This is an outrage! Tesla vandal causes $20,000 in damages, receives no charges.

[Paul Scott]

It wasn't just one car, it was several cars over a few days. Restitution should occur AFTER jail time.

but with no prior record, throwing somebody in jail, just delays the repayment of the restitution and we have no idea what else is going on in that person‘s life or who depends on them or the repercussions that that person‘s family may face as well. To be clear damaging other people‘s property is never OK and they should absolutely pay for it. But throwing them in jail just increases the burden on the system and may have other knock on effects for other people that had nothing to do with it.

It makes more sense to keep them as a productive member society and show them that their actions have consequences. It’s very easy to judge when we are a distance and don’t know all the facts.

Sponsored

 

[65SoYoLO]

but with no prior record, throwing somebody in jail, just delays the repayment of the restitution and we have no idea what else is going on in that person‘s life or who depends on them or the repercussions that that person‘s family may face as well. To be clear damaging other people‘s property is never OK and they should absolutely pay for it. But throwing them in jail just increases the burden on the system and may have other knock on effects for other people that had nothing to do with it.

It makes more sense to keep them as a productive member society and show them that their actions have consequences. It’s very easy to judge when we are a distance and don’t know all the facts.

all that is fine for a child. but if you are an adult and do not know right from wrong, and damaging someone's property is wrong, then jail will give you a wake up call you need.

 

[jimbobb23]

Civil suit is possible. Guy needs to pay it back but also needs counseling. Thats a mental illness.

 

[pkauf01]

Civil suit is possible. Guy needs to pay it back but also needs counseling. Thats a mental illness.

Yes. TDS is the diagnosis.

 

[M0unt41nm4n]

but with no prior record, throwing somebody in jail, just delays the repayment of the restitution and we have no idea what else is going on in that person‘s life or who depends on them or the repercussions that that person‘s family may face as well. To be clear damaging other people‘s property is never OK and they should absolutely pay for it. But throwing them in jail just increases the burden on the system and may have other knock on effects for other people that had nothing to do with it.

It makes more sense to keep them as a productive member society and show them that their actions have consequences. It’s very easy to judge when we are a distance and don’t know all the facts.

No... you are making this black and white... not gray.

1 - His restitution should go beyond $20K. There is pain and suffering here for the owners loss of work to handle getting their cars fixed. Loss of use of the vehicle. Diminished value of the vehicle (even though they have a new paint job) because the insurance companies report a comprehensive claim. There should be punitive damages.

2 - The guy easily could have received a felony with no jail time with the possibility of expungement *if* he pays it off. In many of these cases, it does not get paid off and the prosecutors will have moved on to not giving a shit once the media had moved on as well. This guy has loads of options to get out of not paying and for $20K, the prosecutor down the road, will probably not pursue it. The guy can claim inability to pay, etc. Assuming he gets a garnishment, the victims don't get paid for 10 years. For the opportunity cost of cash being invested and inflation, that 20K is not worth the same in 10 years than it is in today's dollars. It's not fair. The prosecutor should told this guy he has 90 days to pay the victims off (loan baby!) or else.

3 - He should have received *some* jail time. Jail is not a pretty place. Just watch the TV show 60 days in to get a feel and see how many people "tap out" to go home. It is a great way to scare people straight. 30-90 days would have been fine for this guy.

4 - He is likely going to lose his job anyways. There is going to be public pressure via social media, phone calls, etc, to get this guys fired. His employer already said they are considering it. So he is going to have to find some work and it will be a while until he is somewhat forgotten on the internet.

5- Can he get sued personally? Yes. But then someone is going to spend time and money to try to get him to pay punitively.

The prosecutor *not* charging him was wrong and the pendulum went too far in the other direction. It provided no sense of exercising the law. There was nothing punitive about it and it provided nothing to scare "would-be" vandalizes in the future.

As I stated in the beginning of my response to you, this doesn't have to be a 20 year prison term, and it shouldn't be a "no charge" event. The prosecutor could have scared the be-jesus out of this guy with a short stint in the can and also made him work like a dog to get folks paid off quickly, as well as put some punitive $ in there for pain and suffering. That happy medium probably would have been acceptable. not getting charges and just paying off damages is not.

 

[T3s1a]

The questions the media should be asking is if this is the normal policy of the office to offer a diversion program when the amount of restitution is that high.

The SAOs will have standard protocols on pre trial diversion programs - and most offenders are not eligible for programs once the amount is higher than around $1000 because most people that are committing these crimes can’t come up with that amount of money. It’s pointless to set them up for it if they are not going to pay and then they are back in the courts at square one. Which means this was a purposeful exception for this guy given the political powers in control.

30-90 days of jail time plus restitution should be appropriate punishment for this adult offender. That is a big enough deterrent to prevent others from committing crimes like this. Having this go relatively unpunished sets a dangerous precedent.

 

[HaulingAss]

The questions the media should be asking is if this is the normal policy of the office to offer a diversion program when the amount of restitution is that high.

It may be the normal policy of this particular prosecutor's office considering they appear to be following the standard liberal policy of being lenient on property crimes like this.

Which is exactly why people like him are not afraid to commit them. Its why this kind of crime is running rampant in many populous cities (there is very little deterrent).

I would suggest the punishment has to be more severe than monetarily covering the physical damage.

 

[HaulingAss]

but with no prior record, throwing somebody in jail, just delays the repayment of the restitution and we have no idea what else is going on in that person‘s life or who depends on them or the repercussions that that person‘s family may face as well.

It sounds like you are reluctant to charge people with the crime they committed because they might have a challenging life. As if that excuses criminal acts.

Why then did the same woke prosecutor, on the same day, charge a 19-year-old female keying suspect with a felony, considering that perpetrator only caused $7,000 in damage, and only on one car, and had no prior record?

Minnesota DA's woke two-tier justice prizes Tesla violence

This is a clear double standard:

A 33-year-old male employee of Gov. Tim Walz does $21,000 damage to multiple Tesla over multiple days and is not charged with a crime.
A 19-year-old female does $7,000 damage to one non-Tesla car, on one day, and is charged with a Felony with a capital "F".

Both incidents exceeded the $5k damage limit for being recommended for deferred prosecution. Neither perp had a previous criminal record, only one of them commited 6 felonies.

 

[Paul Scott]

all that is fine for a child. but if you are an adult and do not know right from wrong, and damaging someone's property is wrong, then jail will give you a wake up call you need.

Paying $20,000 is a wake up call as well and is a more direct and proportional response. That isn’t a small amount of money for most and it avoids costing someone their job, their home,

well, again, we don’t know the details of the other person and why they were charged perhaps they weren’t a first time offender. Diversion programs are only for someone who has never committed a crime and they still have to make restitution. Costing someone their job ending their career and doing untold damage to his family and other people around him just doesn’t seem worth it. It’s easy to armchair quarterback when we don’t have all the facts and to rant about how they should absolutely be punished without knowing what’s really going on.

I just hope that should you ever make a mistake where you have to make restitution that you are shown more grace than you seem to be willing to show others.

 

[pricedm]

It sounds like you are reluctant to charge people with the crime they committed because they might have a challenging life. As if that excuses criminal acts.

Why then did the same woke prosecutor, on the same day, charge a 19-year-old female keying suspect with a felony, considering that perpetrator only caused $7,000 in damage, and only on one car, and had no prior record?

Minnesota DA's woke two-tier justice prizes Tesla violence

This is a clear double standard:

A 33-year-old male employee of Gov. Tim Walz does $21,000 damage to multiple Tesla over multiple days and is not charged with a crime.
A 19-year-old female does $7,000 damage to one non-Tesla car, on one day, and is charged with a Felony with a capital "F".

Both incidents exceeded the $5k damage limit for being recommended for deferred prosecution. Neither perp had a previous criminal record, only one of them commited 6 felonies.

Thanks for posting the situation of the 19 year old, defacing one car, and receiving a Felony charge by the same DA. Quite the contrast of how these two situations are being treated.

 

[HaulingAss]

Thanks for posting the situation of the 19 year old, defacing one car, and receiving a Felony charge by the same DA. Quite the contrast of how these two situations are being treated.

Yeah, but that's a nice unconscious slip up calling the prosecutor a defense attorney. Because have you ever seen a prosecutor work so hard to defend people who commit multiple felonies? She even ignored the State's own rules suggesting deferred prosecution wasn't appropriate when the damage exceeded $5,000.

 

[HaulingAss]

Diversion programs are only for someone who has never committed a crime and they still have to make restitution.

Why do you say the perp had never commited a crime? It seems to me, after the first defacing, he had committed previous crimes. They were on different days so you can hardly call them one incident.

 

[BengalBoy]

https://www.teslarati.com/atty-no-charge-six-time-tesla-vandal-controversy/#
"Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, who made the decision not to charge 33-year-old vandal Dylan Bryan Adams after he keyed six Teslas around Minneapolis last month, has found herself in the middle of controversy.
The controversy came amidst her decision to press charges against a 19-year-old first-time vandal who keyed one vehicle at the White Castle in Brooklyn Park.
The Tesla Vandal
Moriarty’s decision not to charge Adams after he keyed six Teslas was met with widespread criticism. Adams’ actions resulted in more than $20,000 worth of damages, more than $10,000 of which was to a single vehicle, as noted in a New York Post report. Yet despite the multiple offenses, Moriarty opted to enter Adams into an adult diversion program instead.
The fact that Adams is a state employee who works for the Department of Human Services as a program consultant triggered allegations that his dismissal might be partly influenced by Gov. Tim Walz. Walz is a staunch critic of Musk, previously stating that the falling price of TSLA stock gives him a “boost” in the morning.
As noted in a report from The Minnesota Star Tribune, Moriarty’s decision was so controversial that she was asked about the matter on Wednesday. In response, the attorney argued that her office made the decision outside of any political consideration. “We try to make decisions without really looking at the political consequences. Can we always predict how a story will be portrayed in the media or what people will say? No,” Moriarty stated.
Actually Charged
As noted by the Tribune, Moriarty has made arguments around the fact that Adams was a first-time offender, even if he opted to deface six separate Teslas. But even this argument has become controversial since Moriarty recently charged a 19-year-old Robbinsdale woman with no criminal record with first-degree felony property damage after she allegedly keyed a co-worker’s car. The damage incurred by the 19-year-old woman was $7,000, substantially less than the over $20,000 damage that Adams’ actions have caused."

Something is Rotten in Hennepin County...

 

[dalton108]

https://www.teslarati.com/atty-no-charge-six-time-tesla-vandal-controversy/#
"Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, who made the decision not to charge 33-year-old vandal Dylan Bryan Adams after he keyed six Teslas around Minneapolis last month, has found herself in the middle of controversy.
The controversy came amidst her decision to press charges against a 19-year-old first-time vandal who keyed one vehicle at the White Castle in Brooklyn Park.
The Tesla Vandal
Moriarty’s decision not to charge Adams after he keyed six Teslas was met with widespread criticism. Adams’ actions resulted in more than $20,000 worth of damages, more than $10,000 of which was to a single vehicle, as noted in a New York Post report. Yet despite the multiple offenses, Moriarty opted to enter Adams into an adult diversion program instead.
The fact that Adams is a state employee who works for the Department of Human Services as a program consultant triggered allegations that his dismissal might be partly influenced by Gov. Tim Walz. Walz is a staunch critic of Musk, previously stating that the falling price of TSLA stock gives him a “boost” in the morning.
As noted in a report from The Minnesota Star Tribune, Moriarty’s decision was so controversial that she was asked about the matter on Wednesday. In response, the attorney argued that her office made the decision outside of any political consideration. “We try to make decisions without really looking at the political consequences. Can we always predict how a story will be portrayed in the media or what people will say? No,” Moriarty stated.
Actually Charged
As noted by the Tribune, Moriarty has made arguments around the fact that Adams was a first-time offender, even if he opted to deface six separate Teslas. But even this argument has become controversial since Moriarty recently charged a 19-year-old Robbinsdale woman with no criminal record with first-degree felony property damage after she allegedly keyed a co-worker’s car. The damage incurred by the 19-year-old woman was $7,000, substantially less than the over $20,000 damage that Adams’ actions have caused."

Something Smells in Hennepin County...

If there’s corruption all bets are off all arguments are suspended. This goes without saying.

 

[RayzorBEV]

I'll send my Optimus after them so he can dish out the hammer of Justice against these domestic terrorists and their supporters?
...Ah, just a pipe dream...For now?

Sponsored