MovieChat Forums > Limitless (2015) Discussion > Why did Sands get arrested by the FBI?

Why did Sands get arrested by the FBI?

posted 9 years ago by virusavatar
19 replies | jump to latest

Rebecca knew her apartment was bugged so she said she would kidnap Sands' son to draw him out. This caused Sands to show up with a gun to protect his son, at which point Boyle arrests him.

But what charges do they have to hold him on? As far as I know, Sands isn't wanted for anything by the FBI.

They cannot pin the surveillance cameras on him. Him responding to Rebecca's threat is circumstantial at best, and he can explain the gun away as being legal issue, or seeing the FBI with guns and fearing for the safety of his son. This is literally arresting him for thought-crime at this point.

They only suspect that he killed the evidence clerk or replaced the coat.

They can't prove he's behind the nzt purge, or the death of Rebecca's father.

Houstin cannot testify and no sane judge would accept testimony from a braindead criminal. Brian can't testify unless he wants to go to jail for being complicit in treason, murder, and obstruction of justice. He also can't testify for fear of his family's lives. Morra will deny all knowledge of any of his crimes.

When Sands was telling Rebecca that he killed her father, he spoke hypothetically, so that wasn't an admission of guilt.

So is the only crime they can pin on Sands is that he had a possibly illegal gun drawn in a residential area? If so, why did the FBI mobilize a strike force to take him down?

[–] Jensen3178 9 years ago

Didn't he kill Rebecca's dad. According to the little black book he did and hopefully with the testimony of the coma guy, Houston I think his name was, well if they can use his brain power to testify. Haha

[–] Heroforsale1959 9 years ago

No way would the book be allowed in evidence as there is no clear chain of custody for it, ("Your Honour, I found it under a rock") doesn't count. Houston couldn't give evidence, there is no way he can be cross examined properly.

Brian cant, as he is tainted by his association with Morra and it is doubtful the FBI would want him anywhere near a court of law as the defence would carve him up on the stand and expose their NZT experiment.

It may be possible he could be charged regarding his gun, not for him having it (as a security expert he would have to have a concealed carry permit) but for the fact he had a silencer which I understand is an offence in itself in some US states?.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

[–] wadecollins 9 years ago

Houston is not brain dead. As explained in the episode, he's completely capable of testifying.

[–] Heroforsale1959 9 years ago

His isn't able to be cross examined properly, it would be highly prejudicial to the defence if anything "read" by an encephalograph was submitted as evidence.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

[–] virusavatar 9 years ago

At worst, they can charge him with having an illegal gun and silencer in a residential area. Also, that is a good point, the black book was not legally admitted into evidence, and Houston cannot be cross examined by the defense.

[–] actionmanrandell 9 years ago

wrong the black book would in fact be admissible in court. its not just a list of crimes he committed but has actual proof

[–] kristylharris 9 years ago

Didn't she say that Brian confessed to his connection to Mora and Sans (sands?)?
Which would include all the criminal activities Brain witnessed throughout their time together including the evidence clerk.
I think anyway, I should stop playing candy crush while I watch shows on demand, there is no rewind for when I forget to pay attention. :)

[–] davegoodkin 9 years ago

They have two definite charges, probably three.

First, silencers are VERY illegal. That is felony number one.

Second, many jurisdictions have an additional felony they charge whenever you commit a felony while possessing a gun (even if you legally possess that gun), so that could be charge number two, based on the illegal silencer charge.

Third, the surveillance. The ONLY place they indicated they were going to his son's apartment was at Rebecca's apartment, on the surveillance cameras. And he showed up immediately afterwards, gun drawn, ready for action. Right there if I'm on a jury, I convict for everything related to those cameras. And for the cameras, you could probably get a whole boatloads of charges - they could pin the installation on him, which is also a break in of a residence, which is home invasion, a very serious charge. Then the use of the cameras themselves. And so on.

And since he clearly was involved with the surveillance and why he was at his son's place, his lying about that is lying to an FBI agent in an official investigation, another felony. If you don't think he could get prison for that, just ask Martha Stewart.

In short, they got him on multiple felonies dead to rights. Sure, none of them are the murders, but he certainly is not getting off without prison time.

[–] richterbelmont10 9 years ago

First, silencers are VERY illegal. That is felony number one.

This sounds like the best reason they can hold him.

---------------------------------------

[–] dmc101 8 years ago

I know this is old but this is wrong. Suppressors (not silencers) are not illegal. You can own them. All you need is to buy it, get ATF approval (it's an NFA item) and pay your 200 dollar tax stamp (and transfer fee).

By the way, it wouldn't be the FBI's jurisdiction. It would be the ATF.

[–] sales-487-227902 9 years ago

Hey ppl :)

It is simple - besides Brian is no more connected with Morra, he told whole conspiracy story to Reb; he is not out of FBI only for "no more" NZT condition but probably also because of his confession about spying for senator and he have whole knowledge about Sand's crime activities.

So, probably - Brian is a witness and with Houston and other evidences (is it normal to walk around with silenced gun?) - they can hold Sands; now - how long - I don't know - bur we will see this in final two episodes, I hope.

[–] Heroforsale1959 9 years ago

Sorry, wrong on many counts.

Sands couldn't be tried in open court as the FBI would be crucified by the defence for their use of drugs on a civilian. Houston Cannot be properly cross examined because of his condition, nor could any "evidence" he claims through the use of the prosecutions "experts" be submitted without that ability.

The book is useless as there is no clear chain of custody for it.

Brian could never take the stand, he would have to lie about everything as Sands defence lawyer would rip him apart otherwise. Anything Brian knows about Sands also implicates him in espionage of a federal agency, and Sands would have info about Brian that would implicate him in several crimes if he chose to use it.

So no, it isn't "simple" at all......

Si vis pacem, para bellum

[–] The Shrike 9 years ago

Would normal rules even apply here. I mean, if people were running around with these types of abilities wouldn't they represent a grave threat to the system, and society as a whole. If I were to guess, someone like that would disappear down the rabbit hole into either a secure facility, or a 6 foot hole.

[–] nekkid_hill_billy 9 years ago

felony weapons alone is enough to put someone away for along time. sands spent time in prison he cant even have a gun. convicted felon with a firearm is a about 10 years alone. why cant you cross examine Houston? he can answer yes and know. even if he is not convicted of any of this he could be arrested and charged. he would be in jail until bond decision was made and if it was no bond or a crazy high bond he couldn't pay would be until a court case. this could be months or longer.

[–] actionmanrandell 9 years ago

he spent time in prison but was acquitted of all crimes

[–] actionmanrandell 9 years ago

his actions with the drug would be considered acts of terrorism and he wouldn't even be tried in court he would just be accused of terrorism and held without trial

[–] slimdaddy-70258 9 years ago

You guys are forgetting the only reason that matters for holding Sands in prison. It's the government. If a significant threat is present do you really think they can't hold someone even with little evidence lol. There are numerous secret ways including labeling him a terrorist or threat to national security. That's all the justification they would need to hold him without bail or arraignment.

[–] lantzn 9 years ago

There's also his background with MI6 and the illegal activities he did that got him kicked out. Then he shows up with a gun and silencer in a residential building which could easily point to professional assassin, who bugged an FBI agents home.

[–] Karnivore 9 years ago

For the lolz