Concealing Items With Intent to Shoplift

Quote:

---

Quoting Mr. Knowitall

---

We know the reasons for concealing the items - "I was concealing the items because I had intent to steal them". It's harder to steal items that you're not concealing. I doubt that the prosecutor would mind the defendant's sharing that "reason" in court....

---

I'd be willing to pay to see that one actually...

Look just because Im sharing information with you people online does not mean I would share that same information with the court. The items were "Concealed" In a target shopping bag, the reusable kind, yes I was near the exit to the store, but I never tried to leave. I think I could make a case. But in all honesty, despite what the law says, I don't understand why I should be penalized for considering stealing something, when I have no record. Do you think if we could predict the future we should be arresting people for crimes they haven't committed yet?

Taking something off a shelf of a private home compared to taking something off a shelf of a public merchant is a ridiculous comparison by the way. I literally laughed out loud at your suggestion.


The only charges I can be found guilty of without a doubt, are tampering with store merchandise, "any person who intentionally alters, transfers or removes any label, price tag or marking indicia of value or any other markings which aid in determining value affixed to any merchandise displayed, held, stored or offered for sale by any store or other retail mercantile establishment and to attempt to purchase such merchandise personally or in consort with another at less than the full retail value with the intention of depriving the merchant of all or some part of the retail value thereof; or"

I did remove tags on socks and underwear in order to try them on, but this is because I planned to PAY FOR THEM. THere is no reason to remove the tags otherwise, they had no security sensors. I have broken seals on items before paying for them plenty of times in stores and have never been arrested for it.

I know my story may seem far-fetched, but the whole point of our justice system is innocent until proven guilty. I appreciate whoever changed the title of this topic, I realise my error in ever saying anything along those lines, I will be sure not to repeat such things in the future.



Anyway I am here for help and despite the fact none of you are siding with me, this is what I'll need to prepare for, so thank you.

Quote:

---

Quoting RepentingCitizen

---

Look just because Im sharing information with you people online does not mean I would share that same information with the court. The items were "Concealed" In a target shopping bag, the reusable kind, yes I was near the exit to the store, but I never tried to leave. I think I could make a case. But in all honesty, despite what the law says, I don't understand why I should be penalized for considering stealing something, when I have no record. Do you think if we could predict the future we should be arresting people for crimes they haven't committed yet?

---

That's because you aren't listening.

Concealment is the same as theft. Even if you never left the store.

Quote:

---

Taking something off a shelf of a private home compared to taking something off a shelf of a public merchant is a ridiculous comparison by the way. I literally laughed out loud at your suggestion.

---

In a way, you are correct and incorrect.

Theft is theft. However, shoplifting has specific law around it that makes the concealment itself a crime. That does not occur in private.

Quote:

---

The only charges I can be found guilty of without a doubt, are tampering with store merchandise, "any person who intentionally alters, transfers or removes any label, price tag or marking indicia of value or any other markings which aid in determining value affixed to any merchandise displayed, held, stored or offered for sale by any store or other retail mercantile establishment and to attempt to purchase such merchandise personally or in consort with another at less than the full retail value with the intention of depriving the merchant of all or some part of the retail value thereof; or"

---

A crime, then.

Quote:

---

I did remove tags on socks and underwear in order to try them on, but this is because I planned to PAY FOR THEM. THere is no reason to remove the tags otherwise, they had no security sensors. I have broken seals on items before paying for them plenty of times in stores and have never been arrested for it.

---

Ignorance of a crime is not a valid affirmative defense. You do NOT have to remove tags to try on merchandise. To do so is theft.

Further, it is usually assumed that anyone that tries on underwear gets to keep it.

On a personal note, Ewww.

Just because you hadn't been arrested before does not mean you didn't commit a crime.

Quote:

---

I know my story may seem far-fetched, but the whole point of our justice system is innocent until proven guilty. I appreciate whoever changed the title of this topic, I realise my error in ever saying anything along those lines, I will be sure not to repeat such things in the future.

---

Good. Except I will bet you a latte that the letter you signed DID admit to the theft.

Quote:

---

Anyway I am here for help and despite the fact none of you are siding with me, this is what I'll need to prepare for, so thank you.

---

If you think we are tough, wait until you meet the judge... who will give you about 30 seconds to plead your case.

I have heard the letters signed in stores do not stand up in court. I'm not sure if this helps either but I was never read my Miranda rights until I was at the police station, after which point I did not say 2 words.


And to try on socks you do need to remove the tags, and YES I agree that once you try on underwear you keep it, and I planned on paying for it, all the tags were in the bag, same with all the security tags. I had kept them in the bag because I intended to pay for them.

I don't see how the fact I have no record does not help my credibility. I'm not using it as defense I'm merely using to build character against say, a target employee , who is probably paid commission to catch potential shoplifters.

Quote:

---

Quoting RepentingCitizen

---

I have heard the letters signed in stores do not stand up in court. I'm not sure if this helps either but I was never read my Miranda rights until I was at the police station, after which point I did not say 2 words.

---

Completely irrelevant.

Quote:

---

And to try on socks you do need to remove the tags, and YES I agree that once you try on underwear you keep it, and I planned on paying for it, all the tags were in the bag, same with all the security tags. I had kept them in the bag because I intended to pay for them.

I don't see how the fact I have no record does not help my credibility. I'm not using it as defense I'm merely using to build character against say, a target employee , who is probably paid commission to catch potential shoplifters.

---

You're rationalizing.

You committed a crime; the only matter now in question is what happens, and none of us can see into the future.

(Think about it - nobody has a criminal record until they are charged for the first time)

Quote:

---

Quoting RepentingCitizen

---

I have heard the letters signed in stores do not stand up in court.

---

I've never heard of signed letters not being upheld in Civil court. Besides it makes no difference whether or not you signed the letter. Do not confuse the Civil Demand with the criminal procedure.

Quote:

---

Quoting RepentingCitizen

---

I have heard the letters signed in stores do not stand up in court. I'm not sure if this helps either but I was never read my Miranda rights until I was at the police station, after which point I did not say 2 words.

---

Agreed. Not relevan.t

Quote:

---

And to try on socks you do need to remove the tags,

---

No you don't... and you just committed a crime. Every time.

Quote:

---

and YES I agree that once you try on underwear you keep it, and I planned on paying for it, all the tags were in the bag, same with all the security tags. I had kept them in the bag because I intended to pay for them.

---

Or you didn't want the tags found.

Quote:

---

I don't see how the fact I have no record does not help my credibility.

---

You will enjoy first offender status.

Quote:

---

I'm not using it as defense I'm merely using to build character against say, a target employee , who is probably paid commission to catch potential shoplifters.

---

By your logic, we shouldn't believe police officers because it is their job to catch criminals?

You were caught with a bag full of concealed items with their tags removed. Your credibility is already shot.

Ma'am, even I don't believe you were THINKING about stealing... the judge, who hears this type of story 100 times a day, won't even blink at it. In fact, he/she might even sing along... and will still find you guilty.

Quote:

---

Quoting Security Consultant

---

I've never heard of signed letters not being upheld in Civil court. Besides it makes no difference whether or not you signed the letter. Do not confuse the Civil Demand with the criminal procedure.

---

Are you saying that the letter will not be used in criminal court?

Ok wait, as far as the letter goes this is my understanding; Target will be billing me separate from my shoplifting conviction in order to pay for damages, restocking etc.

If I am willing to pay this, but plead not guilty, will Target still be involved? Or will it be myself versus the police as opposed to police + target. I understand the police may use evidence from target, security cameras (I actually hope they do use these because they work in my favor) but do you think they will have witnesses?

Will I be able to find out before the hearing whether or not the intend to use witnesses?

And finally after I plead Not Guilty, what exactly is the procedure. I mean directly following, what will be asked of me.


I really am appalled at the amount of bias already shown here considering none of you have all the facts of the case. You are all making rampant assumptions that I am a criminal and this is not just a misunderstanding. Maybe you are representing how a judge will act, but it was my understanding that a judge does not pass judgment until all the facts of the case are brought to his or her attention.

I have revised my earlier statement, I at no point had any intentions of stealing anything.

Quote:

---

Quoting RepentingCitizen

---

Ok wait, as far as the letter goes this is my understanding; Target will be billing me separate from my shoplifting conviction in order to pay for damages, restocking etc.

---

Correct.

Quote:

---

If I am willing to pay this, but plead not guilty, will Target still be involved? Or will it be myself versus the police as opposed to police + target. I understand the police may use evidence from target, security cameras (I actually hope they do use these because they work in my favor) but do you think they will have witnesses?

---

Target was the victim. The state will make it's determination as to what is necessary to win the case.

Quote:

---

Will I be able to find out before the hearing whether or not the intend to use witnesses?

---

Your lawyer could.

However, since this entire case will probably take no more than 5 minutes, I wouldn't count on it.

Quote:

---

And finally after I plead Not Guilty, what exactly is the procedure. I mean directly following, what will be asked of me.

---

After you plead not guilty, the game stops and a new date will be assigned.

Quote:

---

I really am appalled at the amount of bias already shown here considering none of you have all the facts of the case.

---

That's cool. I am really okay that a thief (abet a bad one) doesn't think I am nice.

Quote:

---

You are all making rampant assumptions that I am a criminal and this is not just a misunderstanding. Maybe you are representing how a judge will act, but it was my understanding that a judge does not pass judgment until all the facts of the case are brought to his or her attention.

---

You have admitted you took off tags - a crime.
You have admitted you concealed merchandise - a crime.

This wasn't a misunderstanding... you were going to steal and got caught before you nerved up and left. If you would actually known where the line was, you wouldn't have taken off the tags and/or concealed the merchandise... but you still would have been working up to the theft.

Quote:

---

I have revised my earlier statement, I at no point had any intentions of stealing anything.

---

Thief and a liar.

Let me guess... you never had any intention of lying either?

Quote:

---

Quoting RepentingCitizen

---

I was concealing the items because I had intent to steal them, however at the time I had the means to pay for everything concelead and was debating leaving with them or paying.I was concealing the items because I had intent to steal them, however at the time I had the means to pay for everything concelead and was debating leaving with them or paying. When confronted I very explicity offered to pay for everything but was denied this option.

I just don't want anything on my record, I'm willing to pay the store whatever it costs to restock and repackage the items as well as cover other shoplifters. I am not a thief, I have very strong ethics against stealing, but I am not here to argue reasons. The facts of the case are what should be important.

You neglected to explain the different between pleading not guilty and I stand mute.

Thank you regardless though for your input

---

Here, I went ahead and quoted you so that you couldn't completely remove all evidence of your theft, lies and intent.

@cyjeff, just want to thank you for your post which made me chuckle quite a bit. There is no way for me to denying taking the tags off, or "concealing the items". Out of curiosity, where do you think the line is drawn between concealed or not concealed, if I am grocery shopping and certain groceries are in my cart but hidden under other groceries, am I concealing them? Please explain how having items in a bag, A TARGET SHOPPING BAG, is in any way different?

I'm not arguing it isn't different I am just curious how you personally see it to be different.

You can name-call all you want but it is only going to make me laugh, I know I am no thief, I lied because I thought being remorseful would bring me sympathy. I have learned here that is the exact opposite of how I should be acting so I will no longer be trying to play to any crowd or sympathies. Being nice or not has nothing to do with Bias.

: an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment

"I am really ok if a suspected thief thinks I am unreasonable" Well thats all good and fine but you are not a judge, so I don't really care about your feelings. What I care about is what information you can give me. And so far you have been relatively helpful so for that I am grateful, thank you.


And as to your last quote, I was in shock, and when I am under stress and pressure I lie, this is not an unreasonable human response. Now that I have had time to think about it, this is simply what the police officer and target employee told me, not what I was actually thinking.