Quote:
Originally posted by KNOBTAIL
she mentions about vendors being approached to buy some Scarlet Kings. Apparently 3 vendors were interested and they were cited with summonses for attempting to purchase these snakes without knowing whether the seller had a permit! The sellers were undercover wildlife people.
|
Possession is 9/10ths of the law.
Does anyone know for a fact if these people (potential buyers/potential sellers) actually exchanged money/animals with each other before the citations were issued?
*attempting to purchase*
Does this imply that the vendors in question were busted without any animals or money ever having exchanged hands and therefore no wrong doing actually occured?
I would think that the only way they can be busted over this is if they (the vendors) actually broke the law... busting someone because the authorities thought/assumed the person was going to go ahead and break the law is I should think not legal and unable to stand up in court. Just because someone is *interested* in an animal does not mean they have broken any laws.
Up until the moment that the animals/money are actually exchanged between buyer/seller no crime has been committed correct? It would only be if the animals/money have exchanged hands and the buyer had prior to that exchange failed to inquire if the seller had the proper permit would the law have been broken and therefore make the citiations issued proper.
Adrian