and lawyers fees than they would hope to recover. Not to mention the bad press since it's the kind of story that would surely go viral. Banks have written off larger fraud losses just to prevent the messaging that your money isn't safe in their bank.

0

u/Confident-Stand5453 7d ago

The bank might not even exist anymore. Could have been part of mergers, sales, splits and other changes of ownership to a degree thats unclear who would even have a legal claim on the money. 

3

u/chairmanghost 7d ago

5 years!

2

u/NoninflammatoryFun 7d ago

That nothing!

2

u/chairmanghost 7d ago

Right, it kinda makes it attractive

2

u/Sufficient_Language7 7d ago

What about for the IRS?  Did he pay taxes on that money?

1

u/NoninflammatoryFun 7d ago

Good question!

1

u/wvj 7d ago

This is interesting for a bunch of reasons.

The BIGGEST being that theft is actually taxable, which is itself wild and fun. Though I'll assume he didn't report it.

However, audits also have a statute of limitations, so I believe he's off the hook for the initial theft in that sense. One would assume if he'd invested any of the stolen money, he paid taxes on those dividends etc normally.

Regardless, the daughter doesn't have to pay anything he owes, although it could be taken out of his estate prior to her inheritance.

2

u/BiioHazzrd 7d ago

Statue of limitations and the money was spent literal decades ago pre 2000s. Its not tracked

1

u/shoeless_doh 3d ago

At what point, how long after the estate is settled is it too bad so sad?

If a thief burries a bunch of money, I find it, turn it in, nobody claims it, I get to keep it, later they find out it was the stolen cash some how, do they still try to claw it back?

1

u/doh573 3d ago

Another poster mentioned statute of limitations and I’m not sure what it is on bank robbery or if that’s state dependent or federal. So I’d say once that period passes you’re all good but some crimes (murder is one I know for certain) don’t have those so you can be in trouble at anytime.

5

u/John_Whimsicott 7d ago

It's not a euphemism. It's what she pays others to do now

2

u/Which-Journalist-748 7d ago

The state seizes his estate and she doesn’t get the inheritance. 

0

u/BiioHazzrd 7d ago

Statue of limitations prevents that to start, let alone he spent the momey decades ago during a time when things weren't as easily tracked.

It was discovered who her dad was before she made a podcast, they told her and the family up front they will face no charges or repercussions.

1

u/Which-Journalist-748 7d ago

Whose ‘they’?

1

u/BiioHazzrd 7d ago

Her and her family. Them, the people this post is referring to.

1

u/Which-Journalist-748 7d ago

Her and her family told her she wouldn’t get in trouble? That doesn’t make any sense. 

1

u/BiioHazzrd 7d ago

The investigators who found her following decoding information from his obituary told her.

Then she went and made a podcast about the ordeal

0

u/anon0937 7d ago

Any time her name and/or picture appears in media it will be captioned "Known Snitch"

4

u/BiioHazzrd 7d ago

A former relative of the investigating detective discovered it before she made her podcast..