Georgia Public Defender, Alexia Dawn Davis, 31, has found herself facing a relatively rare charge for failing to take steps to return a diamond ring that she found in a parking lot. Davis is charged with theft of lost or mislaid property after she kept the ring for two weeks before taking it to the police in Augusta.
The ring was found outside of a Cracker Barrel in the parking lot on February 7th. The ring belonged to Jane G. Prater, 62, who reported it missing on February 12th. The ring is worth about $10,500.
When Davis found the ring, her companion went back into the restaurant and asked what she should do if she found a ring. The server suggested the manager but the woman said that she would keep the ring and call the police. No call was made.
When the ring was reported missing, the sheriff recovered security surveillance footage and released it to the public on February 19th to try to identify the finder. That same day as the release of the security footage, Davis went to the police with the ring. They then charged her with theft of lost or mislaid property — a felony for any item worth more than $1,500.
Here is the applicable standard:
16-8-6. Theft of lost or mislaid property
A person commits the offense of theft of lost or mislaid property when he comes into control of property that he knows or learns to have been lost or mislaid and appropriates the property to his own use without first taking reasonable measures to restore the property to the owner. – See more at: http://statutes.laws.com/georgia/title-16/chapter-8/article-1/16-8-6#sthash.nli8bOEe.dpuf
The question is one of intent and the meaning of “taking reasonable measures.” Here David does not appear to have taken measures for two weeks, but the law does not state a time period in which to act.
Davis now has found four lawyers to represent her. What is interesting is that the defense admits that it was the release of the video that prompted Davis to go to the police but insists that it was only at that point that she knew of the owner’s identity:
“No matter what shadow the Sheriff and the District Attorney’s office tries to cast upon Ms. Davis’ impeccable reputation and her motives, the legal fact is that she did not appropriate the ring for her own use, which is the crime this statute is intending to cover. When she learned who the owner was through the postings online from the Sheriff’s office, she promptly turned it in. She knew it was valuable but she had neither sold it nor wore the ring as if it was hers.”
Below is the full statement.
The prosecutors are likely to argue that Davis returned the ring to the police not the woman once she knew the name of the woman — something she could have done at any time. Indeed, her companion reportedly said the police would be notified. Local prosecutors will now prosecute a local public defender in the case. The jury will have to determine intent. It is interesting that she is not arguing the most obvious defense that she is a busy litigator and never got around to taking the ring into police. The claim that she was waiting to “learn” the identity of the owner could break down in court if she took no steps to learn the identity but waited for it to occur spontaneously. It would be useful if she could show that she called the restaurant in the interim, but that key fact is not mentioned by her lawyers.
What do you think? Was too weeks too long to wait in your view?
Here is the statement from the defense team:
“We are issuing this statement in response to calls and information that we have received regarding the Columbia County Sheriff’s Office statement about the law on Theft of Lost or Mislaid Property and the case involving our client Ms. Alexia Davis. It is my understanding that the Sheriff’s office has indicated that the law requires a person to make reasonable efforts to find the owner of the property and they arrested Ms. Davis because they feel that she did not make reasonable efforts to find the owner, and only turned it in when they posted the information about the lost ring online.
The law states that “a person commits the offense of theft of lost or mislaid property when he comes into control of property that he knows or learns to have been lost or mislaid and appropriates the property to his own use without first taking reasonable measures to restore the property to the owner.” O.C.G.A. 16-8-6. Every word in a statute has meaning. The important part of the law that is not being discussed is that one must “appropriate the property to his own use” to commit the crime. Possession of the property is a separate element from the appropriation part, which means that mere possession of the property is not sufficient to constitute a crime when the person restores the property to the owner in its original state. Who wants an average citizen, or for example a young person, to think that if he/she finds something and leaves it in his/her locker or car for a week, and then someone posts an ad looking for the item, the person dare not turn it in to the owner because they then have to fear being arrested. That is why there is an appropriation to one’s own use requirement. The taking reasonable measures to restore it to the owner is a defense to the appropriation element, and is not necessary when the owner actually gets their property back as soon as the person becomes aware of his/her identity. No crime has occurred. The law should encourage people to come forward and do the right thing and to not feel afraid. The statute does not define what is reasonable. The statute does not require a person to turn anything into the Sheriff’s office, and it does not set a time limit.
The warrant in this case leaves out the critical fact that the ring was restored to the owner and had not been altered, changed, sold or worn. Ms. Davis was offered money for the ring but did not sell it. She wanted to know if it was real only. If she had sold the ring, like some people may have done when given the opportunity, then this would be a crime because she would have appropriated it for her own use. She talked to a Richmond County jailer about finding lost property and was told she should check the newspaper, lost and found ads, and not advertise because she would get all kinds of people calling her. What the jailer said would happen actually occurred. When Columbia County posted that the ring was lost at the Cracker Barrel, she then knew who the owner was and returned it.
Most importantly, when considering the reasonableness of a person’s effort to restore lost property to an owner, how much more reasonable can the effort be than that the person promptly turns the property in when he/she learns the identity of the owner. This law should be meant to deter crime and promote honesty, not fear of turning something in as we read the law. This is of course our interpretation of the law, and not that of the officer who took out the warrant and the associate magistrate, who is not a lawyer, who actually issued the warrant. Ms. Davis’ impeccable reputation and career are at stake in this case, and her legal team hopes that this statement helps clarify what we believe to be the law regarding finding mislaid or lost property. We are continuing to prepare this case for trial.”
Source: Chroncile
Mespo,
That is certainly an argument I would make in her defense to play to the popular impression of what a thief is. But of course your definition of a thief is simply a popular one, there is of course the statute which we have here to define it for us.
She was playing the waiting game and hoping for abandonment. She knew where the ring was lost, she knew where it was found, she knew the owner of the property on which it was found, but failed to notify that property owner who would be the reasonable nexus between the two parties.
She is a sophisticated defendant who should have known better.
She’s a thief; we all know it. Of course that doesn’t mean she can’t be defended vigorously with arguments like yours and others.
My thoughts on lawyers? I’m not sure what you’re asking. I love the profession and hold it in massively high esteem. Despite gobs of education, I sometimes think I never really understood anything until I went to law school.
Mespo,
Some have no sense of decency. I bet balanced was thinking what they’d do….
Balanced:
No. Let me explain to you what a thief does. A thief pockets the ring; tells no one; goes to an out-of-town jeweler and dismounts the stone; sells the setting or melts it down for sale and then puts the diamond up on some internet site to sell. That’s what a thief does.
Now what are your thoughts on lawyers?
Unfortunately, the US court system has been so corrupted that the burden of proof no longer lies on the prosecution, it now lies with the defense.
It looks to me like the persecutor and biased judge want to force Ms. Davis to prove that she didn’t intend to steal the ring, not for the persecutor to prove that she did. And that will be much harder for her to do.
Some States have a policy of returning item(s) to finder if not claimed within a certain period.
What this PD did was stupid; however, it smells like police payback.
Two weeks of waiting, effectively doing nothing is too long. There was no reasonable effort at all in this situation. Reasonable would have been leaving contact info at the restaurant where the owner is likely to return to. Simply waiting that the owner is identified in the general news for all in town to see is completely unreasonable unless the ring somehow got stuck to the bottom of your shoe after walking all over town one day.
She’s a thief and we all know it.
Justice,
You might be right… Still smells…
Not sure it is about race but I am pretty sure it is about here status as a public defender. I am sure she has made a boat load of enemies in the police establishment as well as the prosecuters office no matter what race they are.
I wonder if they still charge for beastiality or adultery in Georgia….
Columbia County, Georgia must be a veritable Shangri-la if this is all the authorities have to worry about in their crime fighting efforts. I am absolutely certain her daily battles with the police and prosecutors as a public defender had absolutely nothing to do with the charging decision.
Whatever happened to “finders keepers, ….”
AY:
I know, I was just hoping.
Maybe someone could do a test in 4-6 months with a white person and see if they make the same big deal about it. If they dont, then the sheriff should be removed from office.
I am sick of this kind of crap. Best way to end racism is for good people to shun these venal pri**s and call them out on it. If you lose a couple of friends over it, fuk them, they werent worth it anyway.
Bron,
I really do think this is all about race. In this instance look at the circumstances….
Gene,
I wasn’t counting the foul balls…. Baseball season is almost underway…. But you’re right…
AY,
I’d say being a black PD in Georgia is probably 2.5 strikes, minimum.
This is railroading.
AY:
do you really think it is about race? I would hope not.
But you are right about the charge, it is ridicumlus.
When I was 17, I found a gold bracelet in the parking lot of a strip mall. It was 18k gold and I took it to a jeweler and sold it. The bracelet had been damaged from being in the elements and having cars run over it.
What ever happened to “finders keepers, losers weepers.”?
Although a diamond ring? I probably would have taken that to the police station, maybe not that day but within the week. I also would have given the manager my name and phone number and told her to give it to anyone asking about a diamond ring found in the parking lot.
With all things considered, I think this young lady was hoping to get a ring and would never have come forward had the police not been involved.
At what point does a found item become the property of the finder? 2 weeks doesnt seem like enough time but if no one has claimed something for 2 months? Especially if an advertisement has been put in the local media.
This is a BS charge…. She’s black and a public defender…. Two strikes…. Give her a felony conviction…. Three strikes and she’s out….
That prosecutor has to go. By go, I dont mean just leave the prosecutor’s office. Go outta practice of law. Pass Go. Keep going.
Now the PD has some explaining to do to her constitutents. What was she doing in a Cracker Barrell Restaurant for Gods sake?
{music} I’m a cracker, youre one too. gonna take good care of you….
Turning it in to the police would also have required a degree of confidence in police integrity that she may not have had. I expect in her work as a PD she’s come across more than one crooked cop.
This sounds like a “no harm, no foul” situation to me, and it makes me wonder, given that she’s a PD, whether someone in the prosecutor’s office is settling a score.
Is two weeks a long time for a law case? Is there some vital function that a diamond ring performs that requires an urgency faster than two weeks?
I would be very surprised if there is not a successful defense here.
QUOTE “The prosecutors are likely to argue that Davis returned the ring to the police not the woman — something she could have done at any time.”
So the ring had the owners name & address on it!?!?
She could have been waiting for a news ad to find out who the owner was, who knows….fact remains she DID turn it back in…