Originally Posted by BREEDmonkey
Incorrect. There still has to be proof of transfer between Tito and whoever owned the locker (if it wasn't Tito). Without proof those objects are still Tito's property and you cant sell someone's property without their consent. In reality we have so little to go on that I don't know why we're arguing about it. Legally however, if it wasn't Tito's locker, and there is no proof of transfer, its still Titos property.
I'd still say it up to Tito to prove it though. He can't just say they were stolen without proof that they were. It's not up to buddy to go about proving he didn't buy property that someone else had stolen. That just doesn't make any sense what so ever. Tito has the burden of proof that his stuff was taken, other than just saying so. You don't just happen to have a truckload of stuff stolen and be like meh, I am sure it'll show up, no need to tell anybody or get the police involved, I'll just tell them when it comes up.
I have sold many a guitars over the last few years, and if this is the case, then whenever I see an old guitar come up for sale I'll just say it's mine and they will have to investigate and come up with proof that no one did steal it from me, even though I have no evidence that it was indeed stolen. i can make a killing.