Shoplifting Charge for Removing Security Wrap, But Left Item in the Store
My question involves criminal law for the state of: Michigan, I removed a spyder security wrap from an external hard drive freeing it from a locked peg all at once since the spyder wrap was the only thing holding it on the peg, I put the item in my cart, got paranoid and ditched the item in a near by isle and left. 14 days later cops show up talking about prosecuting me for theft, because they can't find the hard drives and they have video footage of me removing the spyder wraps, but no evidence of me concealing or leaving with merchandise... This sounds absurd, that they are trying to charge me and I didn't even steal the item.
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
Uh, you did steal it.
Not absurd at all.
Hire an attorney.
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
I'm guessing it was a review of still cam footage that identified you, since if they were watching you live they should have been able to recover the merchandise.
If you did actually ditch them, it was either in a place they are not able to find them or someone else helped themselves.
Zip your lips during any further conversations unless your attorney is present
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
Quote:
Quoting
adjusterjack
Uh, you did steal it.
Not absurd at all.
Hire an attorney.
It never left the store.
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
Quote:
Quoting
llworking
It never left the store.
Says him.
But leaving that aside, once you steal something you can't "unsteal" it.
Quote:
Quoting People v. Randolph, 466 Mich. 532, 551, 648 N.W.2d 164 (2002).
We emphasize that a larceny is complete when the taking occurs. The offense does not continue. This fact is illustrated in People v. Bradovich, in which two defendants in a store concealed two suits under their own clothing and attempted to leave. Realizing that store personnel were following them and that they would be apprehended, they abandoned the stolen clothing and departed. When later charged with larceny, they claimed to have abandoned the property before leaving the store, and therefore, not to have completed the offense. This Court disagreed, holding that the larceny was complete when the thieves concealed the store's clothing under their own.
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
OP also commited a crime under MPC section 750.360a.
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
MCL 750.360a.
If he's charged with third-degree retail fraud, he would be better served by dealing with that charge rather than arguing that he shouldn't be convicted of retail fraud because he committed a more serious offense. Also, even if he were charged with first- or second-degree retail fraud, it looks like it's a context in which the additional charge could be added -- not an "either/or".
For the statute you found, the video footage would be compelling; the question would be whether they could prove intent to steal. I suspect that it would be difficult for a jury to come to any other conclusion under the circumstances, but I'll leave some room for doubt having not seen the video.
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
Quote:
Quoting
Mr. Knowitall
Says him.
But leaving that aside, once you steal something you can't "unsteal" it.
I am viewing it a little differently. Yes, he removed it from a security post but he specifically stated that he put it in his cart. Therefore, he did not conceal it. People constantly put things in their cart and then take them back out again if they decide against the item. Now, of course I am taking him at his word.
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
Here's the problem: Absent a compelling reason for removing the spider wrap AND prying it off the locking peg hook (thus defeating TWO security measures) that is BELIEVABLE, it looks like intent to commit theft. He didn't just place an item in his cart them put it back. And I'd bet that the video shows him displaying all sorts of behavior associated with theft as well (looking around nervously, walking away from the area whenever others come around, etc.).
I once pried an EAS sensor off a belt because it was preventing me from trying the belt on; but then I went up and purchased the belt immediately. In that case, anyone could see a possible reason for removing the tag in that I obviously wanted to try the belt on. In this case, he'd better have some similar rationale that would be obvious to a judge or jury.
Re: Prosecuted for Removing a Spyder Wrap, and Never Removing Item from Store
Quote:
Quoting
llworking
I am viewing it a little differently. Yes, he removed it from a security post but he specifically stated that he put it in his cart.
Concealment is one possible item of evidence that can support a prosecution for theft, but it is not a required element of theft -- if you grab a hand truck and try to walk out of a store with a stack of microwave ovens, in plain sight of everyone, then change your mind, that's theft even without the slightest hint of concealment.
Quote:
Quoting llworking
People constantly put things in their cart and then take them back out again if they decide against the item. Now, of course I am taking him at his word.
His "word" is that he removed the item from the security mechanism by which it was attached to the display, rather than seeking help from store staff, then "got paranoid" and "ditched" the item -- that is, he has told us that he was stealing the item then got cold feet.