Shoplifting Charge With No Video Evidence

My question involves criminal law for the state of: NJ. Just wondering if someone has some answers? I am still waiting for my first court date for shoplifting from late April. The amount of merchandise was $117, but anyway, it took my lawyer a few times to get the discovery. When he finally got it there was no video survalence included with it. The police records told him there was no video. Now when I was in the Room with the LP he swore on the video evidence and said if needed it will be used in the court room, and I did see myself at the checkout. When I read a copy of the discovery the LP wrote that I left the store without stopping at a register, that I just walked out! I did buy a few things! Just wondering why he would twist it around and say that I just walked out? My lawyer said this no video thing is very unusual. Could this help me with my case, or be worse for me? Anyone? Just sitting here thinking about it. My new court date is July 2nd now!

No video is not at all unusual. LP professionals build cases based strictly on floor surveillance all the time. I won't hazard a guess as to why the LP person told they had video when did not nor can I posit why their report reads the way it does. There is a typical phrase found in many reports regarding registers but it normally only indicates you failed to pay for your concealed merchandise.

As to how it may affect your case, that is entirely dependent on what your attorney does with it at trial.

what difference does it make if there is video?

Did the LP guy witness your theft?

Did you admit to the theft?

Did they find stolen merchandise on you?



If they do not have video, just what do you intend on putting forth for a defense?

realize that your discovery was seeking what the prosecutor has. If the store never turned the video over to the prosecutor, the prosecutor doesn't have any video to give you.

I honestly don't understand any of it, he said something about it could good on my end? But again, I like to hear from diff opinions.

it would be good if that was the only evidence you committed the crime but I suspect it isn't.

There is probably observation by the LP guy (even if it was via closed circuit tv or video)

apparently the merchandise was found on you. Really hard to overcome that evidence


and if you admitted to it, well, a confession is pretty damning.

If the LP who is questioning you says, "We have you on video, and we'll use it in court, so why don't you tell us the truth," he may well be bluffing in order to convince you to confess.

Did you sign anything while in that little room? Cuz you may have signed or written a statement that said you shoplifted.....

Next, we have the LP guy who busted you - he's a witness.

Did they take photos of you and the merchandise in that little room? Make a copy of your drivers license, etc? More evidence.......

Those are questions you know the answer too, and need to discuss with your lawyer.

He did take my photo for the store, I also never got any copies of what I signed when I was in there. I would like to know if I have to only stay out of that store, or all of the Kohls chain stores? I didn't have my license on me, I had left it in the car, which I think is why he called the police. It's just what he wrote on the discovery is totally different then what actually happened, and the video would show it because I saw it in the office! My lawyer is still trying to figure out why it's not available.

apparently the video isn't available but again, if there is other evidence that is damning, it is really irrelevant.

so, is there other damning evidence or not?

I'm not sure what that word means, damning? On my end yes I did have the items in my bag, but I went in the dressing room when I bagged them. He also said he saw me put them in the bag which I know for a fact there are no cameras in there, at least I didn't see them when I saw the monitors. And wow, they have got the system! The lawyers told me that not having the video could be good for me in court but I'm not sure how with all of the other evidence? Just so confusing!

damning= basically valid proof of your crime

which is the eyewitness observation by the LP. Actually if he saw you go into the dressing room with the merchandise, he likely checked the room after you left and if it wasn't in there and you were not holding it in a visible manner on your person, he knows you hid it somewhere. Simple deduction.




and you will find that many stores have a lot more cameras than you would ever suspect.

Video is just evidence that adds to the DA's case. They may or may not use it against you. Have your attorney subpoena the evidence that the state will be using against you. This will allow him time to look at the evidence and assist you in the best possible defense. An attorney will also help you with options to best minimize the impact this has on you.

Trust me, you do not want this to go to trial before your peers. The people will find you guilty with or without video. And people do not like thieves.