Shoplifting, Larceny, Robbery, Theft Caught Shoplifing @ Electronics Store

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

pleasehelpme1

New Member
I live in California, Age 23 and I was caught shoplifting today. This is my first offense, items added up to be $230 in cell phone accessories. All this so I can find a solution to recover important client data from my smartphone with a broken screen.
I know I have done wrong and I should have just spent the money to repair my screen. It was all in the heat of the moment, with a broken screen, panicing, wanting to save my data , the money and time it will take to fix and replace the phone. I clearly just wasn't thinking at the time and made the worst decision in my life by stealing cellphone cables and a backup battery.

I was caught by two Lost Prevention guys once I step outside the door. They handcuffed me and escorted me to the office where they asked me to face the wall, spread my legs, used a medal detector on me and told me to empty my pockets of all the stolen goods and said they will go easy on me if I am truthful and give everything back. I gave them my full cooperation and gave them everything back. They then detained me for about 2-3 hrs while they fill out a full report and review the cameras footage. They told me they would not call the Police and would let me go as soon as they fill out, file the report with a their LP Home Office as well as paperwork I had to sign at the end. They also took a picture of me with the items I took and warned me never to return to their store or I will be charged with trespassing. While they were almost done writing the report they told me they had to call their LP Home Office to let them know what has happened today. They could not reach their LP Home Office the first attempt. So they continued writing the report in full details. 30 mins later they tried calling their LP Home Office again, no answer. 20 Mins later, the 3rd call went through and it seems the LP Home office was busy wrapping things up for the night. The LP made the report to LP Home Office and said I was free to go once I sign some paperwork. While the LP were pulling out the paperwork the Police showed up! I was so scared! One of the LP guys steped out to talk with the Police while partner stayed in the office to look after me. He told me he and his partner did not call the Police, he said it seems the LP Home Office called them probably because they were busy finishing up and didn't want to deal with a new case this late at night.

The Police came into the office shortly after to question me futhur. He turned on his recording device and set it on the table before the questioning.
He told me I'm not under arrest and just wanted to find out what's going on. He asked for my side of the story, why I did it and if this is my first time shoplifing. I told him the truth about my phone and this is my first time shoplifing. He pretty much threw it back at my face and told me he didn't believe me.
He kept questioning me, asking me what City I was from and why I was in a diffrent city than where I was originally. I answered them truthfully, again it was all for the sake of my phone.
The questioning goes onto asking me If I drove here today, ofcouse I am not going to lie while he has my drivers license in his hand; it would probably make the situation worst.
He ask me if his partner could search my car to see if I had any other stolen merchandise or drugs. At this point it seems they are harassing me and taking advantage of the situation.
*I told them no, I do not have any stolen merchandise or drugs and I do not feel comfortable or consent them to search my car.
The Officer replied - Why not? You have nothing to worry about if you're telling the truth. It seems you've got something to hide then. Is there something you're not telling us?
*I replied - No, I have nothing to hide, I just feel confortable you going through my car ( which is also my parents car since their name is on it as well ) and end up scratching and tearing up my car.
*The Officer replied - *chuckled* We're police officers; We don't do that kind of thing. We just want make sure you're telling the truth.
*At this point I thought to myself there's no point in resisting him. Since the Officer is in front of me he could easily arrest me and get a warrent issued to search my car making matters worst; So *I Replied - Alright, I then pulled out my keys slowly and gave it to the officer.
His Partner then step out of the office to find & search my car in the parking lot.

While we were waiting for his Partner to return from my car the Officer decided to asked me to stand up and spread my legs. He asked if I had anything else in my pockets that may have been stolen or could harm/poke him. I told him no, nothing stolen or harmful. He then began to pat me down without asking me. While he was patting me down I then realize that might still have my gfs 3-4" old fashion Box cutter from her work because the safety cap was lost, she put tape at the top of the opening so the blade wouldnt accidentally slide out but just to be safe she didn't want to carry at work and I had remeber putting it in my inner jacket pocket but i wasn't 100% since i also had a small Stack of Business cards, receipts from other purchases. It's been such a long day and with so much going on in my mind and the questioning my memory was a bit fuzzy. It all happen so quick, by the time I could even say anything the officer already started pulling stuff out of my pocket. He found the box cutter along with the business cards and receipts. I honestly told them I really didn't remeber having it and that I would carry stuff for my gf time to time. He ofcourse didn't believe me and said that I most likely brought it to open up packages and steal stuff.
I honestly didn't even have the intention of doing that. Majority of the items I took were all damanged and opened packaged items. They said alright, if they review the video and catch me using the box cutter they would consider that a felony and issue and arrest for me. I know I didn't use it so I have nothing to worry about at this point. However, what I'm worry about is if they can use that against me by considering it as a cocealed weapon because the TOOK it away from me and never gave it back.

The Officer said to me, you know you're under arrest now right? Stealing is a mistomeaner and the box cutter could be a felony.
The Officers Partner returned to the office and everything checked out fine. ( It was dark but the car looked fine aside from a messy trunk )

I was then asked to sign two different forms. I was acknowledging that I would receive a Civil Demand letter?? from a Law Office sometime in the future and a form warning me never to return to their store or I will be charged with trespassing. They told me before that they were not going to take any further action beyond banning me from their store and for me to pay a civil demand fee that will be sent to me in a future notice. However, now that the Police is here I'm not too sure what is going to happen.

Before letting me go the Police Officer wrote me a ticket for "Petty Theft - mistermeaner" and also I have a certain time period listed on my ticket that I must go to the Police Department for "BOOKING" for my figerprints and photo to be taken.

Please help me!!! I'm so scared I don't know what to do. I don't want to go to jail having my gf and whole family find out about this. I'm also trying to apply for a new job and I don't want this to be on my permanent record. My life would be ruined if this were to happen! This is my first offence, nothing like this has ever happen to me before what should I do? What will happen to me? I know I have done wrong and got caught. Is there anything I can do or say to hopefully not make matters worst than it already is?
 
You are a little bit lucky. Under these same circumstances another officer may have arrested you for felony burglary rather than citing you for pretty theft. You probably live in an area where it is harder to get into the jail than to get out.
You need to go for the booking process and appear in court where you can request an attorney. Don't make any more statements to the police.
When the police arrived and questioned you did they inform you of your rights first, including your right to remain silent and to have an attorney? Were you still handcuffed? Handcuffed or not, it seems to me that you would not have felt as if you were free to leave. If you were not informed of your rights you may have something to fight against your statements to the officer. You may have signed some documents but surely you didn't understand what you were signing....
If you were informed, you were foolish to speak.
Don't worry about the box cutter. It is not illegal and doesn't have much bearing on anything.
You should have held your ground on refusing the vehicle search. They likely would not have obtained a warrant.
Anyway, keep quiet until you have an attorney. Since this is a first offense you may be able to minimize the damage. Be prepared to pay several hundred in fines. You might have to take a class and do a short term of probation, but you aren't likely to get jail time.
 
mightymoose said:
You are a little bit lucky. Under these same circumstances another officer may have arrested you for felony burglary rather than citing you for pretty theft. You probably live in an area where it is harder to get into the jail than to get out.
You need to go for the booking process and appear in court where you can request an attorney. Don't make any more statements to the police.
When the police arrived and questioned you did they inform you of your rights first, including your right to remain silent and to have an attorney? Were you still handcuffed? Handcuffed or not, it seems to me that you would not have felt as if you were free to leave. If you were not informed of your rights you may have something to fight against your statements to the officer. You may have signed some documents but surely you didn't understand what you were signing....
If you were informed, you were foolish to speak.
Don't worry about the box cutter. It is not illegal and doesn't have much bearing on anything.
You should have held your ground on refusing the vehicle search. They likely would not have obtained a warrant.
Anyway, keep quiet until you have an attorney. Since this is a first offense you may be able to minimize the damage. Be prepared to pay several hundred in fines. You might have to take a class and do a short term of probation, but you aren't likely to get jail time.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your reply mightmouse I really appricate your insight!

-When the police arrived and questioned you did they inform you of your rights first, including your right to remain silent and to have an attorney? No, they did not inform me of my rights, including my right to remain silent or to an attorney.

-Were you still handcuffed? Yes, I was still in handcuffed, before the Police had arrived.

With Police presence I was not free to leave. I felt that the questioning was unnecessary and I was kept longer than needed with.
 
Last edited:
Once you have an attorney representing you it will be important to make this known. If the officer recorded the conversation it will be peculiar if he claims to have read Miranda advisement and it is not on the tape.
This doesn't mean you are off the hook but it will give the attorney something to work with to help you.
The store employees should not have kept you so long, handcuffed, without calling police. There may be enough here to make everything go away or at least minimize the damage.
You are very lucky you were not arrested for burglary and taken to jail. Stop stealing.
 
Not having the use of your confession to Police wont hurt case much. Anything you said to LP can be used as well as any signed admission. In addition any video or eye witness statements can easily prove your guilt. I have been working in retail theft a very long time and seen accused shoplifters convicted with less. You need to talk to an Attorney see what he says then discuss options including possible plea options like ACD or diversion
 
He was held in custody and in handcuffs for three hours, then searched and interrogated for another hour before being told to sign papers in order to leave. He signed the papers in custody and without Miranda so that likely loses that as a confession too.
The employees, having held him for three hours against his will before ever contacting police, likely won't want any part of this. This is another example of why they should observe and report. When they go hands on they open up a can of worms.

Yes, there will still be some to use against him, but he may have enough in his favor to reduce this to almost nothing. Who knows how it actually went down, but I can see a prosecutor washing his hands of this mess. It is too petty to justify all the trouble.

By the way- you should not accept any plea offer without speaking to an attorney first. A defense attorney will get you a better deal then what the prosecutor might come to you with.
 
Last edited:
This quote form original post may exclude Miranda claim from being issue
"The Police came into the office shortly after to question me futhur. He turned on his recording device and set it on the table before the questioning.
He told me I'm not under arrest and just wanted to find out what's going on"

Officer clearly tells him he is NOT under arrest. Now I am a Loss Prevention Professional not Police lie you MM but isn't arrest a requirement for miranda to apply? In addition I do not believe Miranda applies to Loss prevention only actual Law enforcement.
 
Shrink- regardless of what the officer said, this person was in handcuffs for the entire time, it seems. Under such circumstances, and after already being held for three hours, a reasonable person would not likely feel free to leave. This person was in custody for Miranda purposes even though the officer may not have intended to take him to jail. As he describes it this is most certainly a Miranda scenario. The officer should have known this, especially if the person he was interrogating was cuffed, although cuffs are not a requirement for determining custody.

Miranda is required when a person is in custody and is being interrogated. Custody is determined with a reasonable person standard regarding whether a person is free to leave. Yes, Miranda only applies to law enforcement, but apparently the documents were not presented for signature until after the officer had him in custody and interrogated him. This may stand for civil action, but might not stand as a criminal confession since it occurred at a point after Miranda was required. Video may be useful, but very often video is not conclusive. Testimony of the employees may be useful, but they may be inclined to forget the whole thing.

Keeping him handcuffed for three hours without an intent to turn him over to law enforcement may amount to false imprisonment that both the employees and the store are responsible for. They had good cause to hold him, but the extended detention so they can do paperwork is problematic. This may cause the store to drop the whole matter.

Of course, this is assuming the information given is complete and correct, but as presented there are issues that a defense attorney can bring up to make this all fall apart.
 
Last edited:
Some of my former employers and those I have consulted for employ the use of handcuffs to either all detained shoplifters or those meeting certain criteria. Where I agree one could very easily make the assumption there was an arrest it was not Police who arrested nor detained OP. That was done by retailer's Loss Prevention team. The window I see that makes it where Miranda may not apply is for two reasons

1. The quote I posted Officer told OP he was not under arrest! Unless I am mistaken Miranda applies when under custodial arrest which Officer makes clear right away he was not!
2. It was Loss Prevention that handcuffed and detained (arrested) OP.
All that being said if they have any one or more of the following video, stolen items, signed admission, eye witnesses etc the confession in Police presence is not going to be required for successful prosecution in my view
 
It doesn't matter that the LP detained and cuffed him. For Miranda purposes he was obviously not free to leave and meets the custody requirement. This is an obvious Miranda gaff.... although statements made voluntarily might still be used. The prosecutor will have to hear the recording to decide what to do with it.

Remember that an arrest is not required for Miranda to apply. A person who has been handcuffed for the past three hours and is still handcuffed when police arrive to question him clearly is not free to leave and meets the custody element. It does not matter that the officer is not the one who cuffed him.

Video may not be conclusive. The signed admission is likely out for the same Miranda reasons, given to him after Miranda was required. Had he been advised of his rights and invoked them he wouldn't have signed anything. Spontaneous statements made to the officer might be ok, but that is complicated again by Miranda. Had he been informed of his right to remain silent then he may never have made such statements. Potential false arrest/imprisonment charges against the store and employees may dissuade them from pursuing anything, regardless of what they saw or found.

The prolonged detention, holding a person against their will with no intent to call police to make an arrest, is a significant issue that can make this go right down the dumper.

Even if a criminal action is pursued there is a civil element that needs to be addressed, and the store likely doesn't want that.
 
Agreed but it might have taken Police 3 hours to arrive which happens many times in shoplifting cases. You would know better than I but I was under the impression Miranda applied to Police and the like not a citizens arrest which is what LP for retailers do
 
mightymoose said:
He was held in custody and in handcuffs for three hours, then searched and interrogated for another hour before being told to sign papers in order to leave. He signed the papers in custody and without Miranda so that likely loses that as a confession too.
Click to expand...
Miranda won't apply to the loss prevention folks. His statements to them should be admissible. I agree that if the OP was handcuffed when the police arrived, and given the length of the detention to that point, Miranda should apply for the police.

The employees, having held him for three hours against his will before ever contacting police, likely won't want any part of this. This is another example of why they should observe and report. When they go hands on they open up a can of worms.
Click to expand...
Loss prevention people go hands on all the time - as do security guards. The decision to go hands-on is more a policy matter foir the business, not so much a legal one ... unless the force used to affect the detention is excessive.

Yes, there will still be some to use against him, but he may have enough in his favor to reduce this to almost nothing. Who knows how it actually went down, but I can see a prosecutor washing his hands of this mess. It is too petty to justify all the trouble.
Click to expand...
I'd say a plea (after consulting with legal counsel) to probation, restitution and fines is likely.
 
shrinkmaster said:
Agreed but it might have taken Police 3 hours to arrive which happens many times in shoplifting cases. You would know better than I but I was under the impression Miranda applied to Police and the like not a citizens arrest which is what LP for retailers do
Click to expand...

You are right that LP wasn't required to give Miranda, but when the police arrived he was then detained by the police and still cuffed. He was in the officer's custody at that point and Miranda applies. The officer should have read Miranda before proceeding and could potentially lose any statements he obtained. Since he signed the paper after being in the officer's custody the signed confession wouldn't pass under Miranda either. Had the paperwork been done before the police arrived it might be different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top