Pastor gets a year for selling baby sharks from bay
- Thread starter racrumrine
- Start date
Thales
Active member
Or they really thought they were getting sharks from fishermen that would have otherwise been killed. They all pleaded guilty, and I think they knew, I just think they didn't realize it could be such a big deal - maybe they thought it would be like a speeding ticket instead of like kidnapping.
reefkeeper1
New member
Just make sure Jack Bauer's not your brother.
pbetito
New member
This is interesting as I used to work on a fishing boat in Las Angeles for years and often sold the baby leopard sharks and small bat rays to a few select LARGE aquarium shops. I bet they will sweat if they read this...(HAHA) It may sound really bad but at the time I guess i never thought of it as horrible because I watched idiots slaughter fish by the thousand that they were just going to throw out of their freezers in 3 months anyways. I always thought that since I was selling the creaturesto aquarium stores they were being "saved".... and yes the money was nice too. In retrospect I should have used better judgement, but it is hard to think of what is best for the creatures when you witness so many of them dieing everyday. I am not looking to get into any arguments over what I did and how it was wrong, (I already know it was) I am just trying to shed some light on what the mindset of the fisherman might have been and point out that he was not necessarily Dr. Evil. As for the names of the L.A. shops that bought them from me, they were.....
ahhh... maybe another time
ahhh... maybe another time
Al G Blenny
New member
Keep in mind that a few of the people on here know some of the "criminals" personally and they know the other side to the story. None of these people want to get into a big debate because we don't know all of the facts. Just was the charges were and what the people say really happend. Of course there are always shades of grey and the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. All I will say is that one guys punishment so far is a running tab of over $50,000 IIRC. I used to frequent his place of business and he was NOT selling leopards. He might have had a couple that I never saw because he got rid of them right away but there is not much money in them anyway. He would have to sell hundreds to make any money and there is no way he ever had a large quantity of them. The news is always slanted. No matter how much they try to say they aren't. Just remember that boring stories don't sell any papers.
ahbroody
New member
Concepts important to this.
The reason why they were all convicted is the DA was able to show a conspiracy. An agreement between 2 or more persons to commit a crimial activity. The differences in sentences would be based on involvement and knowledge. A weaker case gets less, a stronger case who wants to go to court get more. I have a real hard time believeing no one knew this was illegal. As such most participants likely had some knowledge that it may not be legal. Once you have some knowledge it is your job to find out. Boys and girls as someone who is in the law enforcement field I will tell you you dont get prosecuted for nothing.
If you are to stupid or lazy to check if what you are doing is legal or illegal then you get what you deserve. I am not in the industry but know some who are and I would check legality before geting into anything. It is your responsibility to know the laws of the area you reside in and to make sure you dont violate them. No one needs to hold anyones hand and say no dont do that.
This also by the looks of it appears they were targeting the sharks. As such there was also probally a controlled buy where things were discussed to show knowledge of actions. This would have been essential to any prosecution and more than likely occurred. I have had a buddy convicted of criminal acts before and it was hard for me to believe it also. I wanted to believe him, but in the end I had to accept I was wrong and he did what he was accussed of and knew what he was doing.
To say the DA went after them because it was an election year is pure ignorance of the law and how people are prosecuted and what it takes to actually be prosecuted. I have seen many people walk when they shouldnt.
Relating the sharks to cullerpa in someones sump is also ridiculous. Lets for simplicity purposes make a drug analogy and make the culerpa marijuana and the live sharks cocaine. An individual with some pot in his house for personal use is extremely different from someone who is collecting and selling cocaine. I mean youobviously know the person and think its wrong but come on your analogy is illogical.
Mike
3rd year law student and police officer
The reason why they were all convicted is the DA was able to show a conspiracy. An agreement between 2 or more persons to commit a crimial activity. The differences in sentences would be based on involvement and knowledge. A weaker case gets less, a stronger case who wants to go to court get more. I have a real hard time believeing no one knew this was illegal. As such most participants likely had some knowledge that it may not be legal. Once you have some knowledge it is your job to find out. Boys and girls as someone who is in the law enforcement field I will tell you you dont get prosecuted for nothing.
If you are to stupid or lazy to check if what you are doing is legal or illegal then you get what you deserve. I am not in the industry but know some who are and I would check legality before geting into anything. It is your responsibility to know the laws of the area you reside in and to make sure you dont violate them. No one needs to hold anyones hand and say no dont do that.
This also by the looks of it appears they were targeting the sharks. As such there was also probally a controlled buy where things were discussed to show knowledge of actions. This would have been essential to any prosecution and more than likely occurred. I have had a buddy convicted of criminal acts before and it was hard for me to believe it also. I wanted to believe him, but in the end I had to accept I was wrong and he did what he was accussed of and knew what he was doing.
To say the DA went after them because it was an election year is pure ignorance of the law and how people are prosecuted and what it takes to actually be prosecuted. I have seen many people walk when they shouldnt.
Relating the sharks to cullerpa in someones sump is also ridiculous. Lets for simplicity purposes make a drug analogy and make the culerpa marijuana and the live sharks cocaine. An individual with some pot in his house for personal use is extremely different from someone who is collecting and selling cocaine. I mean youobviously know the person and think its wrong but come on your analogy is illogical.
Mike
3rd year law student and police officer
Caulerpa is illegal, and it's not viewed anything like pot in the state of CA. It's illegal to sell, grow, distribute, posses, etc. All offenses are punishable individually by fine and possiable jail time. A store selling and growing caulerpa can be fined for both offenses, and the buyer could face fines for transporting it and possessing it. There are no "personal use" clause or "medicinal use" clause for caulerpa. Your analogy isn't valid 
IIRC, this is a federal case. Are DA's involved in federal cases?
IIRC, this is a federal case. Are DA's involved in federal cases?
ViPeR_930
Active member
I do not see how a caulerpa analogy would be illogical. Illegal is illegal, no matter what it is. IDC if you're using it simply for personal use or commercial. Obviously the consequence would be more severe for what would be considered the higher crime, but it is still illegal.
ahbroody
New member
Sorry I did not proof this for errors as ran out of time.
Gresham come one it was analogy, but fine let me be as accurate as possible. Further as you pointed out I only skimmed the article and we are talking federal law not CA law right??
The point I was trying to make is that Indivduals not Dealers with a small amount of caulerpa is in no way similar to a conspiracy involving illegal animal trafficking. The person who made the caulerpa argument and that I followed up on was refering to an individual not a dealer as as you changed my analogy to. An individual who has a small amount of something illegal of little importance and relatively low danger is generally of no interest to the legal system do to the time, and expense to prosecute when compared to the lack of harm they cause. A dealer is important to the system as I will explain later. The federal and state justice system is not interested in kicking down the door of a hobbyist for a small amount of caulerpa, it hasnt and wont happen. Just like the federal and state justice system will generally not kick down the door of some guy with a little personal use pot. Certain circumstances may change this but this is generally how the justice system works.
Your personal use argument on marijuana is correct on a CA state basis ONLY but incorrect as to a federal system which is what we are discussing as you pointed out. I would love for you to find me a marijuana personal use exception in the federal system. It doesnt exist and it is purely a california invention. Remeber the huge court battles over this a few years back where the fed to make their point came in and busted growers and cannabis clubs to show the state they could not make state law which superceds Federal law? So in the federal system marijuana is treated the same regardless of who you are.
No enforcement agency is going to prosecute or even find a local hobbyist with caulerpa in his sump. The costs to harm factor is not there. This no prosecution. If they are found and it is trivial the fed will let the state prosecute as they dont want to waste time trying trivial unimportant matters. The state will often not bother on these matters either unless the case is really really strong and even then will often offer probation. For the fed to take this case shows this was a large scale operation and the fed wanted it stopped.
Okay let me now re discuss the people charged.
An Individual with Caulerpa in his sump which is what I was refering to and I believe the person who initially made this point was refering to is in no way the same as a dealer of illegal fish or even a dealer of illegal caulerpa.
This is different and not the same as a group(conspiracy) harvesting hundreds of protected animals from the ocean and selling them around the country and world apparently.
Inividual 1 is a small user and individual violator of low significance and harm.
Individuals 2-# are dealers and producers of an illegal item. Supplying individual 1. Without individual 2 there is no individual 1. You prosecute the source of the problem as it is much more effective and severe then the individual violator.
Individual 1 is not dealing or producing this item for profit. If he/she were then he would become 2 and garner the attention of the federal prosecutors for this district.
Individuals 2 are selling the items for profit in direct violation of the law as a international conspiracy based on the article and as such they are and should be prosecuted.
So in conclusion an individual with caulerpa in his sump is very very different from a group of conspirators running an International illlegal animal trade ring.
Sorry for any errors again ean out of time.
Mike
Gresham come one it was analogy, but fine let me be as accurate as possible. Further as you pointed out I only skimmed the article and we are talking federal law not CA law right??
The point I was trying to make is that Indivduals not Dealers with a small amount of caulerpa is in no way similar to a conspiracy involving illegal animal trafficking. The person who made the caulerpa argument and that I followed up on was refering to an individual not a dealer as as you changed my analogy to. An individual who has a small amount of something illegal of little importance and relatively low danger is generally of no interest to the legal system do to the time, and expense to prosecute when compared to the lack of harm they cause. A dealer is important to the system as I will explain later. The federal and state justice system is not interested in kicking down the door of a hobbyist for a small amount of caulerpa, it hasnt and wont happen. Just like the federal and state justice system will generally not kick down the door of some guy with a little personal use pot. Certain circumstances may change this but this is generally how the justice system works.
Your personal use argument on marijuana is correct on a CA state basis ONLY but incorrect as to a federal system which is what we are discussing as you pointed out. I would love for you to find me a marijuana personal use exception in the federal system. It doesnt exist and it is purely a california invention. Remeber the huge court battles over this a few years back where the fed to make their point came in and busted growers and cannabis clubs to show the state they could not make state law which superceds Federal law? So in the federal system marijuana is treated the same regardless of who you are.
No enforcement agency is going to prosecute or even find a local hobbyist with caulerpa in his sump. The costs to harm factor is not there. This no prosecution. If they are found and it is trivial the fed will let the state prosecute as they dont want to waste time trying trivial unimportant matters. The state will often not bother on these matters either unless the case is really really strong and even then will often offer probation. For the fed to take this case shows this was a large scale operation and the fed wanted it stopped.
Okay let me now re discuss the people charged.
An Individual with Caulerpa in his sump which is what I was refering to and I believe the person who initially made this point was refering to is in no way the same as a dealer of illegal fish or even a dealer of illegal caulerpa.
This is different and not the same as a group(conspiracy) harvesting hundreds of protected animals from the ocean and selling them around the country and world apparently.
Inividual 1 is a small user and individual violator of low significance and harm.
Individuals 2-# are dealers and producers of an illegal item. Supplying individual 1. Without individual 2 there is no individual 1. You prosecute the source of the problem as it is much more effective and severe then the individual violator.
Individual 1 is not dealing or producing this item for profit. If he/she were then he would become 2 and garner the attention of the federal prosecutors for this district.
Individuals 2 are selling the items for profit in direct violation of the law as a international conspiracy based on the article and as such they are and should be prosecuted.
So in conclusion an individual with caulerpa in his sump is very very different from a group of conspirators running an International illlegal animal trade ring.
Sorry for any errors again ean out of time.
Mike
ViPeR_930
Active member
I understand where you're coming from Mike and I know you probably have more knowledge on the subject being an officer and law student. But you cannot deny that 7 (or was it 8?) species of caulerpa is illegal in CA, whether or not you're just a hobbyist. Of course I know it isn't as big as the leopard shark bust, but caulerpa is illegal for a reason. You don't hear about how caulerpa is destroying marine environments, that's old news.
I initially mentioned caulerpa as being just one example. I know a few other illegal stock being sold in the hobby by retailers in the Bay Area.
If I had known the caulerpa analogy would create such a big issue, I wouldn't have mentioned it. I'm sorry I did.
I initially mentioned caulerpa as being just one example. I know a few other illegal stock being sold in the hobby by retailers in the Bay Area.
If I had known the caulerpa analogy would create such a big issue, I wouldn't have mentioned it. I'm sorry I did.
I think Mikes point is correct. If they, as professionals in the MO industry, didn't know this was illegal, it was their responsibility to find out BEFORE beginning to trade in that species. The fact that there are silly laws doesn't change this. I personally find it hard to believe that everyone involved didn't know this was illegal. I'd be interested to know what they were putting on the export docs. If they identified the shipment as containing CA leopard sharks, wouldn't USF&G have stopped the shipment? If they listed the sharks as a different species, doesn't that imply they knew this was illegal?
Well, since the trail went to the EU, Asia and both the east and west coast of the US, I think the export docs cleared just fine(bet they even had the real name on it). Sending leopard sharks per se isn't illegal, just CA caught ones. Never mind Mexico isn't shipping any ATM. Many wholesalers for YEARS thought it to be OK to list Leopards on their stocklists. Many stores bought them not knowing it's illegal. I understand it's their own fault for not knowing, but come on, how does a dude in Kentucky know about CA regs on Leopard Sharks.
Bah, Arizona has it right, just ban ALL sharks :lol:
FWIW, they spent millions on this case. The agent in charge roamed the planet on our bill.
People with pointed fingers shouldn't point :lol:
Bah, Arizona has it right, just ban ALL sharks :lol:
FWIW, they spent millions on this case. The agent in charge roamed the planet on our bill.
People with pointed fingers shouldn't point :lol:
