Posted on 02/23/2011 2:01:57 PM PST by Libloather
S 190.25 Criminal impersonation in the second degree.
A person is guilty of criminal impersonation in the second degree when he:
1. Impersonates another and does an act in such assumed character with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another; or
2. Pretends to be a representative of some person or organization and does an act in such pretended capacity with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another; or
3. (a) Pretends to be a public servant, or wears or displays without authority any uniform, badge, insignia or facsimile thereof by which such public servant is lawfully distinguished, or falsely expresses by his words or actions that he is a public servant or is acting with approval or authority of a public agency or department; and (b) so acts with intent to induce another to submit to such pretended official authority, to solicit funds or to otherwise cause another to act in reliance upon that pretense.
Criminal impersonation in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.
S 190.78 Identity theft in the third degree.
A person is guilty of identity theft in the third degree when he or she knowingly and with intent to defraud assumes the identity of another person by presenting himself or herself as that other person, or by acting as that other person or by using personal identifying information of that other person, and thereby:
1. obtains goods, money, property or services or uses credit in the name of such other person or causes financial loss to such person or to another person or persons; or
2. commits a class A misdemeanor or higher level crime.
Identity theft in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
S 190.79 Identity theft in the second degree.
A person is guilty of identify theft in the second degree when he or she knowingly and with intent to defraud assumes the identity of another person by presenting himself or herself as that other person, or by acting as that other person or by using personal identifying information of that other person, and thereby:
1. obtains goods, money, property or services or uses credit in the name of such other person in an aggregate amount that exceeds five hundred dollars; or
2. causes financial loss to such person or to another person or persons in an aggregate amount that exceeds five hundred dollars; or
3. commits or attempts to commit a felony or acts as an accessory to the commission of a felony; or
4. commits the crime of identity theft in the third degree as defined in section 190.78 of this article and has been previously convicted within the last five years of identity theft in the third degree as defined in section 190.78, identity theft in the second degree as defined in this section, identity theft in the first degree as defined in section 190.80, unlawful possession of personal identification information in the third degree as defined in section 190.81, unlawful possession of personal identification information in the second degree as defined in section 190.82, unlawful possession of personal identification information in the first degree as defined in section 190.83, grand larceny in the fourth degree as defined in section 155.30, grand larceny in the third degree as defined in section 155.35, grand larceny in the second degree as defined in section 155.40 or grand larceny in the first degree as defined in section 155.42 of this chapter.
Identity theft in the second degree is a class E felony.
S 190.80 Identity theft in the first degree.
A person is guilty of identity theft in the first degree when he or she knowingly and with intent to defraud assumes the identity of another person by presenting himself or herself as that other person, or by acting as that other person or by using personal identifying information of that other person, and thereby:
1. obtains goods, money, property or services or uses credit in the name of such other person in an aggregate amount that exceeds two thousand dollars; or
2. causes financial loss to such person or to another person or persons in an aggregate amount that exceeds two thousand dollars; or
3. commits or attempts to commit a class D felony or higher level crime or acts as an accessory in the commission of a class D or higher level felony; or
4. commits the crime of identity theft in the second degree as defined in section 190.79 of this article and has been previously convicted within the last five years of identity theft in the third degree as defined in section 190.78, identity theft in the second degree as defined in section 190.79, identity theft in the first degree as defined in this section, unlawful possession of personal identification information in the third degree as defined in section 190.81, unlawful possession of personal identification information in the second degree as defined in section 190.82, unlawful possession of personal identification information in the first degree as defined in section 190.83, grand larceny in the fourth degree as defined in section 155.30, grand larceny in the third degree as defined in section 155.35, grand larceny in the second degree as defined in section 155.40 or grand larceny in the first degree as defined in section 155.42 of this chapter.
Identity theft in the first degree is a class D felony.
I thought this in relation to UMMMM,UMMM,UMMM Barak Hussain Obama (aka Brown Clown) impersonating the President of the United States !
Bust them now!
Crossing state lines? Sounds like a Federal offense to me.
Isnt recording a telephone call without the other person’s permission considered a felony?
Me too!!! He did live in New York to attend Columbia University.
Wire fraud???
It depends on the state. Some states are only one-party (i.e. only one has to be aware of it). Other states are two-party (both have to be aware).
Both New York and Wisconsin are one-party states.
Murphy appears to have committed, at least, a misdemeanor.
That is, a crime.
His conversation with the Wisconsin governor was, it appears, a criminal act.
But he’s probably a Democrat, so it’s OK.
In New York City, there were even a couple of guys who parlayed their voice-impersonation skills into on-air jobs in the radio business over the years! Jay Diamond used to call in as "Mario Cuomo" for a while before the station staff caught on and decided they wanted to hire the guy. And Brian Whitman -- formerly of KABC in Los Angeles -- earned his reputation playing similar on-air pranks as "Bill Clinton," "Michael Jackson," "Al Gore," etc.
1. Impersonates another and does an act in such assumed character with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another;
No, I don't think it's at all ridiculous. The call was quite obviously intended to injure the reputation of the Wisconsin Governor. Period.
We've endured the tedious bleating of the MSM and the Democrats about the "new tone" of "civility" in the political sphere, and we all know it's unadulterated BS. given the current environment, I do not think it is unreasonable to view this "stunt" through the lens of the kind of political hatred which obviously was a factor in the Giffords shooting. (Sarcasm intended, but payback is a bitch.)
Therefore, it's a fairly minor misdemeanor in New York, but it's still against the law.
There's no "injury" here that could ever serve as the basis for a criminal prosecution.
But I think it could be said that injury was clearly their intent. They darn sure did not call and RECORD it because they hoped to show everyone what a great guy Gov. Walker was.
And about the “one party awareness in Wisconsin and New York - it would seem only to protect/serve the person who is doing the recording. I understand there are cases where someone NEEDS to have evidence of threatening or abusive language, when recording without permission would serve this end, but IMHO this does not fall under that classification. If anything, this could be seen as entrapment.
May God give us strength.
Tatt
LOL. You have no idea what "entrapment" means, do you?
Entrapment applies when a person is persuaded by a law enforcement officer to commit a crime that they never had any intention of committing before the law enforcement officer got involved in the situation. For example . . . an off-duty or undercover cop who goes out and challenges another motorist to a drag race cannot have that motorist arrested for reckless endangerment or some similar charge.
In order for entrapment to occur in the Gov. Walker "phone call" incident, two conditions would have been needed: (1) the person making the phone call would have needed to be a law enforcement officer, and (2) Gov. Walker would have needed to commit a crime. Nothing remotely resembling either condition was involved here.
The only person who might legitimately claim that they were somehow harmed in this case is Gov. Kohl of Wisconsin, and this would only be true if the caller had done something to defraud or harm HIM. And I'm no lawyer, but in this case that would seem to be a civil matter, not a criminal matter.
Hello and thanks for the clarification. Unfortunately, I had simply considered the possibility that entrapment could be something outside of the bounds of law enforcement. Upon further research, I discovered all manner of definitions, in many nations other than our own, with all except Germany, indeed defining it in terms of law enforcement or government only. Again, thank you for the correction. I always learn something here.
I am wondering though who Gov. Kohl is? I googled that phrase, and confirmed a Senator Kohl from Wisconsin, but found no gubernatorial connection.
Anyway, aside from the entrapment, I still hold that the intent was to injure Gov. Walker, and therefore some charges could be filed, if such laws exist in Wisconsin, or New York. Hopefully, more knowledgeable folks will pursue this if it is indeed a viable option.
FReeregards,
and May God bless.
Tatt
Gov Kohl? Old news his name is Walker .... Update needed...btw its absolutely a crime...
Is he allowed to record a conversation from NYS across state lines to WI?
I did not think recording a conversation in NYS without the other persons consent was legal.
Further checking seems to indicate taping is legal in NY! Shame!
This low-life tactic was certainly used to injure and defraud Walker. How low does this scum have to go before they are liable for their actions?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.