Shoplifting, Larceny, Robbery, Theft Free item or Shoplifting?

[xxlfatty08]

If I was not charged for a TV and then the employee helped me carry out the tv to my car is that shoplifting? I do not know the employee and it was not my intent to not pay. My wife wants to return the tv and I am wondering if I legally have to.

 

[xxlfatty08]

I am not sure what the fallout could be with me in the military. I am able to afford the tv so paying for it would be perfectly fine. I just would prefer to keep it for free if I am legally able to.

 

[Proserpina]

How...honorable of you. Except it's not.

No, you don't get to profit from their error.

 

[Betty3]

Yes, you could call it "shoplifting" since you didn't pay for the TV. We all would like things (including TVs) for free but that is not the way it works.

 

[xxlfatty08]

When at a store if an item is in the wrong place and their is more then one there. Then you get that item for that price because it is the stores fault and the error is on them. So if they did not charge me and the error is on them then I would think it should be free as well. I have been double charged for items and not realized till later after I left and when I tried to go fix the issue they said its too late and I should of checked before I left. So what I want to know is does this same principal work for my situation? Anyone else have any insight?

 

[Proserpina]

Actually, that's not a given at all. It might come down to local rules, but for the most part the store absolutely does NOT have to honor an incorrect price.

Seriously - you're stealing, and you're behaving in a dishonorable manner. Is this really where our military is at the moment?

 

[xxlfatty08]

Ok first off you are wrong...Actually a store does have to honor an incorrect price if there is more then 1 item marked incorrectly. That is the case in California and Georgia. I have worked retail and would have to do so often when the stockers would get lazy and put stuff in the wrong place. I just got two 20$ items for 2$ each because of this exact law. Second off I like the comment where you are going to try to generalize on the military as a whole. Most people I know in the military I know would of kept it without any second thoughts. I have many times caught mistakes like this before it happens and pay the extra money on the spot. I am dishonorable any no way. I simply want to know if I legally have to return the item. These are the laws for Georgia for shoplifting... I had no intent of leaving the store without paying. So stop saying that I am stealing when in fact I am not.
16-8-14

(a) A person commits the offense of theft by shoplifting when he alone or in concert with another person, with the intent of appropriating merchandise to his own use without paying for the same or to deprive the owner of possession thereof or of the value thereof, in whole or in part, does any of the following:

(1) Conceals or takes possession of the goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment;

(2) Alters the price tag or other price marking on goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment;

(3) Transfers the goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment from one container to another;

(4) Interchanges the label or price tag from one item of merchandise with a label or price tag for another item of merchandise; or

(5) Wrongfully causes the amount paid to be less than the merchant´s stated price for the merchandise.

 

[shrinkmaster]

Ok I have worked retail theft for a long time and I have never seen any use this excuse and escape penalty. I would further suspect the employee will be fired or charged with theft as well. You took home merchandise you did not pay for that is stealing no matter how you spin it

 

[cbg]

And in the case of this TV, #5 does not apply...how?

 

[shrinkmaster]

(1) Conceals or takes possession of the goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment;
You took possession of a TV you did not pay for!

(2) Alters the price tag or other price marking on goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment;
N/A

(3) Transfers the goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment from one container to another;
N/A

(4) Interchanges the label or price tag from one item of merchandise with a label or price tag for another item of merchandise; or
N/A

(5) Wrongfully causes the amount paid to be less than the merchant´s stated price for the merchandise.
Clearly applies you did not pay for item

But you go ahead and tell the Judge and Jury how you did not steal this item.

 

[Proserpina]

Ok first off you are wrong...Actually a store does have to honor an incorrect price if there is more then 1 item marked incorrectly. That is the case in California and Georgia. I have worked retail and would have to do so often when the stockers would get lazy and put stuff in the wrong place. I just got two 20$ items for 2$ each because of this exact law. Second off I like the comment where you are going to try to generalize on the military as a whole. Most people I know in the military I know would of kept it without any second thoughts. I have many times caught mistakes like this before it happens and pay the extra money on the spot. I am dishonorable any no way. I simply want to know if I legally have to return the item. These are the laws for Georgia for shoplifting... I had no intent of leaving the store without paying. So stop saying that I am stealing when in fact I am not.
16-8-14

(a) A person commits the offense of theft by shoplifting when he alone or in concert with another person, with the intent of appropriating merchandise to his own use without paying for the same or to deprive the owner of possession thereof or of the value thereof, in whole or in part, does any of the following:

(1) Conceals or takes possession of the goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment;

(2) Alters the price tag or other price marking on goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment;

(3) Transfers the goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment from one container to another;

(4) Interchanges the label or price tag from one item of merchandise with a label or price tag for another item of merchandise; or

(5) Wrongfully causes the amount paid to be less than the merchant´s stated price for the merchandise.

Please. My daughter did her tour of Afghanistan. Evidently didn't need to shoplift. Then again, she actually respects the laws she was fighting for.

Now please let us know how your TV doesn't fit #5.

We'll wait.

And trying to pull this off is absolutely dishonorable.

 

[mightymoose]

So if they did not charge me and the error is on them then I would think it should be free as well.

Honestly, that is a very immature way of viewing it. It is not free unless it is advertised as free. This could easily be construed as a form of theft... and if you swiped a credit card they certainly have the means to find you when they discover the error.

At what point did you notice you were not charged?

 

[mightymoose]

And in the case of this TV, #5 does not apply...how?

He didn't cause the error... so far as we know.
It fits more appropriately under #1, but there are likely other theft statutes besides shoplifting that could be applicable here.

 

[shrinkmaster]

You can find entire statute here http://www.shopliftingprevention.org/shoplifting-laws/georgia-shoplifting-laws.html

 

[army judge]

OP, you're rationalizing the circumstances to skew them to appear to be random, therefore avoiding the elephant in the room; THE TAKING OF THE PROPERTY OFANOTHER WITH THE INTENT TO PERMANENTLY DEPRIVE...blah, blah, blah...the merchant doesn't give away televisions, they sell them. Yet, you now possess one, with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of same, and yet no money has exchanged hands for the television, which you intend to permanently posses.

Your wife is a wise, and honest woman. Listen to her. Your actions can also land you in hot water with the military, because you can be charged under the UCMJ, too!!!!

Then, you could also eventually face a laundry list of GA state charges, too. These charges don't necessarily have to be theft related, because this could be seen as a conspiracy. The employee carrying the item to your car with you, could just be an unsuspecting dupe. The co-conspirators could be elsewhere, and they may have been paid.

As with most amateurs, you blab. You don't just slither away, and enjoy your purloined goods, you come here to tout what you believe to be your success. Sorry, what you did was wrong, and if it doesn't get you, KARMA will! You're not a very good thief, and your actions and admissions have established you don't deserve to wear the uniform I proudly wore for over 25 years! The same uniform my son-in-law died wearing in Afghanistan, and my best friend died in the jungles of 'naw wearing in oh, so many decades ago!

I've charged, defended, and sat in judgment as military members were hit with Article 134: "Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special, or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court."

(1) Article 134 makes punishable acts in three categories of offenses not specifically covered in any other article of the code. These are referred to as "clauses 1, 2, and 3" of Article 134. Clause 1 offenses involve disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces. Clause 2 offenses involve conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Clause 3 offenses involve noncapital crimes or offenses which violate Federal law including law made applicable through the Federal Assimilative Crimes Act, see subsection (4) below. If any conduct of this nature is specifically made punishable by another article of the code, it must be charged as a violation of that article.

(2) Disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces (clause 1).

(a) To the prejudice of good order and discipline. "To the prejudice of good order and discipline" refers only to acts directly prejudicial to good order and discipline and not to acts which are preju dicial only in a remote or indirect sense. Almost any irregular or improper act on the part of a member of the military service could be regarded as prejudicial in some indirect or remote sense; however, this article does not include these distant effects. It is con-fined to cases in which the prejudice is reasonably direct and palpable. An act in violation of a local civil law or of a foreign law may be punished if it constitutes a disorder or neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces. However, see R.C.M. 203concerning subject-matter jurisdiction.

(b) Breach of custom of the service. A breach of a custom of the service may result in a violation of clause 1 of Article 134. In its legal sense, "custom" means more than a method of procedure or a mode of conduct or behavior which is merely of frequent or usual occurrence. Custom arises out of long established practices which by common usage have attained the force of law in the military or other community affected by them. No custom may be contrary to existing law or regulation. A custom which has not been adopted by existing statute or regulation ceases to exist when its observance has been generally abandoned. Many customs of the service are now set forth in regulations of the vari ous armed forces. Violations of these customs should be charged under Article 92 as violations of the regulations in which they appear if the regulation is punitive. See paragraph 16c.

(3) Conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces (clause 2). "Discredit" means to injure the reputation of. This clause of Article 134 makes punishable conduct which has a tendency to bring the service into disrepute or which tends to lower it in public esteem. Acts in violation of a local civil law or a foreign law may be punished if they are of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. However, see R.C.M. 203 concerning subject-matter jurisdiction.