LogFAQs > #880278708

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	American man had to call the POLICE on his TINDER DATE because she won't LEAVE!
wolfy42 06/02/17 1:51:33 PM #30:	XlaxJynx007 posted... aDirtyShisno posted... XlaxJynx007 posted... aDirtyShisno posted... Zeus posted... aDirtyShisno posted... If she didn't leave the house how could she steal anything? It'd all still be inside... If you take an object and put it in your pocket (or purse), you can be arrested in a store. You don't need to physically leave the store. Same would go for homes. No you can't, actually. You have to wait until that person walks out the door before you can arrest him. http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/can-i-be-convicted-shoplifting-when-i-never-left-store.htm No you don't. Just have to prove intent. Let me just quote your last paragraph there. Many clerks and security personnel will not, however, apprehend a suspected thief until that person has actually left the store. The reason is not that they lack justification before that moment, as just explained. Instead, they simply want an open-and-shut case. It will be difficult to argue that one intended to pay for the goods when one has walked out without doing so; on the other hand, defendants who are apprehended pre-exit may be able to convince the jury that their actions were consistent with an intent to eventually pay for the merchandise before leaving the store. And as soon as they get away with it you are liable for a 'false' arrest, since you just proved they didn't do anything wrong in court. You want proof? Wait until they're out the door. You can't be charged with false arrest if your actions can be justified. It can be difficult to prove theft prior to exiting, yes, but it's possible to do so. Back when I was a police officer, one of the first people I arrested was a shoplifter at Target and we arrested them in the store. He was about to leave and that's when we stopped him, hence proof of intent. That is the thing though, you open yourself up for a lawsuit (well at least the company does), and possible damages if the person was tackled etc. You can't justify the actions if you can't prove there was any criminal activity (the person was shoplifting etc), which you can't do if they don't have the items on them anymore. So if the person ditches the items, even if the clerk picks them up and says "he was hiding these in his coat) etc, unless there is a video or something, I don't think it would be a good idea to try and arrest them and go to court over that. It opens you up to way too much liability and potential to be sued, for way too little return. Some way to deter people from doing it is needed, but our current court systems would certainly not be a good choice I don't think. --- Proud member of the Arv The Great is great fan club!!! Join today by putting it in your sig. <cite>wolfy42 posted [p:880278708] in American m... [t:75412373]...</cite> <quote><cite>XlaxJynx007 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote><cite>XlaxJynx007 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>aDirtyShisno posted...</cite> <quote>If she didn't leave the house how could she steal anything? It'd all still be inside...</quote> If you take an object and put it in your pocket (or purse), you can be arrested in a store. You don't need to physically leave the store. Same would go for homes.</quote>No you can't, actually. You have to wait until that person walks out the door before you can arrest him.</quote> http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/can-i-be-convicted-shoplifting-when-i-never-left-store.htm No you don't. Just have to prove intent.</quote>Let me just quote your last paragraph there. <quote>Many clerks and security personnel will not, however, apprehend a suspected thief until that person has actually left the store. The reason is not that they lack justification before that moment, as just explained. Instead, they simply want an open-and-shut case. It will be difficult to argue that one intended to pay for the goods when one has walked out without doing so; on the other hand, defendants who are apprehended pre-exit may be able to convince the jury that their actions were consistent with an intent to eventually pay for the merchandise before leaving the store.</quote>And as soon as they get away with it you are liable for a 'false' arrest, since you just proved they didn't do anything wrong in court. You want proof? Wait until they're out the door.</quote> You can't be charged with false arrest if your actions can be justified. It can be difficult to prove theft prior to exiting, yes, but it's possible to do so. Back when I was a police officer, one of the first people I arrested was a shoplifter at Target and we arrested them in the store. He was about to leave and that's when we stopped him, hence proof of intent.</quote> That is the thing though, you open yourself up for a lawsuit (well at least the company does), and possible damages if the person was tackled etc. You can't justify the actions if you can't prove there was any criminal activity (the person was shoplifting etc), which you can't do if they don't have the items on them anymore. So if the person ditches the items, even if the clerk picks them up and says "he was hiding these in his coat) etc, unless there is a video or something, I don't think it would be a good idea to try and arrest them and go to court over that. It opens you up to way too much liability and potential to be sued, for way too little return. Some way to deter people from doing it is needed, but our current court systems would certainly not be a good choice I don't think. --- Proud member of the Arv The Great is great fan club!!! Join today by putting it in your sig.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1