Court returns stolen money... To bank robber.

Mr. X

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
    • 2,390
    Posts
    18
    Years
    An Austrian court has ordered a bank robber be given back £51,000 that he stole 19 years ago.

    Bank manager Otto Neuman stole £150,000 in cash as well as gold bars and gold coins from his own branch in 1993.

    After getting into financial difficulties, he recruited two accomplices to stage a fake robbery at the Erste Bank in Vienna's Doebling district.

    By the time police caught up with them, only £51,000 and the gold could be recovered. The rest of the money had gone.

    The gold went to the insurance company which had already paid the bank for its loss but the cash has been sitting at the Austrian Justice Ministry ever since.

    Neuman's lawyer, Herbert Eichenseder, confirmed he been recently been contacted by court officials and asked to help return the stolen money to his client.

    The bank felt it had no claim on the money because it had been compensated in full by its insurance company.

    And the insurers said they didn't want it as they had not lost out either. They stolen gold had increased in value so much that it covered all of the money paid to the bank.

    Mr Eichenseder said: "I really didn't believe what the court were telling me but I checked it and it was correct.

    "I had to go into the archives in our cellar to find the details of the case as it was already 19 years old - and I managed to track down the man's details and contacted him to tell him the news.

    "To say that he was surprised was an understatement, but he provided his bank account details and the money has now been transferred."
    Click to expand...

    https://web.orange.co.uk/article/quirkies/Court_returns_stolen_cash_to_bank_robber

    *facedesk*

    Horray for more examples of judiciary dumbassery.

    Of all the other things this money could have been used for, or of all the causes it could have been donated to, it gets given back TO THE PERSON WHO STOLE IT?
     
    Uh, what? o_o
    And to think, we were all fooled into believing the world had actually grown common sense. >,.,<

    This sets new standards for dumbass, haha. :|
     
    I would say either donate the money to charity, or use it to pay down the national debt. Another option is go give some of it back to the bank to compensate for possibly higher insurance premiums.
     
    It's kind of unfortunate, but there are usually laws in place to make sure the courts don't overstep their boundaries. Would you want courts to be able to decide where money goes if they didn't like how a court case turned out? Really, it's the insurance company and bank which decided to give the money to him when the declined to take it.
     
    FreakyLocz14 said:
    I would say either donate the money to charity, or use it to pay down the national debt. Another option is go give some of it back to the bank to compensate for possibly higher insurance premiums.
    Click to expand...

    Why would they have higher insurance premiums? And the national debt is ~165 billion, so 50k would be a drop in a bucket.

    And no, the court ordered that it be given to him after both the bank and insurance company said they didn't want it.
     
    Mr. X said:
    Why would they have higher insurance premiums? And the national debt is ~165 billion, so 50k would be a drop in a bucket.

    And no, the court ordered that it be given to him after both the bank and insurance company said they didn't want it.
    Click to expand...

    Insurance companies hedge risks. When they are forced to pay a claim, that makes the claimant a bigger risk, increasing their chances of financial loss should the claimant renew their insurance policy, or purchase a policy with a different insurance company.
     
    Your ignoring the part about the insurance company saying that the gold increased in value so much that it covered the money they paid out, and (unstated) proably gave them some profit.

    Essentially, they made money from this venture.

    Edit - And the fact that this happened 19 years ago, so the claims have since been paid out a long time ago.
     
    Mr. X said:
    Your ignoring the part about the insurance company saying that the gold increased in value so much that it covered the money they paid out, and (unstated) proably gave them some profit.

    Essentially, they made money from this venture.

    Edit - And the fact that this happened 19 years ago, so the claims have since been paid out a long time ago.
    Click to expand...

    If the insurance premiums were not increased, then I'd say to put the money toward paying down the national debt. It is not unheard of for courts to be used to generate revenue for the state. Traffic courts are used that way here in California.
     
    Last edited:
    What works for California might not work for another country.
     
    Last edited:
    ................................


    Why do these cases even go to court? Why are judges so easily paid off or blackmailed? I'm starting to wonder if there was more than one crime here... because this is beyond stupid.

    You robbed a bank. Pay the money back and go to jail. That's how the system works. Without exploits or stupidity involved, anyway.
     
    O_O
    Wow, this is new. I mean, I've seen stupid, a lot of it too, but this is just too much for my brain to handle. (Mind - hurt) :|

    I mean, there were numerous possibilities for where that money could have been spent that are much more humane and just, not to mention logical and thoughtfully acceptable, than giving it back to the dude who stole it. I guess the dumbasses we see in movies really do exist >_>
     
    Judicial corruption at its finest here, everyone!

    Really, if someone does something like that, they don't deserve to have a position in their justice system.
     
    I think that it is crazy that he would return the money just like that, I mean, who else would really return money that they got away with?
     
    Considering that last I checked (which was a long time ago) a few of Austria's banks were in some trouble they really should have had it go towards the national debt. Priorities, priorities.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top