• foodconsumer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I’m stupid, can someone explain to me how this is illegal? Like morally questionable I get, but how is it illegal?

    • tempest@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      17 hours ago

      According to a quick Google fraud in Japan is

      obtaining property or illicit economic advantages through deceit.

      Gifts I assume are property here

        • altphoto@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          12 hours ago

          I’ve studied laws like that for the better part of 25 years and I’ve formulated this new law ointment I’d like to call Lawinment2.0! IRS available at Walmart for $17.75! And the shipping is free because its a download. Just pay as you normally would thru Walmart pay and then head on over to laws.com and receive your free gift! And if you pay thru laws.com to receive a free 5% offer on an additional law you’ll also receive this custom deluxe gorme designer bag gift pin retainer. Its our way of saying thank you! And thank you George Carling for this fine comedy bit.

        • REDACTED@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Best I can do is legalizing corruption and then spend billion dollars on public programs explaining how lobbying helps the people, not capitalism

  • knight_alva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Hoping that isn’t real because that’s kind of an f-ed up definition for fraud. Also, what a legend.

    • onslaught545@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      82
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      It’s pretty much the textbook definition of fraud. What are you talking about?

      Fraud is defined as intentional deception to deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim.

      He intentionally deceived 35 people for material gain. It’s even more fraud if he deceived each one about only dating them.

      In the US that could also potentially be rape by deception if any of them slept with him because they thought they were exclusive.

      • knight_alva@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        67
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        22 hours ago

        It’s a poor definition because gift exchanges are strictly voluntary and non-reciprocal engagements. I’m not saying what he did was ok or even legal in other contexts. My only point is that I wouldn’t consider this fraud because the victims were not compelled to give. This isn’t a Nigerian prince scam where the victims were promised greater returns at a later date. These victims gave with the expectation of monetary loss.

        • LwL@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          They’re technically voluntary but also socially expected. I’m not sure about birthday gifts in particular but Japan is a country where if you go on holiday somewhere you’re expected to bring a gift for each of your coworkers, and people will think worse of you for not doing that. I’d be kind of surprised if omitting birthday gifts for your romantic partner without prior agreement is a real option.

        • neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Seems to fit the official definition pretty neatly. Colloquially, I tend to agree with you, there’s a spectrum for fraud. But this still counts as fraud. It’s a fraudulent misrepresentation of the truth to convince others to part with something of value (a gift).

          The fact that it’s a gift doesn’t change that this is fraud, only the severity of fraud in a legal sense.

          • Hackworth@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            20 hours ago

            intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value

            Advertising and politics?

          • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago
            1. image of text: there’s this cool alternative called text that doesn’t break the web or accessibility. linking to source & quoting text makes an altogether better web for everyone.
            2. dictionary definition: not an official, legal definition.
          • knight_alva@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            19 hours ago

            Fraud in the sense that the guy is lying and profiting from it, sure. But the common / google definition of a word and the legal definition/ application of that word are two completely different things.

        • onslaught545@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

          So, it’s not fraud if I tell my grandma with dementia that it’s my birthday once a week so she keeps giving me birthday checks?

            • onslaught545@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Not really, no. It’s still using deception for material gain through gift giving. Maybe it’s more of an extreme case, but I was being hyperbolic.

              • knight_alva@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                15 hours ago

                It is materially different because a person with dementia can’t legally advocate for themselves so it is easier for an action against them to be considered a crime.

                • onslaught545@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  It’s still using deception for material gain. Just because it’s harder to scam someone without dementia doesn’t make it not fraud.

      • FelixCress@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        It’s pretty much the textbook definition of fraud. What are you talking about?

        Fraud is defined as intentional deception to deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim.

        That’s what most politicians do every election. Just saying.

      • Zahtu@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        I do Not See the fraud here. If He would have given the Girls His real Birthday, He would have still received the Same amount of Gifts. Nothing would have changed in exchanging the Gifts.

        The only Thing, which it probably helped at, was that He could plan ahead for the birthdays, avoiding a Potential meet-in of each girl, that He dated on the Same Day. The only Thing He is gullible of ist deceiving the Woman on their Relationship. Which is Not an offenes in a legal Sense. There is no punishment for 2-timing, so 35-timing should Not have either

        • AugustWest@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          20 hours ago

          What’s going on with your capitalization? I spent way too much time looking for hidden messages and came away with nothing except the - entirely unrelated - hypothesis that you are German.

          • naeap@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            20 hours ago

            Not OP:
            In other languages (like German) nouns are capitalized.
            I often write mails inside Europe that way to make it easy readable and put focus on the stuff I find necessary.

            For English native speakers it’s probably really looks like hidden code ;⁠-⁠)

            Edit: ok, read said comment and you’re right. That’s just like throwing a dice…

      • RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        21 hours ago

        There is no mention of any consideration (a legal term meaning he didn’t promise them anything in return) provided by the “boyfriend”.

        This would not be fraud under English common law.

        • onslaught545@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          19 hours ago

          You don’t have to promise anything in return for it to be fraud. If I start a Go Fund Me because I have cancer when I really don’t have cancer, the people donating aren’t promised anything in return. It’s still fraud.

      • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim

        Does either of those fill though?

    • cRazi_man@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Look at that smile. He regrets nothing.

      Also: Daily Mail source?..this story is entirely fiction and made up, guaranteed.

    • RidderSport@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Fraud is a very complicated crime. I absolutely hate that I need to know the basic for my law degree as it fills a thousand pages of commentary literature in just one of the largest German legal commentaries because it’s just that complicated.

      • knight_alva@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        22 hours ago

        As I said in another reply, my thinking is thus:

        It’s a poor definition because gift exchanges are strictly voluntary and non-reciprocal engagements. I’m not saying what he did was ok or even legal in other contexts. My only point is that I wouldn’t consider this fraud because the victims were not compelled to give. This isn’t a Nigerian prince scam where the victims were promised greater returns at a later date. These victims gave with the expectation of monetary loss.

        • RidderSport@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Just because these were voluntary non-reciprocal dispositions of wealth would not automatically make this not fraud in Germany at least.

          I talked with a few fellow students and their gut feeling was that this could be fraud as well. After talking a bit about the matter we had quite a few issues apart from the voluntary aspect as well.

          All dispositions in fraud are voluntary for one, otherwise this would be in the ballpark of robbery and the like (as in involuntary dispositions).

          The act of giving a gift is not necessarily irreversible as there are ways to fight the disposition on grounds of fraud for one. Which would tick one of the requirements of fraud: the disposition needs to be unlawful.

          Anyway you’re right in that there are quite a few reasons to conclude this isn’t fraud. If it is, it would be a very “heavy” case which would make this a felony in Germany.

          • knight_alva@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            I’m no legal scholar by any means but I think in America this would be a civil suit not a criminal case unless the amount of money involved was tremendous.

            I won’t even try to guess how it would shake out in Japan.

    • Novaling@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      This guy cheated on 35 different women for gifts and you go:

      Also, what a legend.

      I hope that’s a /s 😔