Anonymous wrote:The woman who was carjacked at the CT Avenue gas station (and whose note to the neighborhood listserv was posted here) reports this morning that a suspect has been arrested and the car towed. May justice be swift and may she heal.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty clear to me that these carjackings are being committed by insurrectionists that were in DC last week for the failed coup, and now find themselves on the no-fly list, with no way to get home.
+1. Bingo. We have a winner.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Police aren't interested in collecting finger prints at all. As long as no life lost or no kids in the car, police will move on to next task. Car thieves need a car but cannot afford one. Your insurance will cover your loss so you didnt lose much but small inconvenience.
Clearly, you’ve never lived through the “small inconvenience” of having your car stolen.![]()
My car was broke-in last summer. The thief trashed the inside but didn't take it. Police didn't want to come to collect finger prints. The same night, cars from four houses were broke-in, one car was stolen. I was glad they didn't come into the house since the garage opener was in the car. I rather lose a car instead of face a robber.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Police aren't interested in collecting finger prints at all. As long as no life lost or no kids in the car, police will move on to next task. Car thieves need a car but cannot afford one. Your insurance will cover your loss so you didnt lose much but small inconvenience.
Cars aren't stolen because the car thief needs the car to get to work? Who are you? Have you exercised your thinking since March? Get some fresh air.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Police aren't interested in collecting finger prints at all. As long as no life lost or no kids in the car, police will move on to next task. Car thieves need a car but cannot afford one. Your insurance will cover your loss so you didnt lose much but small inconvenience.
Clearly, you’ve never lived through the “small inconvenience” of having your car stolen.![]()
My car was broke-in last summer. The thief trashed the inside but didn't take it. Police didn't want to come to collect finger prints. The same night, cars from four houses were broke-in, one car was stolen. I was glad they didn't come into the house since the garage opener was in the car. I rather lose a car instead of face a robber.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Police aren't interested in collecting finger prints at all. As long as no life lost or no kids in the car, police will move on to next task. Car thieves need a car but cannot afford one. Your insurance will cover your loss so you didnt lose much but small inconvenience.
Clearly, you’ve never lived through the “small inconvenience” of having your car stolen.![]()
Anonymous wrote:Police aren't interested in collecting finger prints at all. As long as no life lost or no kids in the car, police will move on to next task. Car thieves need a car but cannot afford one. Your insurance will cover your loss so you didnt lose much but small inconvenience.
Anonymous wrote:Police aren't interested in collecting finger prints at all. As long as no life lost or no kids in the car, police will move on to next task. Car thieves need a car but cannot afford one. Your insurance will cover your loss so you didnt lose much but small inconvenience.
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So this story sounds outrageous primarily because the vic has been led to believe that her car is under surveillance and that there will be a forensic investigation done at some point. Too funny.
What are you talking about? That’s exactly what will happen. Do you have a brain at all?
MPD simply does not do bait car operations. They should, but they don't. So no there is no surveillance team tasked out to this car.
Two things are different in this case. Because the car has Kanu installed, the owner will probably get an alert if the car is moved and can then let the police know. The police may even have direct access to the Kanu alerts. Second, since the crime was in MoCo, the car will be examined there and forensics might actually be done.
I had a car stolen in DC last year. Car was missing for over six months. Car was eventually recovered having been destroyed and turned into a mobile drug lab. MPD were not interested in fingerprinting or doing any forensics because they would not be able to tell if the prints they found were the people responsible for stealing the car...
What... Who cares... How about identify any of them and then start an investigation. Pull the thread and see where it leeds.
The issue is that there is no auto theft task force so the most popular crime in DC takes time away from investigating any other crime. So it is considered a property crime for your insurance company to handle.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So this story sounds outrageous primarily because the vic has been led to believe that her car is under surveillance and that there will be a forensic investigation done at some point. Too funny.
What are you talking about? That’s exactly what will happen. Do you have a brain at all?
MPD simply does not do bait car operations. They should, but they don't. So no there is no surveillance team tasked out to this car.
Two things are different in this case. Because the car has Kanu installed, the owner will probably get an alert if the car is moved and can then let the police know. The police may even have direct access to the Kanu alerts. Second, since the crime was in MoCo, the car will be examined there and forensics might actually be done.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So this story sounds outrageous primarily because the vic has been led to believe that her car is under surveillance and that there will be a forensic investigation done at some point. Too funny.
What are you talking about? That’s exactly what will happen. Do you have a brain at all?
MPD simply does not do bait car operations. They should, but they don't. So no there is no surveillance team tasked out to this car.
Two things are different in this case. Because the car has Kanu installed, the owner will probably get an alert if the car is moved and can then let the police know. The police may even have direct access to the Kanu alerts. Second, since the crime was in MoCo, the car will be examined there and forensics might actually be done.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So this story sounds outrageous primarily because the vic has been led to believe that her car is under surveillance and that there will be a forensic investigation done at some point. Too funny.
What are you talking about? That’s exactly what will happen. Do you have a brain at all?
MPD simply does not do bait car operations. They should, but they don't. So no there is no surveillance team tasked out to this car.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So this story sounds outrageous primarily because the vic has been led to believe that her car is under surveillance and that there will be a forensic investigation done at some point. Too funny.
What are you talking about? That’s exactly what will happen. Do you have a brain at all?