Is this really theft & Should she have been convicted?

Watch
cherryred90s
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
A 23 year old woman found a £20 note on a shop floor, picked it up and put it in her pocket.
The owner had withdrew the money from a nearby cash point and when she lost it in the shop, the staff tried to help her find it but it was nowhere to be seen.

CCTV footage caught the woman pocketing the money. The manager recognised the woman because she was a regular customer.
3 months later, police arrived at her door and asked her to attend a police interview. There, she was shown the CCTV footage, she said that she didn't remember the incident but accepted that it was her.

The woman has no previous convictions, but was charged with theft at a magistrates court where she was given a 6 month conditional charge (meaning that she will not be punished as long as she doesn't get into any trouble for the next 6 months), and was required to pay £175 in court fees.
Do you think that this was fair?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...o=rcreplyemail
0
reply
Sammylou40
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
Bit extreme but taking something that's not yours, and you know it, is theft.
The story also goes on to say that you have to take reasonable steps to find the owner. If you find a pound coin then there is no action to be taken. No one would report that. So you can keep it. Most people it says would go looking for a 20. As the bloke did. She should have handed it in to the store.
My mum found a 20 in the street and handed it in to local police station. 6 weeks later they rang her to go in and get it. No one went looking looking. in that case it became finders keepers.
Theft is theft after all
0
reply
Laomedeia
Badges: 21
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
(Original post by Sammylou40)
Bit extreme but taking something that's not yours, and you know it, is theft.
The story also goes on to say that you have to take reasonable steps to find the owner. If you find a pound coin then there is no action to be taken. No one would report that. So you can keep it. Most people it says would go looking for a 20. As the bloke did. She should have handed it in to the store.
My mum found a 20 in the street and handed it in to local police station. 6 weeks later they rang her to go in and get it. No one went looking looking. in that case it became finders keepers.
Theft is theft after all
Theft is theft but bollux is also bollux. This is more of a case of finders keepers. In these cases the old woman should have been allowed to keep the money. If the original owner then finds out then the woman should be given the opportunity to hand it back (within a reasonable time frame, 3 months for £20 is way beyond reasonable). Only then if the woman refused should she be liable to being a thief.

Not f'ing rocket science is it? But people still cant grasp such a concept.
0
reply
Sammylou40
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by Laomedeia)
Theft is theft but bollux is also bollux. This is more of a case of finders keepers. In these cases the old woman should have been allowed to keep the money. If the original owner then finds out then the womayn should be given the opportunity to hand it back (within a reasonable time frame, 3 months for £20 is way beyond reasonable). Only then if the woman refused should she be liable to being a thief.

Not f'ing rocket science is it? But people still cant grasp such a concept.
Taking something that doesn't belong to you is theft.
Finders keepers is not a principle in law. You steal, you get caught, you get punished. Especially when you do it on camera
1
reply
Underscore__
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
It's made worse by the fact that the 'victim' was a regular customer


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by cherryred90s)
A 23 year old woman found a £20 note on a shop floor, picked it up and put it in her pocket.
The owner had withdrew the money from a nearby cash point and when she lost it in the shop, the staff tried to help her find it but it was nowhere to be seen.

CCTV footage caught the woman pocketing the money. The manager recognised the woman because she was a regular customer.
3 months later, police arrived at her door and asked her to attend a police interview. There, she was shown the CCTV footage, she said that she didn't remember the incident but accepted that it was her.

The woman has no previous convictions, but was charged with theft at a magistrates court where she was given a 6 month conditional charge (meaning that she will not be punished as long as she doesn't get into any trouble for the next 6 months), and was required to pay £175 in court fees.
Do you think that this was fair?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...o=rcreplyemail
I was interested to read this story. Initially I thought it sounded very harsh to punish her as severely as they did, but having thought about it I've changed my mind a little. It was theft, clearly. She knew it didn't belong to her, yet she picked it up and pocketed it. An honest person, particularly in shop like that, would have taken it to the counter and said 'I found this on the floor'. 'Finders keepers' doesn't' really wash with me - it's easy to think of plenty of examples where 'finders keepers' would be clearly lead to outcomes where the perpetrator was clearly 'stealing' even though he'd just 'picked up' an item.
4
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
The owner should have been a lot more careful. She certainly shouldn't have been prosecuted for such a ridiculous crime. I'm sure if someone had just asked her to pay the £20 back to the owner this could have been solved in a civil manner.

The owner is probably a complete **** for wanting to press charges on this.
2
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
It doesn't seem that much different from this one, where the thief will certainly be prosecuted, one would hope:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...ester-39143475
The £20 note in the shop should certainly have been handed in as soon as it was found. There was a good chance it belonged to a little old lady who had dropped a significant part of her pension. It's quite nasty to hang on to it.
3
reply
Laomedeia
Badges: 21
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
Well im a ******* then. If I see money on the floor and I have no idea where it came from, I will keep it.

On the other hand I was in a canteen once and some silly pillock sat down next to me. He was a silly pillock because he got up and went somewhere, probably the toilet but left his wallet on the table. Anybody could have picked that up, but didnt. Unfortunately in my case, a wallet of mine went missing from that very same canteen. Pick-pocketing is definitely a crime! and if you find a wallet on the floor, theres usually cards and other shoot in there so thats also an occasion where I would hand something in.

Just money or a bag of drugs lying on the floor tho, thats fair game.
0
reply
Drunk Punx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by Laomedeia)
Theft is theft but bollux is also bollux.
QFP.

Finders keepers as far as I'm concerned. However, if they insisted upon it, she could've simply been asked to give the woman £20.
0
reply
username2965904
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
It is theft. A police caution might have been the best response.
0
reply
cherryred90s
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by Drunk Punx)
QFP.

Finders keepers as far as I'm concerned. However, if they insisted upon it, she could've simply been asked to give the woman £20.
Finders keepers doesn't exist in the eyes of the law.
Taking something that doesn't belong to you without the owners say so is always theft, regardless of how careless the owner may have been.

I agree though that she should have just been made to give the woman back her money, as it was such a minor offence
0
reply
Underscore__
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by cherryred90s)
Finders keepers doesn't exist in the eyes of the law.
Taking something that doesn't belong to you without the owners say so is always theft, regardless of how careless the owner may have been.

I agree though that she should have just been made to give the woman back her money, as it was such a minor offence
That's not strictly true. You can keep lost property if you've made reasonable effort to find the rightful owner. The police also give lost property to finders after about six weeks


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
cherryred90s
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by Underscore__)
That's not strictly true. You can keep lost property if you've made reasonable effort to find the rightful owner. The police also give lost property to finders after about six weeks


Posted from TSR Mobile
You don't decide that though. Law enforcement and its agents do i.e police. The point is that you can't decide to keep something based solely on the premise of 'finders keepers'.
0
reply
Fusion
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
What if the the £20 note was a free newspaper?
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
(Original post by Fusion)
What if the the £20 note was a free newspaper?
What if? It wasn't. It was a valuable £20 note, possibly 20% of the weekly income of a pensioner or unemployed person.
0
reply
AlexS101
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
No, and I think her lawyer was less than useless TBH.
She should have claimed to have had an honest belief that she "appropriated the property in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps", and therefore to have not fulfilled the Mens Rea of dishonesty.
0
reply
IMissTheTruckles
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by AlexS101)
No, and I think her lawyer was less than useless TBH.
She should have claimed to have had an honest belief that she "appropriated the property in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps", and therefore to have not fulfilled the Mens Rea of dishonesty.
Yes that was the problem though due to court fees the woman didn't actually get a lawyer, she just pleaded guilty. If she had actually got a lawyer she would of almost certainly not been found guilty.
0
reply
Fusion
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by IMissTheTruckles)
Yes that was the problem though due to court fees the woman didn't actually get a lawyer, she just pleaded guilty. If she had actually got a lawyer she would of almost certainly not been found guilty.
Are tory cuts to blame for this?
0
reply
Kvothe the Arcane
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
I think if you find a wallet, you should endeavour to return it. But money isn't identifiable and I'd posit that most cash handed in to employees doesn't find its way to the original owner. I don't think it was theft.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you think receiving Teacher Assessed Grades will impact your future?

I'm worried it will negatively impact me getting into university/college (170)
44.16%
I'm worried that I’m not academically prepared for the next stage in my educational journey (43)
11.17%
I'm worried it will impact my future career (31)
8.05%
I'm worried that my grades will be seen as ‘lesser’ because I didn’t take exams (83)
21.56%
I don’t think that receiving these grades will impact my future (36)
9.35%
I think that receiving these grades will affect me in another way (let us know in the discussion!) (22)
5.71%

Watched Threads

View All