Can You Be Charged With Shoplifting if You are Stopped Before Leaving the Store
My question involves criminal law for the state of: Florida
My gf was accused of shoplifting at Kmart. The first accusation was "where are the men's pajamas you took" After a search of the bookbag, no men's pajamas were found in her possession.
Our son is on one end of an autistic spectrum and has been diagnosed with sensory processing issues. (he's 5) Things that do not bother the normal person can cause a thermal nuclear meltdown with our son.
She had a kids shirt under her arm for our son and he started to freak out while behind her friend in the checkout, so she was headed to the door to take him outside which is usually the best thing when he gets like that. Before she made it outside she was confronted and accused of shoplifting. Just like everyone else I have read about it, she was led to a room and presented with the option of paying a civil fine and no criminal charges would be filed. It was described as "you agree to our terms or we are calling the cops".
I guess what I am wondering, is what constitutes shoplifting? The property never left the store. She never went outside with it. They have invoked that she must pay $450 to not have criminal charges filed. Obviously, if she needs a lawyer, their fees would probably exceed the fine. Simply put, I realize if she just pays the fine, everything will be fine. But to me, it sounds like the employee making the accusation will be entitled to some kind of commission as it sounds like she was "strong armed" into admitting wrong.
Are their grounds for counter-suing to have kmart pay the legal fees?
I just don't see where a crime was actually committed.
Thanks in advance for replies.
O
Re: Kmart Shoplifting - What Constitutes "Shoplifting"
She was stopped before getting outside. Do you believe they have to wait until the person gets out of the store where they have to chase them down to collect their property?
even in your statement she was clearly heads out the door with merchandise she didn't pay for.
So where were the men's pajamas?
no, there is no counter suit here
if if your wife knows the best thing to do to help your child that means she wouldn't be freaked out by the incident and should have calmly set down any unpurchased merchandise before leaving the store. If she pushes back and this goes to court she can surely bring up all of this as a defense. Whether it may help or not something I could answer
Re: Kmart Shoplifting - What Constitutes "Shoplifting"
There were no men's pajamas. She was dumbfounded when asked. And this is Florida, the most populated state in the union. We live in a "resort" area. I don't believe that forgetting to pay for something is exactly the same thing as shoplifting. With that being said, I would think that in plain site should have been looked at differently. We can't expect the way people will act.
Our son's issues were just diagnosed that same week. If you buy the "reusable" bags and you shop with them and get near the door, you are a shoplifter. In other words, I understand your take on not waiting till she got outside, but it wasn't as if she was trying to conceal the item.
Thank you for the reply!
Re: Kmart Shoplifting - What Constitutes "Shoplifting"
Florida law defines “retail theft” as “the taking possession of or carrying away of merchandise, property, money, or negotiable documents; altering or removing a label, universal product code, or price tag; transferring merchandise from one container to another; or removing a shopping cart, with intent to deprive the merchant of possession, use, benefit, or full retail value.” Florida Statutes § 812.015(1)(d).
Taking an item and heading to the door with it without paying for it would fall in the category of carrying away of merchandise. Your wife could try arguing that she didn’t do it with the intent to deprive the merchant of possession, use, benefit, or retail value — in short that she had no intent to steal it — and that she headed to the door only because your kid was having a melt down and she forgot she had the item in her arms and see if a jury will buy that argument. Bear in mind that the prosecutor will argue that the kid freaking out was just cover for the theft. Sadly, there are real thieves who use their kids just that way, to create a diversion to cover for their theft. How likely it is that a jury would buy it, I cannot say. That’s something she can ask a lawyer about. And I think it’s a good idea for her to have a consult with a criminal defense attorney before she pays the civil demand or does anything else that might admit to the theft so she understands her options and can make an informed choice on how to proceed.
Re: Kmart Shoplifting - What Constitutes "Shoplifting"
Resort areas generally have a higher theft rate I believe. Shoplifters are on vacation and do not expect to return where they can be identified.
Re: Kmart Shoplifting - What Constitutes "Shoplifting"
Quote:
Quoting
omitho
There were no men's pajamas. She was dumbfounded when asked. And this is Florida, the most populated state in the union. We live in a "resort" area. I don't believe that forgetting to pay for something is exactly the same thing as shoplifting. With that being said, I would think that in plain site should have been looked at differently. We can't expect the way people will act.
Our son's issues were just diagnosed that same week. If you buy the "reusable" bags and you shop with them and get near the door, you are a shoplifter. In other words, I understand your take on not waiting till she got outside, but it wasn't as if she was trying to conceal the item.
Thank you for the reply!
When your son was diagnosed. You said she has dealt with the issue enough so she knew the best action. That strongly suggests she would not be freaked out by his actions and would deal with the child in an orderly manner.
Re the personal shopping bags;
not sure why this was brought up as there was no claim one was used in this situation but;
simply putting merchandise in such bags can be construed as theft. Never put merchandise that has not been paid for in such bags.
Re the "in plain sight" should remove intent;
sorrry but that ploy is often used because of your argument. Thieves will try just about anything to excuse the taking of property when caught.
If she pushes back it will likely come down to whether a judge or jury believes her in a trial. Personally as distasteful as the alternate appears, I really would not want to risk a conviction.