I’m stupid, can someone explain to me how this is illegal? Like morally questionable I get, but how is it illegal?
According to a quick Google fraud in Japan is
obtaining property or illicit economic advantages through deceit.
Gifts I assume are property here
Presumably he had to give 35 presents too.
That’s what I’m wondering. Perhaps he gives a mean back and foot massage.
Or he’s just good with the D. He might also be good at delivering other Vitamins too
Jesus Christ! Can we get some of that law in the US?!
Best I can do is legalizing corruption and then spend billion dollars on public programs explaining how lobbying helps the people, not capitalism
So like…makeup?
No, more like telling 35 different women 35 different fake birthdays so they get you some nice gifts while they’re all under the impression that they’re your only girlfriend. Nothing like wearing make up, you silly, woman hating, goose! Xoxo
“Why you wearing eye shadow, you fraud? Just don’t sleep and get real dark spots under your eyes, poser!”
Dude outed himself when he told Janice his birthday was the 35th of March.
That’s a super shitty thing to do
He’s basically cheating and stealing from 35 people
Take it he wasn’t reciprocating the gifts?
I think the only way this makes sense is that he’d start dating someone, say his birthday is coming up, dump them after receiving the gift and repeating the process.
Hoping that isn’t real because that’s kind of an f-ed up definition for fraud. Also, what a legend.
It’s pretty much the textbook definition of fraud. What are you talking about?
Fraud is defined as intentional deception to deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim.
He intentionally deceived 35 people for material gain. It’s even more fraud if he deceived each one about only dating them.
In the US that could also potentially be rape by deception if any of them slept with him because they thought they were exclusive.
There is no mention of any consideration (a legal term meaning he didn’t promise them anything in return) provided by the “boyfriend”.
This would not be fraud under English common law.
You don’t have to promise anything in return for it to be fraud. If I start a Go Fund Me because I have cancer when I really don’t have cancer, the people donating aren’t promised anything in return. It’s still fraud.
The consideration is the exclusive romantic relationship. They wouldn’t have given him gifts if they didn’t believe they were in a relationship.
But this is probably fake.
Thank you for the addition
I do Not See the fraud here. If He would have given the Girls His real Birthday, He would have still received the Same amount of Gifts. Nothing would have changed in exchanging the Gifts.
The only Thing, which it probably helped at, was that He could plan ahead for the birthdays, avoiding a Potential meet-in of each girl, that He dated on the Same Day. The only Thing He is gullible of ist deceiving the Woman on their Relationship. Which is Not an offenes in a legal Sense. There is no punishment for 2-timing, so 35-timing should Not have either
What’s going on with your capitalization? I spent way too much time looking for hidden messages and came away with nothing except the - entirely unrelated - hypothesis that you are German.
Yeah, i am German and autocorrect is my enemy. Especially when writing english. It is still the Default Setup from Google GBoard, but it is so fucking bad.
It’s a poor definition because gift exchanges are strictly voluntary and non-reciprocal engagements. I’m not saying what he did was ok or even legal in other contexts. My only point is that I wouldn’t consider this fraud because the victims were not compelled to give. This isn’t a Nigerian prince scam where the victims were promised greater returns at a later date. These victims gave with the expectation of monetary loss.
Seems to fit the official definition pretty neatly. Colloquially, I tend to agree with you, there’s a spectrum for fraud. But this still counts as fraud. It’s a fraudulent misrepresentation of the truth to convince others to part with something of value (a gift).
The fact that it’s a gift doesn’t change that this is fraud, only the severity of fraud in a legal sense.
Fraud in the sense that the guy is lying and profiting from it, sure. But the common / google definition of a word and the legal definition/ application of that word are two completely different things.
They’re technically voluntary but also socially expected. I’m not sure about birthday gifts in particular but Japan is a country where if you go on holiday somewhere you’re expected to bring a gift for each of your coworkers, and people will think worse of you for not doing that. I’d be kind of surprised if omitting birthday gifts for your romantic partner without prior agreement is a real option.
So, it’s not fraud if I tell my grandma with dementia that it’s my birthday once a week so she keeps giving me birthday checks?
Your grandma having dementia changes the formula a bit.
Not really, no. It’s still using deception for material gain through gift giving. Maybe it’s more of an extreme case, but I was being hyperbolic.
It is materially different because a person with dementia can’t legally advocate for themselves so it is easier for an action against them to be considered a crime.
It’s still using deception for material gain. Just because it’s harder to scam someone without dementia doesn’t make it not fraud.
This guy cheated on 35 different women for gifts and you go:
Also, what a legend.
I hope that’s a /s 😔
I mean the article itself is apparently satire so yeah.
Look at that smile. He regrets nothing.
Also: Daily Mail source?..this story is entirely fiction and made up, guaranteed.
Genius.
Kinda clever.
