|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Atherton police called it grand theft in the April 5 log entry — and it is definitely grand — but they say they’re investigating it as a residential burglary that may have unfolded over a period of months.
A resident in a house on Belbrook Way is missing nine purses and a pair of gloves, with a total estimated value of $93,500. The list includes several Hermes items: a $25,000 black and gold crocodile-skin purse, a $15,000 burgundy purse, a $10,000 burgundy pouch, a $1,500 pair of black gloves, and a $12,000 black Birkin purse — named after actress and singer Jane Birkin and “a symbol of wealth due to its high price and elusiveness to the public,” says Wikipedia.
The list includes three items from Chanel: a $7,000 evening bag and two Chanel Classic purses valued at $4,500 each, and two $7,000 purses made by Louis Vuitton.
Sgt. Sherman Hall said in an email that there were no signs of forced entry and that detectives are pursuing leads.
By Dave Boyce
By Dave Boyce
By Dave Boyce
Check if a divorce is imminent…indicates insurance fraud. Spouse to be cut off with no income needs cash.
To spend that amount of money on such trivial status symbols is obscene. The woman must have very low self esteem.
Since my previous post was removed…is it safe to say perhaps the stolen property was earned?
Did you really need to say that, Janet. Maybe she collected them, maybe they were gifts. Maybe she prefers purses to art work or cars or jewelry. Who cares..someone took them and they are valuable.
Someone took them and they are valuable, sure. But more importantly someone took them and they were hers. Plain outright thievery. Doesn’t matter why or how she had the bags. They were stolen and that’s despicable.
Probably fence them for $50 each !
“They were stolen and that’s despicable.”
Despicable may be a little strong. There is a price to pay for ostentation. Maybe the currency is sympathy.
My heart would readily go out to victims who are poor or simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
When a guy has his fancy sports car vandalized, I have a curiosity about it, but that’s it. Likewise, I guess, for a woman who’s lost possession of $90,000 in purses. Come on! Yes, the thief should go to jail but I cannot find it in me to share the pain of such a victim.
It is amazing to see how quick some of the commenters are to assume and to judge others.
I guess I can play that game too. I suppose Mr. non-ostentatious “Joe” is safe and smugly living in a more appropriate sized home in Allied Arts and with his chosen status symbols – perhaps a Prius (holding on to a 1st or 2nd gen?)…and only is seen hiking in his REI gear (not Patagonia!). He discouraged his kids from applying to anything other than state colleges, as clearly any others were elitist…
You probably wish she had spent the $92K on more important things, such as the Class-Warfare-In-Chief Obama’s recent fundraising get togethers…
What a tool!
OK no problem. If it’s OK for commenters to depict burglary victims as being deserving of their fate due to the commenter’s judgemental definition of ostentation, I’ll just go away and let the class envy crowd crow on…
Unbelievable.
Someone steals something – not even remotely justifiable (as if there were such a thing) like food – and our locals blame the owner for being ostentatious or for their obscene trivial status symbols.
Funny, in most parts of this world, our simplest lifestyle choices – having more bathrooms than people in your house, having a room just for our cars, throwing away food, pampering our pets – would seem incredibly wasteful and ostentatious. It’s all relative.
This victim earned that money. Whether they chose to buy a purse or a Prius is hardly the point. The fact that someone took something that wasn’t theirs, is.
Geez.
With all due respect to those who are attacking the snarkier posters, the Almanac set them up with this line:
“a symbol of wealth due to its high price and elusiveness to the public”
Why bother to include that info (from Wikipedia, no less!) if not to elicit comments about frivolity and the 1%?
P.S. To all you Birkin collectors. I run a small nonprofit in this community. If you’d like to sell off some of your bounty and donate the proceeds to charity, many of your less fortunate neighbors would be grateful.
Or rather than donate a local charity, maybe it would be more palatable to the snarks if instead of collecting nice things, the victim instead purchased a table at the next campaign visit from the Class-Envier-In-Chief. After all, the party knows what’s best for us.
People collect all sorts of stuff. Exotic cars, coins, stamps, art, and jewelry immediately come to mind. Perhaps some of us weren’t aware that there was a hand bag collector’s market. Apparently, there is. And, it’s an exclusive club.
Here’s the deal: these bags apparently hold their value and even appreciate. How’s that different than buying some bars of precious metal? It seems to me, this victim lost their investment. They are out $90,000!
Does YOUR inability to invest such amounts make this less of a crime? Should the victim not have reported it? Should the thief not be held accountable?
I don’t understand the ridicule from the frequent flyers on these message boards. But, I certainly have come to expect it.
If the advertisers only understood the mentality of the people who frequent these forums, they would spend their advertising money elsewhere.
Whenever you have items of high value that are small to fit them in a safe, put them there. Insurance will likely cover this & I hope the victim doesn’t have much sentimental connection to the items.
Lesson learned here……Haha
Hilarious to see people fighting over purses. Vanity items are named such for a reason. I, too, have opinions on these purses & the money parted from these folks when purchasing them. Savvy investment instrument with a high return on investment, in a World filled with other options? I think not. Still, the point is: theft is theft. If you value it: lock it up. Sticky fingers are everywhere.