MARK MILLER IS A THIEF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[DaveyFig]

Not sure how this will end up but i had a message on my answering machine today when i came home from Mark Miller asking for my info so he can issue a refund to me.
I will keep everyone posted on how things turn out.
Todd Peddle

I wonder what could have possibly happened recently that would leave enough money in Mark's pocket to refund your money...hmmmm...

 

[Gecko_Den]

Even if it couldn't be prosecuted wouldn't you feel bad getting something you knew DID NOT belong to the person selling it to you. I for one would NEVER knowingly do this. Aquring anything this way shows what kind of ethics, morals, and integrity you have.

First of all, as I stated at the beginning of my post, I agree with you. There is no need to call into question my morals, ethics, or integrity.

Second: you bring up a valid point when you ask "something you knew DID NOT belong to the person selling it to you"

By legal definition "receiving stolen property" is:

Receiving stolen goods is generally buying or acquiring the possession of property knowing (or believing in some jurisdictions) that it had been obtained through theft, embezzlement, larceny, or extortion by someone else. The crime is separate from the crime of stealing the property. To be convicted, the receiver must know the goods were stolen at the time he receives them and had the intent to aid the thief.

Third: Until your "contract" is validated by a legal authority, the courts for example, it is still your word against his. You said yourself that the detective that talked to him said that he accused you of breach of contract. Which leads us back to my original statement that this is really a civil matter. Don't take my word for it though, contact the prosecutor in Kansas and ask him to issue a warrant for his arrest based on your contract and let us know how that goes....

 

[heathn]

I wonder what could have possibly happened recently that would leave enough money in Mark's pocket to refund your money...hmmmm...

hmmmm indeed

 

[Randall Turner]

Randall,

You didn't happen to get a picture of the male with the kink?

Laura,

Anyone who does aquire them in any way is guilty of receiving stolen property. I have a hunch one or both of them have already been sent to a good friend of Mark. I wont say the name until I have proof, but when I do get proof everyone will know.

Sorry, I do not. I will ask a good friend if they snapped a pic of it though, if so I will email it to you.

 

[raybueno]

First of all, as I stated at the beginning of my post, I agree with you. There is no need to call into question my morals, ethics, or integrity.

Second: you bring up a valid point when you ask "something you knew DID NOT belong to the person selling it to you"

By legal definition "receiving stolen property" is:

Receiving stolen goods is generally buying or acquiring the possession of property knowing (or believing in some jurisdictions) that it had been obtained through theft, embezzlement, larceny, or extortion by someone else. The crime is separate from the crime of stealing the property. To be convicted, the receiver must know the goods were stolen at the time he receives them and had the intent to aid the thief.

Third: Until your "contract" is validated by a legal authority, the courts for example, it is still your word against his. You said yourself that the detective that talked to him said that he accused you of breach of contract. Which leads us back to my original statement that this is really a civil matter. Don't take my word for it though, contact the prosecutor in Kansas and ask him to issue a warrant for his arrest based on your contract and let us know how that goes....

I'm not questioning you at all just making a statement.

I also want to clarify, there is not a contract between Mark and I for this breeding. We had a contract for his male to be bred to my female. No contract or agreement ever happened in regard to my male being bred to my female. I was never informed this happened until well after Mark had already done it.

As far as theft by receiving goes aquiring possession of something known to you to be stolen is theft by receiving. You dont have to have the intent to aid the thief for it to be that.

Thank you for you information.

 

[raybueno]

Sorry, I do not. I will ask a good friend if they snapped a pic of it though, if so I will email it to you.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Griz]

You know, just a thought. Obviously Mark is still doing shows. If someone had the time, I reckon they could notify the show organizers and let them know not just of this situation but the numerous other one's that Mark is involved in. If I was an organizer, I would not want this type of individual to have a table at my show. Anyways, just a thought for anyone out there with time to kill.

Griz

 

[raybueno]

The SIGNED contract

Here is the signed contract. I hope this helps everyone to see why we feel these animals are STOLEN.

Nowhere on there does it say anything about OUR male motley being bred to OUR female snow.

 

[raybueno]

By the way... Thank you James for resizing the contract for me so I could put it here for everyone to see.

 

[Double LY]

You know, just a thought. Obviously Mark is still doing shows. If someone had the time, I reckon they could notify the show organizers and let them know not just of this situation but the numerous other one's that Mark is involved in. If I was an organizer, I would not want this type of individual to have a table at my show. Anyways, just a thought for anyone out there with time to kill.

Griz

The show being referenced in the Kansas City Reptile Show. Jason Cruse (member name here is GoLizards) is the organizer. I did not realize that LocoLizards was still vending at this show or I would have attended (after seeing if your t-shirts were still available) ...

I have t-shirts that will be available shortly for Daytona and Tinley Park. Black t-shirts with florescent wording:

LOCOLIZARDS
We're not Loco
We're just thieves

$9.95 shipped

Griz

 

[JamesH]

No thanks needed Ray. Glad I could help you with it.

 

[Griz]

Basically what you are saying is that since Mark is a friend of mine and that we have done business together in the past, I should be held under the same scrutiny as he has even though a have a spotless track record.

You might want to check with Jason Hormann of Kansas City Reptile Distributors (KCRD). He is friends with Mark and might have a better way of contacting him? Jason has previously defended Mark over the John Martino incident but I hope anyways, that the recent cases regarding Mark might just have him doing an about face. Anyways, just a thought that might help.

Griz

 

[KCRD.com]

I saw Mark this past weekend.....

Mark and I both vended at Jason Cruse's show over this past weekend. I did walk by his table and didn't recall seeing any Motley Hypos. We did briefly talk about this thread at the end of the day Saturday. At that time I had not read the thread. All I can say is that to this day I have still never had a problem with Mark. Obviously there are others here who have but I do know that there are always two sides of a story and if you really think you are in the right here, I would suggest pursuing the civil suit and let the courts decide who is at fault here and who owes who. It is unfortunate that this has come to this and it seems that these problems continue to arise on a regular basis on this forum. I also have become very familiar how it's easy "to get behind the eightball" on here too since in a recent thread I posted about another breeder popping up after a few years after he ripped me off for over $700 and I was made out to be the crook. Explain that one. Anyhow, I would not expect Mark to make any posts on here since everyone here has made their judgments up already. I don't know who is at fault, except that knowing Mark, I can say that if he had two of my boas in the middle of a breeding season and he ended up breeding them after striking out with the original plans I would not have a problem splitting the litter with him even if it was my snakes since he bred them, other wise I most likely loose a season with them. From reading this thread my only assumption is that the reason he took the snakes he took was because he probably felt that you would have given him far less since you two were not exactly on the best of terms after your recent phone conversations. I also believe that Mark was at fault for not calling you to tell you that he was going to breed your snakes until it was already done.

Someone earlier stated that these deals always go array, this is why after this year I won't be doing any more breeding loans of my own.

Bottom line is let the courts figure it out, and until then from a legal stance no one is guilty of stealing anything. If the court decides against Mark and he doesn't give the animals back then he can be charged with theft, until then. since he has had ownership since they were born and if he sells them before any judge makes a decision then they by law are his animals. Possession is how many tenths of the law?

Let the judges decide! I could honestly see a judge go either way with this one.

 

[raybueno]

Did you not read what is posted here????

Mark wont post here because he is wrong and he is a COWARD!!!!!!!!

You to are an idiot if you believe what he tells you.

I have written proof.

 

[LauraB]

Anyhow, I would not expect Mark to make any posts on here since everyone here has made their judgments up already

Jason, the man has a signed, dated breeding contract. Said breeding did not take place. It ain't rocket science to figure out who's right and who's wrong. Mark's probably not posting because it's clear he's wrong and he knows it.

I don't know who is at fault, except that knowing Mark, I can say that if he had two of my boas in the middle of a breeding season and he ended up breeding them after striking out with the original plans I would not have a problem splitting the litter with him even if it was my snakes since he bred them, other wise I most likely loose a season with them.

The decision to breed Ray's animals together was NOT Mark's decision to make, not without consulting Ray FIRST. Perhaps he didn't do that because he didn't want to give Ray the opportunity to say no. Good grief, Ray is capable of breeding his own animals, you know ... and so does Mark.

From reading this thread my only assumption is that the reason he took the snakes he took was because he probably felt that you would have given him far less since you two were not exactly on the best of terms after your recent phone conversations.

Is that your assumption or is that what he told you, Jason? My assumption is he took the snakes because he felt he was entitled to them due to the contract agreement, even though that portion of the contract was null and void when the stipulated breeding did not take place.

If the court decides against Mark and he doesn't give the animals back then he can be charged with theft, until then. since he has had ownership since they were born and if he sells them before any judge makes a decision then they by law are his animals

Wrong! Mark did not then and does not now have "ownership". Mark was only granted a loan. He only has possession, not ownership. He did not have ownership of either parent animal before, during or after breeding. He did not and does not have ownership of any offspring of animals that do not belong to him, unless stipulated in the contract.
Had a successful breeding of Mark's male and Ray's female taken place, then Mark could have rightly claimed ownership of half the babies, since one parent animal did/does belong to him. But not in this case.

I am keeping my neighbor's purebred dogs for the summer .. an unaltered male and unspayed female they breed and show. We actually have a signed contract to protect both of us, since they're worth some bucks.
If she goes into heat, he inseminates her and she has pups before my neighbors return from Europe, do I get to keep half the pups because I have possession (or "ownership" as you see it) when they are born? I don't think so. And neither would my neighbors. And no, there is no such contingency in our contract, but hell, maybe I should just assume that I get half the pups if it happens in my care!

It was nice of you to come here on Mark's behalf, but Mark's silence already speaks volumes.

 

[Griz]

Man Jason, I am at a loss of words here which is rare. I knew you have been biased in the past but thought that at least, some of the past threads, might open your eyes. Amazing....

Griz

 

[John E Dove]

I was incredulous as well Mr. Hormann. Given the unrefuted facts stated how could a man of good consciences, or follower of moral ethical standards, even attempt to defend the actions of Mr. Miller in this matter. I can easily understand friendship but there is no power in the universe that could inspire me to defend even my closest friend if he were clearly in the wrong, regardless of his personal reasoning or justifications.

 

[Corey Woods]

If I were in the same situation and bred someone else's animals together and produced offspring I would keep babies back for my trouble. I'm not defending Mark in any way and I personally think the guy is a complete scammer. However, I would not breed someone elses animals and expect to get nothing for my hours of labour and trouble.

Given the situation I think what Mark kept back for himself was fair. As I said if I were in the same situation I would have kept back the same animals for myself for the trouble.

I also understand that the breeding contract was not followed but we do not have all of the information. From my own experience not everything goes to plan. Some males will only breed certain females and some males are just plan gay. Other males would bang a garden hose if you let them. If I were doing the breeding loan and said male wouldn't breed said female I'd throw in another male with the female. I'd rather have a viable litter than a whole bunch of slugs.

Take this as a lesson learned. Someone always feels like they got ripped off doing a breeding loan. Use this as a learning experience and don't do breeding loans. If you can't doing everything in house either purchase the other animal you need or let your animals mature an extra year so you can do the breeding yourself.

Given Mark's history of ripping people off I would just be thankful that you have your original adults back and some of the babies to show for it. Other people are not so lucky, such as Todd Peddle, who paid for animals over a year ago and still has nothing to show for it. The police have gotten involved and I hope that Mark will refund Todds money.

Corey

 

[DaveyFig]

Given the situation I think what Mark kept back for himself was fair. As I said if I were in the same situation I would have kept back the same animals for myself for the trouble.

If you were in the situation , and bred animals in a way contrary to the contract, and kept back whatever you wanted you would be the bad guy!

If I were doing the breeding loan and said male wouldn't breed said female I'd throw in another male with the female. I'd rather have a viable litter than a whole bunch of slugs.

The OP wasn't given that option. Mark made the choice. I have a feeling that if Mark said "Hey, my Motley het albino is being a baby, would you like me to put your motley on your snow", that the OP would have probably asked for them to be sent back to him so that he could chose whether to do THAT breeding, or something that would maximize the potential of the snow genes.
The only reason Mark had the snow was to hopefully make albino motleys, using his motley het albino.

 

[raybueno]

Corey you are also an IDIOT. I think you and Jason share the same brain cell.

These are not his animals and why would you get to have anything from a litter MY animals produced before I had ever had a chance to look at them???

We would have given Mark something for breeding OUR animals together but that is OUR choice NOT HIS!!!

I have not even had the opprtunity to see MY animals.

What he kept was not his to keep and I am pursuing charges against him as we speak. Tomorrow the detective will meet with the District Attorney to discuss what charges are appropriate.