Pay us or we’ll call the cops: Many U.S. stores giving shoplifters choice of punishme

Mason66 said:

No it isn't. If it is a money making scheme, a lot of people that are weak will fall for it.

Click to expand...

clownboy said:

No it's not. They'd make more from persecution and court mandated restitution AND it would cost the shoplifter more.

Click to expand...

JANFU said:

And if you cannot afford a lawyer, or even have a record, how does that work.

Click to expand...

celticwar17 said:

Welll....I wouldn't shoplift in the first place...So if they accuse me of such a thing, I would refuse to comply and go on my merry way.

Click to expand...

clownboy said:

Better for you the shoplifter is how it works. Choose to have them press charges and you will have a record AND pay fines and restitution.

Click to expand...

Superfly said:

that's what I was going to say. You can't just accuse someone of shoplifting without proof.

Now if you are really shoplifting, then I think it's a good idea. It will give you a chance to fix things, without it possibly ruining your life.

Click to expand...

CanadaJohn said:

When I worked in retail, back in my highschool days - yes, they had highschool back then - it was common for someone who was caught shoplifting to be given the choice of paying for the goods they were accused of stealing and being banned from the store in the future, or they could sit back while the store contacted the police. Pretty much everyone who could afford to paid for the stolen goods.

As with most things in life, those who can ill afford to get in trouble have the hardest time getting out of trouble. Lots of times little junior called home and mom or dad came down with the credit card and got junior off the hook. But if mom and dad are working or have no money, junior gets in the system.

As for the situation outlined in the OP, it's a make money crock, in my opinion, at best, and at worst it is extortion and should be punishable with jail time.

Click to expand...

ObamacareFail said:

Virtually all department stores these days have an excellent video surveillance system. If someone does shoplift, they will have video evidence of it. Not to mention you can be caught with the goods in your posession. If they lack evidence and call the cops....God help them in court.

Click to expand...

Cephus said:

Which is really ridiculous because there are hundreds of "shoplifters" every day. You can't go into a store and not find product spread all over the place by idiots who pick it up and change their mind later. I don't think you could ever find a single judge that would find any of that actionable./QUOTE]

Would you bet your career/reputation on that hunch or simply play along with paying a small fee and accepting the education?

Click to expand...

StillBallin75 said:

Allow me to give you some insights from first hand experience. As an inventory associate I often have to cover the asset protection specialist (usually the guy who stands up at the front) when he goes on break or for some other reason is unavailable. In our training videos, if we witness shoplifting, we are to confront the customer before they attempt to exit the store and apprehend them ("apprehend" not in a legal sense but just having a firm physical grip on the individual), and then lead them to the back room (usually the asset protection office where all the surveillance and video equipment is). I would say the vast majority of the time people choose to comply - if they don't, we try to prevent them from leaving the store until we can get the police involved.

Click to expand...

faithful_servant said:

That will get you sued eventually. Until you leave the store, you haven't stolen anything and detaining someone in that manner is not legal.

Click to expand...

faithful_servant said:

That will get you sued eventually. Until you leave the store, you haven't stolen anything and detaining someone in that manner is not legal.

Click to expand...

StillBallin75 said:

In my example the customer is detained when it is clear they are heading for the exits without having paid for merchandise.

Click to expand...

JANFU said:

Thoughts are?
Pay us or we’ll call the cops: Many U.S. stores giving shoplifters choice of punishment

Imagine you’re browsing at Bloomingdale’s when a security guard taps you on the shoulder and accuses you of shoplifting. He takes you to a private room, sits you down, and runs your name through a database to see if you have any outstanding warrants. Then he tells you that you have two options. The first involves him calling the police, who might arrest you and take you to jail. The second allows you to walk out of the store immediately, no questions asked—right after you sign an admission of guilt and agree to pay $320 to take an online course designed to make you never want to steal again.

Which would you choose?

Click to expand...

ObamacareFail said:

I would dare them to call the cops and then sue them for false arrest as I do not shoplift.

Click to expand...

JasperL said:

The article did a good job laying out the problem. Assuming I was actually innocent, it's still not a no-brainer to fight the charge. If the police did file charges, it would cost far more than the $320 to fight it assuming the risk of conviction was zero. You'd burn through that with the first phone call to a decent attorney. The possibility of $5,000 or $10,000 in attorney fees wouldn't bankrupt me so I could afford the risk and not suffer any change in lifestyle, but that's not true if you're poor.

It all depends on whether the retailers are operating in good faith. If they are, and the article offered no evidence they were making spurious allegations, then there probably is little downside, and lots of petty criminals avoid a very damaging hit on their record for no more than a speeding ticket in lots of jurisdictions.

FWIW, the traffic court in my area poses the same risks - if you're ticketed, it really doesn't pay to fight the ticket for 99% or so. My last one was total BS, but the fine was $100, I plead no contest, the judge put me on 3 month traffic "probation" and it stayed off my driving record. If I'd plead 'not guilty' it's my word against the police, and if found guilty I'd owe another $500 in 'court costs' for the 'trial' AND have a hit on my driving record. I was IMO completely innocent, but I paid the fine - no brainer. I'm not sure why I wouldn't take the $320 cost in this case for the same reasons, even if innocent.

Click to expand...

JANFU said:

What if you are innocent???? Not familiar with the law. Ya think these Security Officers are all well trained.
Next- Waiting for you to prove I hate capitalism or you could man up and apologize or retract it.
Over to you.

Click to expand...

clownboy said:

There is no safe harbor for the stupid. And if you're that stupid you're going to be taken advantage of by every conman you run across. No avoiding that.

But again, if you're innocent, then you're not a shoplifter and shouldn't admit to being one. That's what your day in court is for. Just like any other crime you're accused of and are innocent of. It's called life, **** happens, you deal with it appropriately.

And you're confused. I didn't say you hated capitalism, that was another poster.

Click to expand...

Superfly said:

Yall are hung up too much on the "but I didn't do it and I'll sue" part of the scenario. How about you consider the fact that yes, a person walked into a store and shoplifted. Should they be given the option to pay, or no?

Click to expand...

JANFU said:

IP cameras and the systems to run and maintain are expensive.
Normally store focus on high value goods. Cost benefit and what is being stolen by customers. Then again, up to 70 % of theft can be internal, by employes.
Not sure about the US but up north, razor blades, brand name are pricey.
If you go to a flea market, you will see these very same blades sold for a low price.
Same with cosmetics.
Same with spices. Certain spice can be quite pricey.

Click to expand...

US Conservative said:

We are both in Ca. Here, if you get a speeding ticket you can opt to take an online course and pay a fee-this will prevent it from being reported to your insurance, meaning you may well save money.

The alternative is a fine AND increased insurance costs.

Are you saying thats extortion?

Click to expand...

faithful_servant said:

That will get you sued eventually. Until you leave the store, you haven't stolen anything and detaining someone in that manner is not legal.

Click to expand...

Shoplifting can be based upon concealing goods within a store such as in your pockets or within bags. The prosecution would still have to prove you had the intent to steal the property, but this can be proven by circumstantial evidence. Dropping the bags and attempting to leave when confronted could additionally be viewed as consciousness of guilt.

Click to expand...

radcen said:

First off, sounds like a good shakedown, though I recall some people saying this used to be standard practice back in the day.

Second, you never... ever... go into their private room with them. If they want to call the police, they are free to do so, but being whisked out of public view is not in my interests.

Third, never sign anything.

As has been mentioned, stores are hamstrung by what they can legally accuse you of, so this just enhances my suspicion that this would be a shakedown... they have no real proof.

Click to expand...

clownboy said:

Thank you for that wonderful advice for those who are guilty of shoplifting. I'm sure the thieves will profit greatly by it. And it's only a possible shakedown if you're a thief. If you're innocent they in all likelihood wouldn't be standing there talking with you in the first place.

Click to expand...