Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MartyS

In search of an honest person

Recommended Posts

After a diligent search by myself of this story, I am beginning to feel like Diogenes carrying his lamp through the streets of Athens. I have so far been unable to identify a single person, actually involved in the storyline, whom I could possibly consider to be an honest person.

 

Before anyone rushes forward to prove me wrong, I would suggest you carefully examine the actions of your proposed candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After a diligent search by myself of this story, I am beginning to feel like Diogenes carrying his lamp through the streets of Athens. I have so far been unable to identify a single person, actually involved in the storyline, whom I could possibly consider to be an honest person.

 

Before anyone rushes forward to prove me wrong, I would suggest you carefully examine the actions of your proposed candidate.  

 

Not sure what you mean by "honest" Marty:

always truthful?

fair?

upright?

ethical?

decent?

just?

respectable? (maybe that's a bit Jane Austinish :))

not fraudulent or stealing? (well, we know who that rules out :))

doesn't hack people's heads off? (ditto :))

 

To be "honest" I can't think of anyone I've ever met or encountered that would satisfy all the above.  Was such a creature ever born? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what you mean by "honest" Marty:

always truthful?

fair?

upright?

ethical?

decent?

just?

respectable? (maybe that's a bit Jane Austinish Posted Image)

not fraudulent or stealing? (well, we know who that rules out Posted Image)

doesn't hack people's heads off? (ditto Posted Image)

 

To be "honest" I can't think of anyone I've ever met or encountered that would satisfy all the above. Was such a creature ever born? Posted Image

 

Knowingly conspired, planned or committed an act that was an actual violation of law.

Edited by MartyS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Knowingly conspired, planned or committed an act that was an actual violation of law.

 

Right, so, it's not about "honesty" but "breaking the law" which is much narrower.  Even so what I said earlier still applies ("I can't think of anyone I've ever met or encountered that would never have broken any law. Was such a creature ever born?").  Have you never exceeded the speed limit?  Not even by a teensy weensy bit?  Like, maybe, 1 mph?  Ever? Posted Image

Edited by Zombie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, so, it's not about "honesty" but "breaking the law" which is much narrower. Even so what I said earlier still applies ("I can't think of anyone I've ever met or encountered that would never have broken any law. Was such a creature ever born?"). Have you never exceeded the speed limit? Not even by a teensy weensy bit? Like, maybe, 1 mph? Ever? Posted Image

Zombie

 

I do not know if you are being factious or if you are oblivious to the basic concepts of law. Laws fundamentally forbid or require an action. Laws governing the actions of individuals are classified as either, “Mala in Se,” OR, “Mala Prohibita.”

 

“Mala in se,” basically translates as, “Evil in itself.” The action addressed by this classification is evil in its very nature. I.e. Murder, theft, etc.

 

“Mala prohibita,” laws are evil because some human entity has said they are evil. There is nothing inherently evil about speeding in or of itself. However, if your speeding is irresponsible based on the circumstances, it is no longer speeding, it is considered Reckless Driving. Failing to pay your income taxes is not evil.

 

These are my recollections of the basic concepts of law from a course I took many, many years ago. The instructor then asked the students to consider the Ten Commandments. We had to consider each commandment individually. We then discussed and attempted to classify each of them, as whether they were, “Mala in Se,” Or, “Mala Prohibita.” Believe me when I say, “It changed what could have been a very boring class, into an interesting one. The best example of that is here, in my response to your post. I did not have to do any research to prepare this answer.

 

Are you now ready to put forward a candidate from the storyline, or were you just playing the role of a Devil’s Advocate.

 

I personally classify the offense of creating a, “Cliffhanger,” as, “Mala in se.”

 

Marty

Edited by MartyS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping someone would notice this aspect. Well done, Marty. :)

 

Yes. Though to vastly varying degrees, we have almost all major characters, with two possible exceptions, breaking laws.

 

Shane? He stole mainly food, out of dire necessity. Granted, he put himself in that mess partially by his own doing (staking everything on the surf lifesavers competition) but he was coming out of a very bad situation.

 

Trevor? It was illegal for him to leave Florida (he was a minor) against his father's wishes. However, I think it is very understandable that he did, under the circumstances (which included suspecting his father of killing his mother).

Did he break gun laws in a few countries by keeping his gun hidden? Yep... and so would I. I would not wish to sail in some of the waters he did unarmed.

 

Here are my two nominees for characters who have not broken the law: Craig Grundig, Martin Blake, and Mike Gonzalez.

 

Not sure what you mean by "honest" Marty:

always truthful?

fair?

upright?

ethical?

decent?

just?

respectable? (maybe that's a bit Jane Austinish Posted Image)

not fraudulent or stealing? (well, we know who that rules out Posted Image)

doesn't hack people's heads off? (ditto Posted Image)

 

To be "honest" I can't think of anyone I've ever met or encountered that would satisfy all the above. Was such a creature ever born? Posted Image

 

Me! Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

 

Zombie

 

I do not know if you are being factious or if you are oblivious to the basic concepts of law. Laws fundamentally forbid or require an action. Laws governing the actions of individuals are classified as either, “Mala in Se,” OR, “Mala Prohibita.”

 

“Mala in se,” basically translates as, “Evil in itself.” The action addressed by this classification is evil in its very nature. I.e. Murder, theft, etc.

 

“Mala prohibita,” laws are evil because some human entity has said they are evil. There is nothing inherently evil about speeding in or of itself. However, if your speeding is irresponsible based on the circumstances, it is no longer speeding, it is considered Reckless Driving. Failing to pay your income taxes is not evil.

 

These are my recollections of the basic concepts of law from a course I took many, many years ago. The instructor then asked the students to consider the Ten Commandments. We had to consider each commandment individually. We then discussed and attempted to classify each of them, as whether they were, “Mala in Se,” Or, “Mala Prohibita.” Believe me when I say, “It changed what could have been a very boring class, into an interesting one. The best example of that is here, in my response to your post. I did not have to do any research to prepare this answer.

 

Are you now ready to put forward a candidate from the storyline, or were you just playing the role of a Devil’s Advocate.

 

I personally classify the offense of creating a, “Cliffhanger,” as, “Mala in se.”

 

Marty

 

How fascinating! I'd not heard of that concept before: “Mala in Se, Mala Prohibita.”

 

That makes perfect sense, as a way of understanding legal theory.

 

Thanks for bringing this up!!!!!!

 

And I absolutely agree with your statement: "I personally classify the offense of creating a, “Cliffhanger,” as, “Mala in se.”

Cliffhangers are indeed evil, which is why I so steadfastly and forthrightly, with virtious vigor, strive to ensure that none ever occur in my stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliffhangers are indeed evil, which is why I so steadfastly and forthrightly, with virtious vigor, strive to ensure that none ever occur in my stories.

 

 

 

 

male bovine manure Posted Image

 

 

 

 

Here are my two nominees for characters who have not broken the law: Craig Grundig, Martin Blake, and Mike Gonzalez.

 

Okay, hasn't Craig been informed into some of the background by Rachel's sister's husband. They both know that Trevor is a runaway, and Craig knows about Trevor concealing the gun but did not report it.

 

Martin, he has been 'married' to Rachel, or at least known about Trevor since he arrived. He has also been harbouring and abetting him too.

 

Mike Gonzales, he has withheld information of a criminal offense. Like knowing that Harry has placed illegal trackers on both Joel's and George's vehicle.

Edited by wildone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly jaded on this subject.

 

I think that the quality of most peoples honesty depends on who is watching.

 

I've seen far too many people whose actions are motivated by what others will think of them, not doing the right thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping someone would notice this aspect. Well done, Marty. Posted Image

 

Yes. Though to vastly varying degrees, we have almost all major characters, with two possible exceptions, breaking laws.

 

Shane? He stole mainly food, out of dire necessity. Granted, he put himself in that mess partially by his own doing (staking everything on the surf lifesavers competition) but he was coming out of a very bad situation.

 

Trevor? It was illegal for him to leave Florida (he was a minor) against his father's wishes. However, I think it is very understandable that he did, under the circumstances (which included suspecting his father of killing his mother).

Did he break gun laws in a few countries by keeping his gun hidden? Yep... and so would I. I would not wish to sail in some of the waters he did unarmed.

 

Here are my two nominees for characters who have not broken the law: Craig Grundig, Martin Blake, and Mike Gonzalez.

 

 

CJ,

 

You sound like Frank Tittle. A blankety blank Ultra Liberal Defense Attorney. According to him in Chapters 98 and 99 Dirk and Rachel are the victims of bad laws. Dirk is sounding off in the same choir. Half a world away Rachel is singing from the same book. Agreed, the two of them might not have known about the Merchant Marine Act when they started with the Ares. But they sure as hell knew about it when they expanded their operation by buying the Atlantis for cash.

 

Shane is a thief. How short your memory is CJ. I have a clear recollection of Shane admitting to trespassing and vandalizing Ned Kelly’s toolboxes by using super glue on them.

 

Ahh Trevor. Again you’re memory is selective. I seem to recall Trevor admitting to concealing the income he received from tips. Then he conspired with Joel to use Atlantis in an illegal charter in Greece. Although the tax year for 2006 is not ended, I doubt he intends to report the income from the charter. He also entered into a conspiracy with Joel to smuggle the diamond engagement ring.

 

Maybe you need to review the chapters where Mike Gonzalez conspired with Henry and failed to stop or take action while Henry broke one law after another.

 

His partner Greg dragged Craig into his transgression. When Greg arranged for his nephew Trevor to be able to regain custody of the revolver he broke the law. This in spite of the fact Trevor admitted breaking the law. Craig failed to enforce the laws he is sworn to uphold.

 

When Rachel arrived in Australia she conspired with her sister, Ned and Melody Kelly, along with Martin Blake to conceal the true identity of the Ares. They planned and altered her appearance. Are you trying to tell me you are not required to register boats in Australia.

 

Here are two quotes from Rachel in Chapter 99.

 

then putting a cooked-up registration on her.

 

 

Kookaburra – we probably need to keep calling her that – couldn’t be sold; she has a faked registration and also, she’s not mine to sell.

 

CJ are you trying to tell me Martin Blake has been using Kookaburra as a charter business and does not know she has a false registration.

 

Who is your next candidate? Sanchez.

 

BTW Again you proved you are unable to count. You said two but listed three.

Edited by MartyS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

male bovine manure Posted Image

 

 

 

Okay, hasn't Craig been informed into some of the background by Rachel's sister's husband. They both know that Trevor is a runaway, and Craig knows about Trevor concealing the gun but did not report it.

 

Martin, he has been 'married' to Rachel, or at least known about Trevor since he arrived. He has also been harbouring and abetting him too.

 

Mike Gonzales, he has withheld information of a criminal offense. Like knowing that Harry has placed illegal trackers on both Joel's and George's vehicle.

 

Interestingly, putting a tracker on someone else's vehicle has become a legal gray area. The justice department has taken to arguing that it does not require a warrant or even probable cause for the police to do it, because the information gathered is the same as if a car had followed them, and being out in public they have no right to privacy from what could be observed via non-electronic means. This issue has reached the supreme court, and has yet to be decided. However, for Henry, it means that what he did (placing a tracker, not the trespass) may have been legal, because the same logic applies. Why would it be legal for the police to do it and not him, based on the same legal theory? No law allows the police and not others to do this. :) BAck in 2006, though, Henry may well have been breaking the law, but the justice department has cleverly opened up the means to take legal stalking to a whole new level, because if they get the ruling they want, it will apply to everyone, due to the legal theory involved (no expectation of privacy on a public road).

 

I'm fairly jaded on this subject.

 

I think that the quality of most peoples honesty depends on who is watching.

 

I've seen far too many people whose actions are motivated by what others will think of them, not doing the right thing.

 

Totally agreed!!

 

CJ,

 

You sound like Frank Tittle. A blankety blank Ultra Liberal Defense Attorney. According to him in Chapters 98 and 99 Dirk and Rachel are the victims of bad laws. Dirk is sounding off in the same choir. Half a world away Rachel is singing from the same book. Agreed, the two of them might not have known about the Merchant Marine Act when they started with the Ares. But they sure as hell knew about it when they expanded their operation by buying the Atlantis for cash.

 

Shane is a thief. How short your memory is CJ. I have a clear recollection of Shane admitting to trespassing and vandalizing Ned Kelly’s toolboxes by using super glue on them.

 

Ahh Trevor. Again you’re memory is selective. I seem to recall Trevor admitting to concealing the income he received from tips. Then he conspired with Joel to use Atlantis in an illegal charter in Greece. Although the tax year for 2006 is not ended, I doubt he intends to report the income from the charter. He also entered into a conspiracy with Joel to smuggle the diamond engagement ring.

 

Maybe you need to review the chapters where Mike Gonzalez conspired with Henry and failed to stop or take action while Henry broke one law after another.

 

His partner Greg dragged Craig into his transgression. When Greg arranged for his nephew Trevor to be able to regain custody of the revolver he broke the law. This in spite of the fact Trevor admitted breaking the law. Craig failed to enforce the laws he is sworn to uphold.

 

When Rachel arrived in Australia she conspired with her sister, Ned and Melody Kelly, along with Martin Blake to conceal the true identity of the Ares. They planned and altered her appearance. Are you trying to tell me you are not required to register boats in Australia.

 

Here are two quotes from Rachel in Chapter 99.

 

CJ are you trying to tell me Martin Blake has been using Kookaburra as a charter business and does not know she has a false registration.

 

Who is your next candidate? Sanchez.

 

BTW Again you proved you are unable to count. You said two but listed three.

 

I'll argue over Frank Tittle being liberal (or any other political persuasion - we just don't have any info on that). He's a criminal lawyer, and his job is to say what is needed to help his clients. whether its true or not. What he says has no bearing whatsoever on his own beliefs.

 

And okay, okay, Shane did indeed try to superglue Ned's toolbox shut. :)

 

Concealing tip money? Remember, he split that 50-50 with Julie, so he's only concealing his half. We don't know what she did with hers. And he did far better than usual on the first charter we saw; he probably nets far less than that, on average. Marty, have you ever found a dollar... maybe some loose change, like a quarter in a parking lot a few times in a year... and then not reported it? Legally, it's the same. :P And you did say that not reporting taxes wasn't evil. :)

 

As for the charter in Greece, that broke no US laws, and won't unless he doesn't report it. And, even then, that'd make the voyage largely tax deductible, so the net taxable income would likely be zero. :P

 

And you're saying you think Gonzalez should have busted Henry for victimizing poor Bridget? Or do you mean George? As I recall, Gonzalez has tried to keep Henry from breaking laws in most cases. :)

 

Greg is Craig's superior officer, so Craig is obligated to defer to him. :)

 

Now, speaking of memories (I won't defend mine, I freely admit it's bad) yours seems a tad off for MArtin Blake. Nowhere does it say that RAchel was in contact with him during her arrival or while Ares was being recreated as Ares. Indeed, Rachel said, "Later, when I fell in love with my childhood sweetheart, Martin, someone helped me with the paperwork to change my last name from Smith to Blake."

 

So it looks to me like MArtin wasn't involved in Rachel's arrival or the doctoring of Ares into Kookoburra at all. And, she's registerted, as Kookoburra, in Western Australia, but I don't know of any Australian law that violates, and Martin didn't do it anyway.

 

Now, as for me saying two but listing three, you are forgetting; Martin Blake and Craig Grundig (two of the three) are Australian! Therefore, we need to count them with Australian maths. 1+1+1=3, which is half of 6, but in Australia 6 is upside down so it's a 9, so you subtract one (for Gonzalez, who isn't in Australia) to give you 8, then subreact the 3 (which is half of the six from whence came the 9) to get 5, and then subtract the 3 we started with, and you've got two: Gonzalez, Grundig, and Martin Blake. It's quite simple so long as you bear in mind that, relative to the northern hemisphere, Australia is upside down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll argue over Frank Tittle being liberal (or any other political persuasion - we just don't have any info on that). He's a criminal lawyer, and his job is to say what is needed to help his clients. whether its true or not. What he says has no bearing whatsoever on his own beliefs.

 

Any political reference never crossed my mind.

 

And okay, okay, Shane did indeed try to superglue Ned's toolbox shut. Posted Image

 

Concealing tip money? Remember, he split that 50-50 with Julie, so he's only concealing his half. We don't know what she did with hers. And he did far better than usual on the first charter we saw; he probably nets far less than that, on average. Marty, have you ever found a dollar... maybe some loose change, like a quarter in a parking lot a few times in a year... and then not reported it? Legally, it's the same. Posted Image

 

What does what I did or did not do effect a deliberate action by Trevor. He intended to evade paying taxes and he did.

 

And you did say that not reporting taxes wasn't evil. Posted Image

 

I did not say that. I dislike being misquoted.

 

Please note correction in followup post.

 

As for the charter in Greece, that broke no US laws, and won't unless he doesn't report it. And, even then, that'd make the voyage largely tax deductible, so the net taxable income would likely be zero. Posted Image

 

Is it your contention that Trevor is only required to obey US Laws. He knew he was breaking the laws of Greece.

 

And you're saying you think Gonzalez should have busted Henry for victimizing poor Bridget? Or do you mean George? As I recall, Gonzalez has tried to keep Henry from breaking laws in most cases. Posted Image

 

What Henry and Mike did was evesdrop electronically on Joel's conversations. They did so without Joel's knowledge or consent. They did so without a lawful order of a court. They did this while sitting in a bedroom in Mike Gonzalez's home. I do not know what the laws of Florida say, but I know it is a violation of US Law.

 

Greg is Craig's superior officer, so Craig is obligated to defer to him. Posted Image

 

I sincerely hope you do not really believe this.,

 

Now, speaking of memories (I won't defend mine, I freely admit it's bad) yours seems a tad off for MArtin Blake. Nowhere does it say that RAchel was in contact with him during her arrival or while Ares was being recreated as Ares. Indeed, Rachel said, "Later, when I fell in love with my childhood sweetheart, Martin, someone helped me with the paperwork to change my last name from Smith to Blake."

 

So it looks to me like MArtin wasn't involved in Rachel's arrival or the doctoring of Ares into Kookoburra at all. And, she's registerted, as Kookoburra, in Western Australia, but I don't know of any Australian law that violates, and Martin didn't do it anyway.

 

I am unable to say how they do things in Western Australia. I do know I had to produce proof of ownership when I registered my vessels in the State of New York.. Seeing as no one in Australia had valid proof, it must have been a forgery. Do you really believe it is not a crime to do that in Australia?

 

As to Martin helping with the forgery, I cannot prove it. However he has been operating a charter using Kookaburra for an extended pereiod of time. The only question that comes to my mind is: Would Rachel allow Martin to use a boat, with a false registration, and not tell him?

 

Now, as for me saying two but listing three, you are forgetting; Martin Blake and Craig Grundig (two of the three) are Australian! Therefore, we need to count them with Australian maths. 1+1+1=3, which is half of 6, but in Australia 6 is upside down so it's a 9, so you subtract one (for Gonzalez, who isn't in Australia) to give you 8, then subreact the 3 (which is half of the six from whence came the 9) to get 5, and then subtract the 3 we started with, and you've got two: Gonzalez, Grundig, and Martin Blake. It's quite simple so long as you bear in mind that, relative to the northern hemisphere, Australia is upside down.

 

This final paragraph makes as much sense as the majority of the rest of this post by CJ. There are several unexplained facets that puzzle me. I will wait patiently until the final chapter is posted.

 

One statement I have made, I will say again. Rachel doesn't care who's life she screws up, as long as she does not pay any penalty.

Edited by MartyS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • And you did say that not reporting taxes wasn't evil. Posted Image

     

    I did not say that. I dislike being misquoted.

  • I would like to state for the record, When I challenged CJ on this I was incorrect.. I did say that. However that is my personal opinion, not the law unfortunately. After all, the primary difference between Trevor and his parents regarding evading income taxes, is the amount of money involved.
Edited by MartyS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted Image .................. Well what is Lisa guilty of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... and Ben seemed like a nice boy. Can't remember him doing anything downright evil, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted Image ..........Although Ben was a character (hmmm, wonders if the goat was pointing to someone here) he was not a major player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted Image .................. Well what is Lisa guilty of?

 

 

Benji,

 

Lisa attempted to have a public officer release to her property, that was in the care and control of said said public servant, Simply put: Lisa attempted to get Sergeant Gonzalez to allow her to remove items from the Chandlery without the consent of Dirk.

 

Now the second one is a little tricky, but it is on the books. Lisa, under Federal Law is a minor. It is unlawful to transport a minor across state lines for immoral purposes. Her father has discovered evidence in her bedroom there is a sexual relationship between her and Joel. The father is involved in the conspiracy also. He cannot give permission for her to go legally. Remember, she is not paying for the plane tickets. BTW the key here is the fact, Lisa is a minor.

 

This also leads to an interesting situation. Lisa and Joel have been concealing, from her father, the fact that Trevor was almost killed by pirates. Although Joel and Lisa did meet Dirk, nothing was said to them, about Rachel still being alive. If you read Chapter 98 carefully you will note Lisa is still not sure whether or not to believe Dirk's denial. The final problem is Lisa's fathers condition regarding Dirk. He told Joel he was concerned about Dirk making a further attempt to kill Trevor and destroy the boat with them aboard. According to Joel's statement's to Trevor on the telephone, the facts have been in the local newspapers. It is most likely Lisa's father learned about the attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted Image ............. There is a point here about Lisa, Lisa ASKED if she could remove items from Dirk's store, that was not dishonest. Again Lisa never disavowed her her relationship to Joel with her father, she never lied about it, therefore was not dishonest about it. Concealment of facts is not dishonesty, in Lisa's case she told the truth to her father, yet neglected to inform him of her tryst with Joel at Bridget's guesthouse. That is the only fault I find with Lisa, yet was she dis-honest? Or just not forcoming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Criminal lawyer

 

Isn't that redundant?

 

Or at least an oxymoron? Sorta like what us grunts used to think of 'military intelligence'.

Edited by Daddydavek
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to the topic, if there are no shades of gray, then the main characters like the vast majority of people on the planet are less than perfect.

 

Mark Twain had much to say on the topic. Here are some of his quotes:

 

"Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities. Truth isn't."

 

"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please."

 

"Honesty is the best policy - when there is money in it."

Edited by Daddydavek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted Image ............. There is a point here about Lisa, Lisa ASKED if she could remove items from Dirk's store, that was not dishonest. Again Lisa never disavowed her her relationship to Joel with her father, she never lied about it, therefore was not dishonest about it. Concealment of facts is not dishonesty, in Lisa's case she told the truth to her father, yet neglected to inform him of her tryst with Joel at Bridget's guesthouse. That is the only fault I find with Lisa, yet was she dis-honest? Or just not forcoming.

 

Benji,

 

You have every right to have an opinion. I do not agree with yours.

 

Marty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Benji,

 

You have every right to have an opinion. I do not agree with yours.

 

Marty

 

Posted Image ........... As we have differed before Marty, as we have differed before! Posted Image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the charter in Greece, that broke no US laws, and won't unless he doesn't report it. And, even then, that'd make the voyage largely tax deductible, so the net taxable income would likely be zero. ../..//public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.png

 

Is it your contention that Trevor is only required to obey US Laws. He knew he was breaking the laws of Greece.

To be fair to Trevor, I think that recent events have adequately proven that nobody else in Greece was paying any taxes in 2006. Why should Trevor be the only one? Posted Image

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably the point of writing fiction is to have readers that want to read it? Of course, I could be entirely wrong about this :)

 

So, can anyone name any interesting and "honest" fictional character that gripped them and kept making them want to turn the pages? Come on, be honest now :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to Trevor, I think that recent events have adequately proven that nobody else in Greece was paying any taxes in 2006. Why should Trevor be the only one? Posted Image

 

Hi Low Flyer,

 

You may if you wish, go back and take a look at Chapter 31,when the charter was discussed between Joel and Trevor. the following quote is from that chapter:

 

Trevor blinked, tempted, but he had concerns. “Joel, do you have any idea how much trouble we could get in if we get reported?”

“Yeah, but they asked me, and they’re American so they’re not Greek cops doing a sting. They had a charter that canceled on ‘em after they got here. They wanted to see some nearby islands and maybe do some diving.” Joel explained the itinerary they had in mind, and then added, “You said you were worried about money, and here’s twelve grand of it.”

 

 

My understanding of this event which took place in Chapter 31 is, Trevor was aware if he agreed to take the charter he would be in violation of the laws of Greece. If you wish to Interpret it differently, that is your prerogative. I do not think he was concerned with failing to pay any tax due.

 

One thing for sure, it looks like running illegal charters may be an inherited trait.

Edited by MartyS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Our Privacy Policy can be found here. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..