Latest Headlines
- New ‘Wind Phone’ In Cantonment ‘Connects’ Grieving Families With Deceased Loved Ones
- New Details Emerge In Fatal DUI Crash That Killed 14-Year-Old Cantonment Boy; Driver Released On Bond
- Business Alliance Calls For Escambia County To Deed Part of OLF-8 For Light Industrial Use
- Escambia Tax Collector Marcus Pointe Office Moving To New Location; Driving Test Location Changing
- New 332 Lot Subdivision Planned For Devine Farm Road In Cantonment
- These Are This Week’s Road Construction Slow Down Spots
- Northview High’s Calloway Named Winner In VFW Essay Contest
- Florida Gas Prices Trend Lower After 15 Cent Hike, AAA Says
- Traffic Back To All Four Lanes In $4.7 Million Highway 29 Reconstruction In Century
- Man Charged With DUI Manslaughter After Cantonment Boy Dies
Walnut Hill Man Charged With Dealing In Stolen Property
March 31, 2015
A Walnut Hill man has been charged with dealing in stolen property after an east Alabama man just happen to spot his stolen trailer in a yard as traveled along Highway 97.
The victim contacted the Tallapoosa County Sheriff’s Office in Alabama to reported that he had found his stolen utility trailer valued at $2,000 at a home in the 7000 block of Highway 97. After the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office investigated, it was determined that Tucker was also in possession of a 1990 Yamaha Rhino and a pressure washer that were also reported stolen in Alabama, according to an arrest report.
Tucker told deputies that he had paperwork concerning ownership, but those documents were never provided, the report states.
Tucker was charged with second degree felony dealing in stolen property. He was released from the Escambia County Jail on a $7,5000 bond.
Comments
7 Responses to “Walnut Hill Man Charged With Dealing In Stolen Property”
REGARDING:
“I’m a little confused (nothing new) about his role in the thefts. He’s not charged with stealing the stuff.”
I assume they don’t know for sure. If they knew he stole it, they could have recovered it sooner. They know he had what was stolen, so the charge is valid. Other charges might or might not be valid, but without proof one way or the other, the prudent thing to do is to charge what you know and can prove.
David for knowing our limitations
I’m a little confused (nothing new) about his role in the thefts. He’s not charged with stealing the stuff.
Is he the thief, a middleman, or just some dumb sap that bought cheap stuff and should have known better?
Mistakes in reporting does happen as they did not record our serial number at the time of the report OR that our car had been damaged as the thieves were cutting the cable. Still at the mercy of good people helping locate it.
Glad he was able to recover his trailer and hopefully someone will get their ATV back! I wish it was our 2009 John Deere Gator 620i XUV 4×4. But at any rate we’re thankful someone’s stolen property was recovered!
Sounds like the Sheriff’s office may have given a good lawyer some leverage on having the stolen Yamaha dropped due to incorrectly identifying the vehicle.
Hard to steal something that was not even made at the time.
>>Interesting, article states a 1990 Yamaha Rhino but they weren’t put into production until 2004? Possibly a Yamaha ATV but sounds like a typo in the arrest report
The report does say 1999 Rhino, but you are right about 2004. Must be a typo in the report. The report does contain the specific VIN.
Interesting, article states a 1990 Yamaha Rhino but they weren’t put into production until 2004? Possibly a Yamaha ATV but sounds like a typo in the arrest report