(09-18-2016, 03:13 PM)syscrash Wrote:I believe it is a FACT that a trailer is a "structure" that is "customarily occupied by people." The trailer was frequently "occupied" by Nick, Monroe, Hank and Wu. They met in it, ate in it, discussed cases in it and kept valuable books and artifacts in it. It was far from "gutted" since it was customized for use by a Grimm. If Felix Dietrich had examined the trailer contents it could have easily appraised at above the $100,000 bargain price he quoted Nick for 20 books.Quote:(1) Protected property means any structure, place or thing customarily occupied by people, including public buildings as defined by ORS 479.168 (Definitions for ORS 479.168 to 479.190 and 479.990) and forestland, as defined by ORS 477.001 (Definitions).
This would not cover a gutted trailer. It is not a structure customarily occupied. Being able to enter something does not define it as occupancy. If what you are implying was true. That would include a cardboard box on skid row. or a pup tent in a camp ground.
You could make the argument if the trailer had even the basic amenities. If the content could be used to declare the trailer as a structure to be used as research it would fit. But the content can never be declared as to it even existing. It is the secrete nature of the contents that prevents it from what in a normal circumstance would make it a protected property.
Even the fact that the books are hundreds of years old and as the executor was speculating they would be of great value. They could never be appraised or sold. for other then a Grimm they have not value. If BC has their way and wesen are no longer in the shadows. Then the books would have extreme monetary value.
Emotionally year point hold water. But the law does not work on emotions. It does nto even work on logic. It is what can you prove. To prove the books have value you would have to show the book.s. Since you can't show the book, the law would not consider them as even existing.
Case in point:
http://www.oregonlive.com/aloha/index.ss...llega.html
Also:
http://www.oregonlive.com/lake-oswego/in...olf_c.html
Also:
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index...in_co.html
Hexenette may never face a "Kehrseite" trial for her crimes, however in the court of Grimm, Nick is judge and jury. IMO he knows she is guilty of arson. He should tell her his verdict and sentence her accordingly.
New Guy
(09-18-2016, 08:10 AM)irukandji Wrote: The other thing I want to point out is that Juliette was never charged with arson, or convicted of arson. While we saw her throw a match into it, our country still stands by the motto innocent until proven guilty. Juliette is still innocent until a court states otherwise. As Nick never pursued the matter, he must have believed she was innocent as well or come to the conclusion on his own that she had a right to torch the trailer.Hi Iruk,
If Nick "believed she was innocent as well or come to the conclusion on his own that she had a right to torch the trailer," then he is a total dufus and a disgrace to Grimm Heritage. IMO Nick knows Hexenette is guilty of burning the trailer. He has a responsibility to mete out justice and punishment.
New Guy