Okay, heres the scoop.
A couple months ago a friend of mine took a total of four checks of his mother's each for about a couple hundred dollars and wrote her signature on them and cashed them.
His mother in order to scare him called the police and had detectives sent to his house under the guise that he had stolen them and forged her signature.
The detectives showed up and told him about the crimes he had commited and that he should get a lawyer.
Shortly, after the Mother called the detective explaining the situation saying that he had payed her back for the checks and that she no longer wanted to press charges, now here is where it gets out of line.
The detective stated that it did not matter whether or not he had paid the sum of the worth of the checks and that it didn't negate the fact that it wasn't "HER" signature on the checks.
Shortly afterwards he received a summons to the court for four counts of Class 4 Felony Forgery, along with a statement saying he should turn him self into police for printings and photo's.
Here is what I was wondering....
How in the world can the police still press charges even though the Mother has said that it was all taken care of and that the sums had been repaid? Stating that it was okay for the son to take the money just that he should of had her sign the checks and she knew nowhere else to turn to teach the man a lesson?
If his mother attends the preliminary court hearing and explains the situation do you think the state will drop the charges? I would think that with the situation explained the state would not have enough proof beyond a reasonable doubt to convict.
What could possibly be done in this situation to sort this mess out.