Pregnant mom arrested for forgetting to pay for sandwich

[Dakini]

Glad to see most people here haven't managed to mature beyond stage 4 moral development.

So... because shoplifting is illegal it can't also be bad because it's harmful to the store to allow it to proceed unpunished?

[Four-sided Triangles]

So... because shoplifting is illegal it can't also be bad because it's harmful to the store to allow it to proceed unpunished?

Because most shoplifters pay $50 in order to steal $5 worth of shit amirite?

[The Black Forrest]

Glad to see most people here haven't managed to mature beyond stage 4 moral development.

So... because shoplifting is illegal it can't also be bad because it's harmful to the store to allow it to proceed unpunished?

Did they intend to shop lift?

[Dakini]

So... because shoplifting is illegal it can't also be bad because it's harmful to the store to allow it to proceed unpunished?

Because most shoplifters pay $50 in order to steal $5 worth of shit amirite?

This one did.

[Dakini]

So... because shoplifting is illegal it can't also be bad because it's harmful to the store to allow it to proceed unpunished?

Did they intend to shop lift?

Who knows. How should the store be expected to distinguish between someone who intentionally stole and someone who accidentally stole? It's not like this is a case where the cashier forgot to ring something in where the customer could reasonably expect that this item was added to their bill. Further, she shoplifted the second she started eating her sandwich without paying for it. She definitely intended to shoplift, even if she may have intended to shoplift in the socially acceptable "it's not really shoplifting" sort of way.

[Four-sided Triangles]

This one did.

Shoplifting requires intent to steal, does it not?

[Chrinthanium]

I had once taken a bag of M&M's and ate them while walking around the store. I paid for everything, including the M&Ms (I handed then the empty wrapper) and the store security guard still acted like I was shop lifting. I showed him the receipt and told him to f-off. Exactly what I would have said to that store if this had happened to me. I'd have left the money on the table, taken a picture of it with my cell phone camera. Probably a video also, and then left.

That store manager should be tried for unlawful detainment.

[Dakini]

This one did.

Shoplifting requires intent to steal, does it not?

No, it requires leaving a store with unpaid goods.

[The Black Forrest]

Shoplifting requires intent to steal, does it not?

No, it requires leaving a store with unpaid goods.

Did they intend to leave the store with unpaid goods?

[Four-sided Triangles]

How should the store be expected to distinguish between someone who intentionally stole and someone who accidentally stole?

We manage to do it with homicide all the time.

Further, she shoplifted the second she started eating her sandwich without paying for it.

This reminds me of the kind of hyperbolic reasoning required to equate theft with violence or taxation with theft.

She definitely intended to shoplift, even if she may have intended to shoplift in the socially acceptable "it's not really shoplifting" sort of way.

I'm pretty sure shoplifting legally requires you to leave the premises.

[The Black Forrest]

Did they intend to shop lift?

Who knows. How should the store be expected to distinguish between someone who intentionally stole and someone who accidentally stole? It's not like this is a case where the cashier forgot to ring something in where the customer could reasonably expect that this item was added to their bill. Further, she shoplifted the second she started eating her sandwich without paying for it. She definitely intended to shoplift, even if she may have intended to shoplift in the socially acceptable "it's not really shoplifting" sort of way.

Depends on the place and the circumstance.

Eating and tossing the container is theft.

Eating and passing the container to the checker; is not theft.

[Dakini]

No, it requires leaving a store with unpaid goods.

Did they intend to leave the store with unpaid goods?

Maybe. Just because she says she didn't mean to when she was caught doesn't mean she really didn't mean to.

[Dakini]

Who knows. How should the store be expected to distinguish between someone who intentionally stole and someone who accidentally stole? It's not like this is a case where the cashier forgot to ring something in where the customer could reasonably expect that this item was added to their bill. Further, she shoplifted the second she started eating her sandwich without paying for it. She definitely intended to shoplift, even if she may have intended to shoplift in the socially acceptable "it's not really shoplifting" sort of way.

Depends on the place and the circumstance.

Eating and tossing the container is theft.

Eating and passing the container to the checker; is not theft.

No. Eating an unpaid item in the store is theft. If you pay for it anyway, stores tend to not give a shit. However, if they wanted, they could prosecute you for eating the food in their store.

[Four-sided Triangles]

No, it requires leaving a store with unpaid goods.

1. This ironically negates your assertion that she would have shoplifted even if she paid.

2. Theft requires mea culpa. Sorry. If you want to play the legalism game, then at least play it correctly.

[The Black Forrest]

Did they intend to leave the store with unpaid goods?

Maybe. Just because she says she didn't mean to when she was caught doesn't mean she really didn't mean to.

Possibly. But again paying $50 to steal $5? Probably not.

Hell. My wife once did the monthly shopping and arrived home with item in her purse. My kid tossed it there.

She should be arrested right?

[Tekania]

This one did.

Shoplifting requires intent to steal, does it not?

For one to be guilty, yes, intent would need to be established. To detain / arrest however one only needs probable cause. Being in possession of an item you concealed on your person and then leaving with said item without paying is enough for probable cause in most jurisdictions.

[Celritannia]

Depends on the place and the circumstance.

Eating and tossing the container is theft.

Eating and passing the container to the checker; is not theft.

No. Eating an unpaid item in the store is theft. If you pay for it anyway, stores tend to not give a shit. However, if they wanted, they could prosecute you for eating the food in their store.

Theft only occurs if a person had the intention to do so.

[The Black Forrest]

Depends on the place and the circumstance.

Eating and tossing the container is theft.

Eating and passing the container to the checker; is not theft.

No. Eating an unpaid item in the store is theft. If you pay for it anyway, stores tend to not give a shit. However, if they wanted, they could prosecute you for eating the food in their store.

No. That's your opinion.

Stores don't do it as the cost usually outweigh the benefit.

[Dakini]

How should the store be expected to distinguish between someone who intentionally stole and someone who accidentally stole?

We manage to do it with homicide all the time.

Homicide is a crime where you spend a lot of time in jail. Shoplifting is a crime where you pay a fine unless you make a habit of it. If she wants to plead for leniency, she should get to do that at court.

Further, she shoplifted the second she started eating her sandwich without paying for it.

This reminds me of the kind of hyperbolic reasoning required to equate theft with violence or taxation with theft.

It shouldn't. The law is that you're stealing when you consume an item in a store without paying for it. Stores don't generally prosecute people for it though.

She definitely intended to shoplift, even if she may have intended to shoplift in the socially acceptable "it's not really shoplifting" sort of way.

I'm pretty sure shoplifting legally requires you to leave the premises.

Theft, whatever. You're not legally allowed to use merchandise you haven't purchased. You're not legally allowed to leave the store without paying for merchandise. It's bad for the store if people are allowed to get away with this or if they do not face punishment for doing this because they cannot catch everyone (therefore they should punish the people they catch to deter others). It's bad for the customers if theft is frequent from stores, as stores have to raise their prices to earn money.

[Dakini]

No. Eating an unpaid item in the store is theft. If you pay for it anyway, stores tend to not give a shit. However, if they wanted, they could prosecute you for eating the food in their store.

No. That's your opinion.

Stores don't do it as the cost usually outweigh the benefit.

No, it's not my opinion, it's fact. I've seen people prosecuted or fired for eating food they didn't pay for, even if they intended to pay for it later. It's actually against the law.

[Omega Centauri]

1.Vomit the sandwich back up into the wrapper.
2. Give it to them
3. Leave
4. ???????????
5. Profit

[Sheariliik]

Should of just left 5 dollars on the counter, and said fuck you to the store. I wouldn't sit four hours anywhere because some rent a cop told me too. But the woman was probably just scared, albeit a little naive.

this.

[The Black Forrest]

No. That's your opinion.

Stores don't do it as the cost usually outweigh the benefit.

No, it's not my opinion, it's fact. I've seen people prosecuted or fired for eating food they didn't pay for, even if they intended to pay for it later. It's actually against the law.

It's your opinion and I don't know the circumstances of your store in question.

I see women allowing their kids eat something and pay for it. They are not prosecuted.

You consider it theft. I consider it theft if it's not paid.

[Four-sided Triangles]

Homicide is a crime where you spend a lot of time in jail. Shoplifting is a crime where you pay a fine unless you make a habit of it. If she wants to plead for leniency, she should get to do that at court.

So it doesn't matter in this case simply because the consequences aren't a big deal?

Theft, whatever. You're not legally allowed to use merchandise you haven't purchased. You're not legally allowed to leave the store without paying for merchandise. It's bad for the store if people are allowed to get away with this or if they do not face punishment for doing this because they cannot catch everyone (therefore they should punish the people they catch to deter others). It's bad for the customers if theft is frequent from stores, as stores have to raise their prices to earn money.

IF someone pays, how is the store suffering? Further, if you're not legally allowed to consume things you haven't yet purchased, doesn't that mean that, if they wanted to be dicks about it, every sit-down restaurant in the country could arrest every single patron for the lulz? Or does this principle only apply to retail? Is this some law written down somewhere?

[Dakini]

No. Eating an unpaid item in the store is theft. If you pay for it anyway, stores tend to not give a shit. However, if they wanted, they could prosecute you for eating the food in their store.

Theft only occurs if a person had the intention to do so.

...and the store is clearly equipped to tell a person's intent how?