Shoplifting in Walgreens

[dagreat1]

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Tennesee


this is a very strange situation for the child ( young adult) of a good friend of mine that well did or did not get caught shoplifting in Walgreens shes knows Im taking the bar next year so I tried to give her the best counsel I could...

Here are the facts from the best I can ascertain:

daughter went to exchange a feminine product
saw a bottle of cosmetics she wanted
attempted to shoplift the product and didnt know the employees saw her select and walk around with the product(no one saw the concealment)
discarded the box empty
Mgr asked her to provide her license for the exchange(which at first he didnt)
she thought the request was usual for a 2 dollar item and provided the Mgr with an old outdated 5yr old out of state DL
Mgr said brb and walked off
for several minutes the girl waited and no help figured something was up, when she saw her empty box was recovered out the previous aisle
had second thoughts and abandoned the effort item back on another shelf and walked out the store without her old DL or her product exchange
Luckily for her she did cause the police were in fact called and she got away just in time before they pulled into the store
she then called the store anonymously about 30 minutes later and told the employee where they could retrieve the item

Now heres the issue:

she worried cause her old DL may tie into her new in state ID
the store now has her face
her mom says shes had a problem with theft and has been at other chains doing this behavior

Conclusion:

well it was totally out of line in my perview if the Mgr acted ad hoc as LP even with merchants priviledge cause the effort was abandoned and if the police had come and the item was discarded and not on her person the store would still be facing a liability factor even if she was trespassed. Though criminal attempt is still a crime many retailers in my experience tend not to prosecute unless theres an actual arrest made at the time of the incident. Secondly, even with the old out of state DL the retailer will be forced to prove that that ID didnt end up in the hands of a look alike imposter. Walgreens in my opinion is going down a slippery slope having employees taking up security functions to the degree where they call cops without absolutely certainty that the subject has the merchandise on their person.Usually these functions are reserved for people with certified LP training. I told her to tell her daughter dont take her happy azz in that store again as for sure the DL has been turned over to the police and a photocopy made for the store they will be on the alert for her the next go round. But to this point I dont see her worrying about much, the merchandise was recovered and she lived to fight another day.

What do you guys think??

[seniorjudge]

I think the bad person is definitely guilty.

[dagreat1]

well theres no argument there...I guess my question is shes still worried she will get caught, I dont think she will simply being there was no arrest and the item she was trying to take was like 35 bucks and she put it back before they arrived, I dont think the store or the police are going to try to pursue it....I guess she hope this doesnt tie into her other ventures at that chain

[seniorjudge]

well theres no argument there...I guess my question is shes still worried she will get caught, I dont think she will simply being there was no arrest and the item she was trying to take was like 35 bucks, I dont think the store or the police are going to try to pursue it....

Don't count on it.

By the way, I realize lawyers have trouble writing the English language.

If you want to be a lawyer, I hope you improve your written English.

[dagreat1]

Judge;

I write for my schools law review,so excuse me I'm typing on the fly. I don't really want to bore people with long outdrawn details simply to sound intelligent. Rule 1 of Law school: Just the FACTS

also I didn't gather your meaning on the last reply; dont count on her get arrested? or dont count on her getting away with it? Please clarify.

[seniorjudge]

Judge;

I write for my schools law review,so excuse me I'm typing on the fly. I don't really want to bore people with long outdrawn details simply to sound intelligent. Rule 1 of Law school: Just the FACTS

also I didn't gather your meaning on the last reply; dont count on her get arrested? or dont count on her getting away with it? Please clarify.

Don't count on her getting away with it.

Okay ... if you are LR, I withdraw my comment.

Do you proofread by reading the article backwards?

[cyjeff]

IF she has a long record with Walgreens, yes, they are coming for her.

The police really hate showing up for this stuff.

It just isn't their top priority...

Next question is why is our little thief carrying around an old out of state license?

Methinks this is not her first theft.

[dagreat1]

well that's a bit alarmist isnt it? It's somewhat obvious she didn't get away with it. the Store has starting point. Not to mention she left without her original merchandise. But I don't see them justifying any saw any charges when the merchandise was recovered and no one actually saw any concealment. the concealment would be presumed because of the empty box. However, before I went to law school I worked in retail loss prevention of a decade and I can attest that people get "spooked" all the time after they conceal merchandise and subsequently dump the merchandise. That's why as a rule of thumb we didn't stop shoplifters until after they attempted to leave the premises thereby making a shoplifting charge stick. If they abandon the effort, we let them leave and waited for them to come back where we could catch them. That it itself didnt subject a person to any type of criminal prosecution.

[cyjeff]

well that's a bit alarmist isnt it? It's somewhat obvious she didn't get away with it. the Store has starting point. Not to mention she left without her original merchandise. But I don't see them justifying any saw any charges when the merchandise was recovered and no one actually saw any concealment. the concealment would be presumed because of the empty box. However, before I went to law school I worked in retail loss prevention of a decade and I can attest that people get "spooked" all the time after they conceal merchandise and subsequently dump the merchandise. That's why as a rule of thumb we didn't stop shoplifters until after they attempted to leave the premises thereby making a shoplifting charge stick. If they abandon the effort, we let them leave and waited for them to come back where we could catch them. That it itself didnt subject a person to any type of criminal prosecution.

The merchandise was NOT recovered in a condition that allowed it to be resold.

Therefore, a theft occurred.

As for proof, I am sure that ten minutes reviewing the tapes will provide more than enough... not to mention her call to the store.

I also said it depended upon her relationship with Walgreens. If this is a place she steals from routinely (and I am assuming she does), they may be more motivated.

That is why I put that first in my post. At the front. First thing. Means it is important.

By the way, what your company did or did not do in regards to shoplifting means NOTHING in regards to the law... as you know.

Walgreens has a year to make a police report.

[dagreat1]

@ cy...


shes doesnt have any record at Walgreens from what I can tell. which doenst mean she hasnt stolen from them before. the point Im trying to make is when she spoke to me she said she gave the Mgr the older DL cause she thought it was strange she would say she didnt need ID for her exchange then said changed his mind and then after she gave it to him he proceeded to walk off with it....luckily she didnt give him her current ID. So when you allege they are coming after her....Coming after her for what? ATTEMPT??!!....in most states thats not even prosecutable.