Man Blows $1.5 Mil. On Faulty Credit Card

Assume that someone drives to a gas station, and uses a credit card to activate the pump, and then pumps gasoline into his car. Did the owner of the gasoline "consent?"

The point being that as business methods change, the relationships change, and thus the concepts that govern those relationships must change.

If the credit card that was used to buy the gas was stolen, that's one thing. But if the owner of the gasoline did not intend that the gas be pumped, that's a completely different matter.

By providing an automated means to dispense and receive payment, the owner of the gasoline intends and consents for this transaction.

If the pump payment unit malfunctioned and allowed the dispensing of gasoline without collecting payment, those that availed themselves of free gasoline without any intention to pay are stealing it.

Lawyer like mouthing and different shading of this thief's wrongdoings does not change the fact that this thief knew he did not have the money in his account. The act of taking money, from whatever source, that was not his, is stealing. He knew it and all of you who are trying to shift the blame know it. Flawed thinking, as displayed here, is indicative of the moral cancer that permeates our once fine nation. Quit making excuses for criminals.

The part you don't seem to understand, through prejudice, most likely, is that THE BANK GAVE HIM THE MONEY. How can you NOT understand that??

He identified himself. He followed procedures. The account was HIS, and the bank allowed him to draw against it. Is this concept of lending money unfamiliar to you?

Do you really believe that society should kneel prostrate before banks and hold trials to determine THEIR CUSTOMERS' intents? All because they cannot adequately police THEIR OWN ACCOUNTS?? I think not. More likely you just enjoy virtual lynch mobs.

The bank gave him nothing. Without HIS physical action of accessing the ATM while KNOWING he did not have money in the account constitutes stealing. He knew what he was doing, which, in retrospect makes him many times smarter than you apparently are. Neither you or he have an excuse for thinking that his actions were anything but illegal.

The bank ALLOWED him to take the money. How can you be so friggin dense??? The bank ALLOWED it.

Do you understand what a bank account is? Do you understand that millions of people go over their balances EVERY SINGLE DAY?? Do you know what an "overdraft" is?

The thief KNEW that he did not have that amount of money in his account and he KNOWINGLY continued to take the money. How can you be so dense?

The bank did not KNOWINGLY allow it. There was a malfunction of the bank's systems.

Had the person stopped at $1000 or maybe even, in your world, $10,000, you can chalk his windfall up to the bank's largesse. Once you get to a million dollars it's just silly to try and argue it was just a simple overdraft.

They specifically identified his card as a CREDIT CARD..not debit card. Credit Cards are based on your Credit which is established by the bank...not based in any way on how much money you have in a checking account. If I borrow 20K on my credit card and go gamble on it and default...that's not theft...It's bad money managment.

Again..there is no 'overdraft' on a credit card. The bank establishes your credit line and you use it as you see fit. Far different than a debit card tied to your checking account.