Detectives from the Folsom Police Department are continuing their investigation into the circumstances surrounding the recovery and return of a rare banjo stolen in June from Portola Valley developer Jim Pollock.
No arrests have been made, said Folsom police Detective Jon Lasater. A “bounty hunter” and an attorney — the two men who received a $10,000 reward from Mr. Pollock in exchange for the return of his banjo — are not the focus of the investigation, Mr. Lasater said.
A rare 1931 Vega Vox III banjo that Mr. Pollock had played before six U.S. presidents happened to be inside his GMC Denali when it was stolen during a trip to the Sacramento area.
The transfer of the banjo to Mr. Pollock occurred without police involvement, Mr. Lasater said, adding that while it is advisable to get police participation in the return of stolen property, it is not required.
The transaction also appears to be legal, he said, noting that the district attorney, when all the facts are in, will have to decide. Possession of stolen property can become illegal, but “you have to kind of show some intent (to deprive) and continue to deprive the owner” of the property, he said. “Possession of (stolen) property with the intention of returning it to the owner is not a violation of the law.”
So far, Mr. Lasater said, any intent to deprive Mr. Pollock of the prompt return of his banjo appears improbable. Claiming a reward in a straightforward manner, if a reward has been offered publicly, is not an instance of depriving an owner of property, Mr. Lasater said.
The banjo surfaced when the bounty hunter learned of its whereabouts and contacted an attorney to arrange its return, Mr. Lasater said, adding that he has no idea as to how the bounty hunter found it.
“I think the only issue at question is why didn’t they call the police when they knew it was stolen,” he said. “It’s shady, how it went down, but was it a criminal violation? Probably not.”
In an e-mail to the Almanac, the attorney involved in the banjo’s return said that he and his partner “never conditioned the return of Mr. Pollock’s Banjo, nor did they withhold the item. It was transferred immediately and in excellent condition. The only reason it came to us was to facilitate its safe and professional return to Mr. Pollock.”
The award, the attorney said, “was not a condition precedent to the return of his property.”
EDITOR’S NOTE: After further reporting, we learned that information in an Almanac story on the recovery of the banjo, which ran in the Almanac’s print edition of Aug. 22, is incorrect, including the reference to a police sting operation and a planned arrest of an unnamed attorney and a private investigator. The Almanac regrets these errors.
