Don't rely on those counterfeit detecting pens!

rdwarrior, that is pretty funny! hahaha, that would be great...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Very interesting story and a very good catch on your behalf before leaving the premises!

At first, when I read the discrepancy you noted in watermark, I thought this might turn out to be an error printed on the wrong paper, much like this misaligned print on LD's $100 he recently posted here.

 

I once asked if it were still illegal counterfeiting if a counterfeiter bleached a 1996 $5 bill with the Lincoln portrait watermark, and printed a new purple $5 bill on it which would normally have the huge 5 watermark and three small 5s watermark, or vise-versa, if they could still get in trouble for it. Of course, as I figured, the answer was "YES" Dumb question, I guess. But I really wonder if any error $5s will turn up with a purple $5 bill being printed on a Lincoln watermark paper sheet. Would that error, if real, be worth a lot of money?

 

I rode to the bank with a co-worker once and watched the teller hand him a counterfiet 20.
We pulled away and he counted his money... I noticed one bill was funny looking and asked to see it.
Sure enough, it was fake.

IMO they should have just refused the bill and asked for another. To arrest him was way overkill.
Even if the bill was fake, the chances he made it or knew it was fake were slim to none.
My friend didn't believe the 20 was fake until we went back to the bank and they confirmed it.

 

urbanchemist said

even if it was counterfeit if the driver didn't honestly know they cant do anything​

Read more: http://www.cointalk.com/showthread.php?t=152605&pagenumber=#ixzz1COC3Wu40​

How do you determine if someone "didn't honestly know"? Truth drug? Lie detector? Hypnosis?
Whenever someone is 'caught' trying to pass a potentially counterfeit note the authorities have to investigate (to determine if the note is genuine or not and if "not" then the innocence or guilt of the party) otherwise we might just as well give up trying to catch countrfeiters and set up our own presses.

 

They could investigate, but they have no business arresting someone until they KNOW, proof positive, that the bill is fake AND the suspect KNEW it was fake.
I hate lawsuits in most situations, but this guy should sue every single person he met that day and the entities that they work for.

 

well it would just be a matter of believing the person. like i stated when i worked at the bank we would get at least one counterfeit note a week. we would then send the note out to be checked for sure. i would say a majority of the notes we had gotten were just color copies. sometimes we would catch the note at the time of the transaction and sometimes it wasn't till after the fact counting out our cash. we would never credit the customers account of course. i would just explain to the customer what makes the note a counterfeit.

 

Sorry, ratio411, but I don't live in America so I don't know how the system works there. Should the police 'detain' as opposed to 'arrest' the person until the investigation was completed?

I certainly hope that the person involved in this episode didn't incur any expenses (apart from time lost and inconvenience) in which case then sue. But there is a price to be paid (occasional inconvenience) for vigilance, to ensure that the money in your pocket is real, that the homicidal maniac can't purchase a firearm over the counter, that the person sat next to you on the plane isn't carrying a bomb, that the teacher/priest/whoever isn't going to mess around with your kids etc.

 

Believe it or not, there is a huge difference between 'detaining' and 'arresting' when it comes to the legal system here.