This evening someone left a half-eaten container of Chow Mein on my car. :-(

It's too bad the death penalty has been rescinded in Canada!

Plastic surgeon? $2.6 million house overlooking the ocean? the Pacific Palisades?

Maybe, you just got their housekeeper fired. (not that she doesn't deserve to be if she is the one doing this trashing)

Given the area it comes from, I wonder if it wasn't identity thieves who took it originally and dumped it after they got what they needed. Kinda scary actually when you think about what you were able to learn about these people just from their trash.

Although people who fail tie down their trash really piss me off! There is one family who does this and every week I am picking up their trash. Drives me crazy!

I have to agree with Robert - something doesn't add up here. A plastic surgeon isn't going to take the time to drive his trash somewhere to dump it. Something else is going on...

People who dump their trash are usually clever enough to remove any identifying papers. There's a gully near us that is apparently used by several people as a trash dump. Since I have the misfortune to always walk by it, I keep an eye out for any identifying papers - there never are any.

Still these people ought to be very interested in knowing that their personal papers are readily available by the curb of your street. If nothing else, they ought to thank you for bringing this to their attention.

Regardless if it was them personally or their hired help, they're still responsible for it.

Sorry, but as an ex-copper, the idea that the most-likely explanation for this event is that the original owners of this trash personally dumped it on your street is - remote.

This is much-more likely to be the outcome of dumpster-diving or trash-trawling. Identity-thieves (very common in upscale neighborhoods), private investigators, or law-enforcement. The reason that you didn't find CC data or more address information may well be that all of that was removed before it was dumped - this is not the owners' original trash, this is their trash after whoever took it had taken what they wanted from it.

The shipping box (with the UPS label) may well have been re-purposed. You may also be looking at the accumulations of some homeless person's pathologies. I see at least one Target shopping bag, which doesn't really seem to jibe with the upscale nature of some of the other materials described.

I could be wrong, but I think chances are that you have maligned the people you identified from the trash as being personally responsible for putting it there.

llater,

llamas

Might it be good manners that stand in the way of a timely response? The Sitnoveters may have returned home to Brazil and the proper hosts would not dream of opening mail addressed to guests...and have forwarded the box to Eduardo in Brazil.
This could become an international incident, as well as an on-going entertainment.

Well, then , answer me some questions.

- how do you know that all of these cash receipts are related to the same person/persons?

You don't. But you have drawn some pretty-broad conclusions based purely on that assumption.

- how do you know that any of the materials you found - apart from 2 which contained the same name and would seem to be connected - are associated with any of the other materials you found?

You don't. The fact that you found them all in one place doesn't mean that they all came from the same place, or that there is any connection between them except that they were found stuffed into a gorocery-store bag on the curb.

If I got a social-media accusation from a complete stranger accusing me of some petty crime in a place far away, I would ignore it, too.

I didn't say I had all the answers. I am looking at what is more likely.

Scenario a) A Brazilian plastic surgeon and his wife bagged up all their trash from a visit to the LA area and then dumped the bags on a residential street in Santa Monica

or

Scenario b) A homeless person grabbed a load of trash from the dumpsters behind the Santa Monica Radisson, including two items dropped in a wastebasket by a visiting Brazilian plastic surgeon and his wife, as well as a mass of receipts and pocket litter from 75 other, different guests, trawled through it looking for who-knows-what, and then dumped the lot on a residential street in Santa Monica.

I'll take door number 2, Monty. Or any one of a dozen more-likely explanations for what you found. But I could well be wrong. Could you?

I'm well-familiar with the stories of the stolen Rambler and the parking lot incident at Whole Foods. Well done. But in both those cases, you did what the coppers should have done, but didn't - tracked down leads and obtained evidence. In this case, you have taken confusing and incomplete facts, which admit of fifty different explanations, decided that you know what the one true explanation is, and proceeded to accuse people by name of being responsible for what you assume they have done. If you were a copper, your 'investigation' would be laughed out of the prosecutor's office.

llater,

llamas

In my neighborhood, trash pickup is included in my property taxes. The trash I find in my yard is due to people not securing it properly - have you seen what a dog will do to a trash bag? - buy a can, please - or the guys who pick it up.

Being an "ex-copper" does not speak to your competence in assessing a situation like this.

You really need a like button here.

Brilliant!

Situation: Trash in the street.

Which really seems more likely:

1. Someone dumped it there.
2. Identity thieves are at work!
3. Some other convoluted scenario.

Are identity thieves really far more common than people who litter? I think the ex-copper was a copper too long. Sure, you can't know without proof, but it's hardly as if Amy's thrown them in jail or something.

The 'convoluted scenario' is the one in which we assume that two visitors from Brazil would drive around looking for a place in Santa Monica to dump their trash.

The much-more-likely scenario is that people who dump their trash anywhere and everywhere, dumped their trash on a street in Santa Monica.

As to this:

'Being an "ex-copper" does not speak to your competence in assessing a situation like this.

You really need a like button here.'

- that might well be a 'like' button that I would press. I am, after all, an ex-copper, and there are reasons for that.

However, when confronted with an unusual and unclear situation, you are much-more likely to get the most-likely explanation from a copper, who deals with unsual and unclear situations every day and who has had their eyes opened to the more-unusual aspects of life, than you are from the average citizen, who has not. Most coppers have seen enough to know that you should only believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear, and that the obvious answer very-often - isn't.

After examining the images more-carefully (discarded food packages, wrappers from men's underwear, empty UPS box, a mass of retail receipts (described, not seen), a UPS shipper, a boarding-pass copy, I'm inclined away from the idea that this was the leavings of an identity thief, and stronger in my opinion that these are the leavings of a homeless person. There is certainly no credible basis on which to call out two people by name and accuse them of littering, much less to pack up street garbage and mail it to a third person with more-strident accusations of littering. To do these things is - beyond rude.

llater,

llamas

Who cares how it got there?

The owners should be furious that their names and personal contact information are being scattered randomly across a city with a gigantic criminal population.

Good job, Amy!

llamas, I live in AZ, the double ll is a y sound in spanish

Every time you sign off with 'llater llamas' I see
yater
yamas

And I'm willing to bet a lot of other people aew reading it that way

Lujlp,

I live in AZ too, and you're right, but it's clear from context how he means it to be pronounced. If he were less argumentative on Amy's blog I'd pronounce it correctly in my head. As it is, he gets the yamas from me.

Do police officers actually refer to themselves as "copper," or when he says he's an ex- does he mean he was a police officer in the 1930s?

Our gracious hostess wrote:

'There was a first name on a United baggage tag that matched that of one of their very few FB friends . . '

Really? The same first name as one of their Facebook friends?

Well, that settles it, of course. How could I ever have thought that there could be any other possible explanation?

/sarcasm off.

If we're talking weak tea - your whole justification seesm to hinge on your opinions of the shopping habits of the citizens of Santa Monica, together with your deductions from the presence of fast-food wrappers and similar highly-credible 'evidence'. Two sugars, please.

Look, there's no question about where some items in this trash might have come from. What you don't have is a single scintilla of credible evidence about how it ended up on your street. And yet you're mailing packages of street garbage to total strangers, based on zero evidence, accusing them of littering and demanding that they come and collect what you have simply assumed they are somehow responsible for. And now you're e-mailing possible acquaintances of the people you have already decided are guilty of this outrage, to say - what, exactly? Does this seem like a rational and measured response to you?

Exactly as you said - you're guessing. Your words, not mine.

Rude, much?

If this is your idea of effective deduction, I think I'll stick to my flawed and wanting skills.

There are a dozen more-credible explanations for hos this happened than the one you have chosen to latch onto. Hint - think garbage trucks. Think street people. Think the same routes by which the last 50 pieces of unidentified trash appeared on the streets of Santa Monica. Occam's Razor.

Now, since you have a deadline, I will leave this until you have time to track doen the explanation - if you can - at which time I look forward to seeing you post it here. Unlike you, I am keeping a more-open mind as to how this might have happened.

lujlp - yes, I know how it reads. Feel free to read it just as you please.

llater,

llamas

As to 'copper' - I was raised in the UK, but was a copper in the US. It is just another verbal affectation. Pay it not the smallest mind.

llater,

llamas

One final thought for the evening -

"I know a good many cops, as does Gregg, who goes to murder scenes with them for a living (researcher for crime novelist), "

Then I have a thought - why don't you have some of them come here and comment on what you have said and done?

I was a copper in a Metro Detroit department. Mayhap we have acquaintances in common. That would be kind-of amusing.

llater,

llamas

Lobster: Situation: Trash in the street.

Which really seems more likely:

1. Someone dumped it there.
2. Identity thieves are at work!
3. Some other convoluted scenario.

#1 is a given (we can presume the trash wasn't dumped by rabbits or robots.) Your options should have been:

Which really seems more likely:

1. The trash was dumped by the Brazilian couple.
2. The trash was dumped by someone else.

All llamas is proposing is that someone could've picked up a bunch of trash out of a dumpster and then tossed it after going through it. Amy certainly may be right but the idea that llamas has seems reasonable to me.

I see this all the time in the ranch country where I often work, and where my own horses live. Once, I loaded up several bags of litter and dumped it in the driveway identified by the mail inside the bags.
People are just as bad about disposing unwanted pets. I've seen a number of dogs and even rabbits dumped by the road.
A friend of mine lived in Hawaii and always knew when there was a deployment: unwanted pets would be routinely dumped along the road she took to work.

Sounds to me like some douchebags picked up a package, did some shopping, grabbed a bite to eat on the way somewhere, and put their crap into a bag and threw it out the window.

Is it possible, llamas, that bits and pieces of the trash came from a variety of different sources?

Well not to put to fine a point on it, but while it is possible, it is not probable, because you see...the author happens to LIVE THERE. See if she'd noticed several smaller pieces there, then a big load, that might mean, at worst, that she threw a few small pieces in with the unexpected "gift".

If you find a body missing a hand, and you find a hand without a body a few feet away...odds are pretty good they go together.

If you find an unexpected pile of trash, and two indentifiers (name/address) in that unexpected pile, odds are ridiculously high that they were part of the same toss.

If we were to go through your trash right now, how many different names would we find in yours, would we find your magazine plus your neighbors mail plus your 2nd cousin twice removed's credit card reciept? No.

Fact is llamas, that you're constructing a picture of a counter scenario solely for the sheer preversity of opposing someone for the sake of opposing them.

You haven't put something coherent together that is even nearly as likely as, "Couple of rude jackasses tossed their shit from a car on their way from point A. to point B.

You can hold to it as much as you like, but rude littering assholes are a lot more common than identity thieves and mystery gangs of trash dumpers mingling their stuff in the middle of the night.

"#1 is a given (we can presume the trash wasn't dumped by rabbits or robots.) Your options should have been"

I thought it was INCREDIBLY f'ing obvious that that was what I meant, but thanks for the pointless "clarification" JD.

"You haven't put something coherent together that is even nearly as likely as, "Couple of rude jackasses tossed their shit from a car on their way from point A. to point B."

Well here we have a 'copper' who self-proclaimedly believes in completely idiotic maxims like 'it is never the obvious answer!' ... that's the kind of idiocy that puts innocent people in jail. I wonder if ex-copper is no longer a copper because he just wasn't very good at it.

Robert, what is it about a douchebag that you find so distasteful that you use the word as an insult? Have you ever actually seen a douchebag? They're pretty rare these days.

So many points, so little logical consistency.

The trash was not tossed out of a window - unless you believe that it landed in the neat pile that was photographed. Unless this was not actually how it was found.

The trash is all mixed together. Sure - exactly as it would be if it were (for just one possible example) the result of tipping 63 hotel-room wastebaskets into one trash gondola. Trash all mixed up in the same bag may well tie the trash to an individual, but still tells us all precisely nothing about how it got to where it was found.

Everyone simply assumes the trash was deliberately placed where it was found - but there is no evidence of that. If you believe it is possible that it was deliberately thrown out of a vehicle and was found as shown, then you must also (logically) believe it is possible that it fell out of a trash truck and was found as shown. One outcome is no more or less likely than the other.

For those who have trouble keeping up, I did not initially suggest the identity-theft answer, and indeed, I already said that I know think this is a less-likely answer to this whodunnit.

@ Lobster, who wrote

'Well here we have a 'copper' who self-proclaimedly believes in completely idiotic maxims like 'it is never the obvious answer!'

Well, that's a particularly-inane response, because a) I never said that, or anything like it and b) what I am saying is not 'it is never the obvious answer', what I am saying is that there is no obvious answer, based on the data we have. Examples of matching body parts lying next to each other are not very applicable, really, are they? I realize that you did not provide this exceptionally-inane simile, but all of the inanity is starting to run together at this point.

Let's summarize, shall we?

- Bags/boxes of trash found neatly stacked on the curb in a suburban street.
- Bags contain assorted trash of all sorts.
- Included in the trash are two pieces of paper which once belonged to what appear to be a married couple, one of which identifies a street address which does not appear to be their residence.
- Also included is a piece of paper which bears only a first name.

Did I miss anything?

Actions that have been taken so far.

- Messages sent to both persons whose names appeared on pieces of paper in the trash, presumably accusing them of dumping it there.
- a selection of the trash mailed to one of the persons named at the street address found in the trash, along with an accusatory and scatological note which can only be read as accusing her/them of dumping the trash where it was found.
- (This one I love) A message to a Facebook friend of one of the persons named, who has the same first name as that found on another piece of paper in the trash, saying - what, exactly? I'm dying to know.
- (This one I love even more) A message to a person who appears in a photograph on the Interweb standing next to one of the persons named, saying - what, exactly? I'm dying to know.

Do the actions taken appear to you to be justified by the facts as known?

Self-evidently not. Self-Evidently. But don't take my word for it. In the original post, our generous hostess wrote

'Now, I have to say, I have no video or other evidence that Eduardo and Jacqueline themselves dumped the trash on my street.'

and that may be the last logical statement made on the matter - except, of course, for mine.

But explain for me, a mere ex-copper, bound by simple logic - if you have no evidence that they did this, what possible basis do you have for accusing them of it, and proceeding to hcall them out by name on the Internet and harassing them with accusatory messages and mailings?

What Possible Basis?

Answer - None. You made up what you consider to be The Obvious Answer. You Made It Up. You wove two or three bits of data into a complete narrative. Occam's Razor. Any explanation which requires you to multiply assumptions becomes the less-likely explanation.

Now, you're allowed to snark at me, so I think I'm allowed - with my usual level of politeness, naturally - to suggest that a person who makes a living as an author and speaker drawing attention to the bad behaviour of others may perhaps be predisposed to see bad behaviour where none actually exists?

Once again - I don't have the answer. I am accused of arguing that 'It's Never The Obvious Answer' - a ridiculous thing to say, which is probably why I never said it - but by the same token, what's being argued here is 'It's Always the Obvious Answer' - which is just as ridiculous.

Now - think about this for a minute - do you really want coppers (especially) working from the basis that 'it's probably the obvious answer'? Is that really what you want?

Sniping and snarking about me, and about coppers in general, duly noted. But, again, the failure of logic - what bearing does the unwillingness of your local police commander to enforce a noise ordinace have to do with this discussion?

' . . . sheer preversity . . . ' (sic). Moi? Why, yes - thank you for noticing. But 'preversity' - the willingness to question the 'obvious' and speak up when logic has obviously flown the coop - is a virtue, not a vice.

Appreciate the forum. It's always interesting to see how others think.

llater,

llamas

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Love it Amy, remind me to stay on your good side.

Really Robert W? The death penalty for leaving trash? Reeeeeaaaally?

"Well, that's a particularly-inane response, because a) I never said that, or anything like it "

I'm always amazed when people blatantly contradict what they wrote just a few posts above. Do you think people won't notice? Here is a quote from yourself:

"Most coppers have seen enough to know that ... the obvious answer very-often - isn't."

Is changing your story also one of those copper skills?

@ Lobster:

I wrote

"Most coppers have seen enough to know that you should only believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear, and that the obvious answer very-often - isn't."

You said I wrote:

"Well here we have a 'copper' who self-proclaimedly believes in completely idiotic maxims like 'it is never the obvious answer!' ..."

One of these things, is not like the other.

Note the difference between my words - 'very-often . . isn't', and what you claimed were my words - 'never'.

English is hard, isn't it? I know.

I didn't 'change my story', it was you who changed my story. Forgive me if I don't feel the need to take responsibility for what you did. And - having been a copper - unlike you, I am completely un-amazed when somebody loudly claims a blatant contradiction which, on closer inspection, turns out to be entirely imaginary.

However, please do feel free to play again.

llater,

llamas

And, incidentally, trying to haul this back onto a slightly higher plane - there is an interesting observation to be made here about confirmation bias and the tendency to align with normative worldviews.

Within just this thread of comments, two different commenters have expressed an identical confirmation bias about something entirely unconnected with the matter at hand. They have, in the words of a better writer than I, 'assumed facts not in evidence.'

Both examples leaped off the screen at me. Can you spot them? They are classic case(s) of going with 'the obvious answer'.

llater,

llamas

Fact is llamas, that you're constructing a picture of a counter scenario solely for the sheer preversity of opposing someone for the sake of opposing them.

Robert that is, of course, your opinion, not a fact. Likewise it's not a fact that the Brazilians dumped that trash. It's Amy's opinion (in her original post, she admitted, "I have no video or other evidence that Eduardo and Jacqueline themselves dumped the trash on my street.")

Why are you so certain of what llamas' motivation is in presenting a different opinion, another scenario?

I totes heart sheer preversity.

Some of the best preversity is sheer... It compels fools to remember that words have meaning.

"Note the difference between my words - 'very-often . . isn't', and what you claimed were my words - 'never'.

English is hard, isn't it? I know."

I actually knew this would be your response, and unfortunately for you, you've fallen into a logic trap of your own making. If 'very often' translates as 'a minority of time' then it is logically a mistake to assume that the most obvious answer isn't probably correct, and your proclaimed method is still flawed. If 'very often' translates as 'most of the time' then you're still wrong, for the reasons mentioned. So you've contradicted yourself again in terms of the premises of your methods.

Don't know why people don't just admit they made a mistake instead of the lame attempt at backpedalling.

"They are classic case(s) of going with 'the obvious answer'."

Lol .. so we're back with the 'obvious answer is a mistake'. You change your story more often than my toddler's diaper is changed.

Bravo JD. I just read through all these posts and it is quite obvious that llamas has way too much time on his hands and spends it just trying to be contrary for contrary's sake.

Amy's writing the owners is something everyone should do in a case like this, instead of being apathetic and doing nothing like most people do.

You make it sound like her making an accusation is a crime. Sheesh! If these people, whom you don't know, have such thin skin, and oh my, they're going to be sooooo offended by her note, blah, blah, blah... My gosh!

Have you not a life, no friends? Probably not, the way you seek attention, antagonize and want Amy and others to search out your "Can you spot them" game, demonstrates you're just using this site to turn it into "your" site, make everyone respond to your comments and demands. Typical power play and oh so full of semantics.

Point is, the owners should be offended, whether they did it or someone else went through their trash and did it. Either way, they are responsible for disposing of their trash properly. If something fell through the cracks, they should have the decency to follow up. And if they are not at fault, a decent person would agree to Amy's disgust and would respond with an apology/regret for the mishap and be disgusted themselves enough to answer/investigate.

Stop making a mountain out of a molehill and hijacking the post. I don't think anyone's entertained by your troll-like heckling.

To everyone else, sometimes the best answer to a troll who has proven to keep on heckling is to ignore him. It is the best consequence to that kind of ongoing rude behavior, otherwise he's being rewarded for it by getting the attention he so desperately desires.

I just read through all these posts and it is quite obvious that llamas has way too much time on his hands and spends it just trying to be contrary for contrary's sake.

Frances, I'll ask you the same question I posed to Robert: why are you so certain of what llamas' motivation is in presenting a different opinion?