Consequences of Buying Stolen Property on eBay

My question involves criminal law for the state of: colorado

I bought something a month or so ago on eBay, and someone contacted me and told me that what I bought had been his, It had been stolen and he filed a police report at the time of theft. He told me that it was stolen 7 years ago. I contacted the person who sold it to me on eBay, and they told me that they had no idea it had been stolen.

I have 2 questions:

1- Should I contact the police department that this fellow told me he filed a stolen item report to determine if it is his, and if so should I give it back to him?
2. What is the criminal and civil responsibility of the eBay seller? I paid with a credit card so I can probably get my money back, but is there any criminal action for the seller selling it so long after it was stolen?

1 - The SOL for a theft prosecution has likely long ago run out. For example, it's 3 years in CO. Probably the same or close in other states. It's also 3 years in CO for a civil lawsuit. Could be 2-4 years in other statues.

2 - Could have passed through a number of hands in the past 7 years.

3 - Frankly, it sounds like a scam to me and I wouldn't be contacting the police or talking to anybody else about it. Next time somebody calls, tell them to get lost and hang up.

Just out of curiosity, what kind of item and how much did you pay?

I’m have to differ a bit with Adjusterjack on this.

While the statute of limitation may have run out on theft, there is the other crime of receiving stolen property. Colorado law 18-4-410 provides that a person commits theft by receiving when he receives, retains, loans money by pawn or pledge on, or disposes of anything of value of another, knowing or believing that said thing of value has been stolen, and when he intends to deprive the lawful owner permanently of the use or benefit of the thing of value.

You have been put on notice that the property may be stolen. If it is in fact stolen, to retain it could put you in violation of this particular law.

I would suggest you ask the person in question for the name of the law enforcement agency he reported the item stolen to and the case number. Then you contact that agency, tell them of your conversation with the alleged owner, give them the case number, tell them about the item you purchased and let them take it from there. Of course, keep a record of the date and time you contacted the agency, the name of the officer you spoke to and attach that to receipts for your purchase. This way you will have done your due diligence in response to then "victim's" claim.

If it’s a scam, they will let you know and you will have covered your behind.

Even that law would be subject to a statute of limitations, and after 7 years, that statute would likely have run out.

I also think that the SOL has run out on any receiving charge but I think the following suggestion is a good one.

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

I would suggest you ask the person in question for the name of the law enforcement agency he reported the item stolen to and the case number.

---

If the guy can't come up with an answer to that question it strengthens a "pound sand" response.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Even that law would be subject to a statute of limitations, and after 7 years, that statute would likely have run out.

---

No. L-1's point - and he's right - is that the offense of RSP BEGINS not with the property being stolen, but the moment that he retains property he's been put on notice is stolen or likely to be stolen.

I'd do what L-1 suggested.

I will get the name of the police dept and date of incident and call them to ascertain that there is a factual basis for this fellow's claim- If so, I will see if I can ship the item to the police department so they can contact its rightful owner and at the same time file a dispute though my CC company for that transaction. What about the fellow who sold it to me? Doesn't he have come culpability in this or was his sale of it beyond the statute but since I just became aware I am the one that the clock begins on- is that right?

Quote:

---

Quoting adjusterjack

---

I also think that the SOL has run out on any receiving charge but I think the following suggestion is a good one.

---

Assuming the property is stolen, the violation is continuous for as long as he continues to posses the property and reasonably should know it is stolen. The clock only starts once he no longer possess the property.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Even that law would be subject to a statute of limitations, and after 7 years, that statute would likely have run out.

---

Not necessarily for being in possession of stolen property ... unless he BOUGHT it 7 years ago.

Other exceptions to the SOL include items or suspects that may have left the jurisdiction, ongoing conspiracies, etc. L-1 offers up the best route to take to avoid potential criminal liability.