A kid stole candy from our store--and his mother did absolutely nothing.

The BBQ Pit
1

I wish to Pit the entire world, for going to hell in a handbasket, and specifically this woman, who is contributing to the problem by apparently not teaching her son any morals whatsoever.

Scene: Walgreens, Saturday evening, me leaning on the counter at Register One, watching a six-year-old boy over at the candy display. “Mom, I need money! Mom, I need money!” He addresses his remarks to her over by Photo. She ignores him. He puts a Kit-Kat bar in his pocket, turns around, sees me watching him. His little face almost comically goes, “OOPS!” and he hastily puts the Kit-Kat bar back. I holler for the manager. She comes up, we all meet at Register One, the kid, the mom, the woman who came in with them.

“He put a Kit-Kat bar in his pocket, and when he saw that I saw him, he put it back,” I report to the manager.

We all look at the kid. He hangs his head.
The manager says, “You know, I’m supposed to call the cops, but since you put it back, I won’t.”

He hears the word “cops” and starts to puddle up. He looks over at his mom. We all look over at his mom, waiting for a response.

She says: “Can someone help me in Photo?”

I want to pause here and make sure y’all got that. Her response to the information that her son had just stolen a candy bar was, “Well, they’re not going to call the cops, so it doesn’t affect me, so I can go on with my business.”

Uh huh.
The kid, seeing that punishment is not forthcoming, immediately un-puddles. They go about their business. Later, as I’m ringing them all up, the woman who came in with them buys, among other things, a Kit-Kat bar. Which she promptly hands to him.

Now, what important lessons did he learn tonight?

  1. You can steal candy and nothing bad will happen.
  2. If you express your distress at not having something by stealing it, somebody will give it to you.

Good lessons for a young man to learn.

And someday I suppose his mom will be insisting, “My son’s a good boy”, in the face of all law enforcement evidence to the contrary.

In other news, tonight a skanky-lookin’ man came up, asked me where the hair clippers were, I directed his attention to the appropriate aisle, and two minutes later he ran out the door with his hair clippers, setting off the beeper.

So I assume that somewhere in his past, there was a mom whose response to the information that her small son had just stolen something was, “Can someone help me in Photo?”

2

Well, technically, it was an *attempted *theft. He did *actually *steal it. Other than that, I’m totally with you. Lousy parenting there, to be sure.

3

No. Once he put the candy in his pocket he had committed an unauthorised taking. It does not matter if took it out of the store or put it back.

(There would still be a question about the mens rea/intent element.)

4

Duck Duck Goose, you have answered a lot of questions for me tonight. I suspected where all these lousy people were getting their lousy ideas of how to be a human being, but now I know - they are being raised by wolves. No, strike that - wolves would do a better job of instilling some values in them. They’re not being raised at all. Their parents have abdicated their responsibility to grow a human being who is a contributing member to society.

5

At the very least, the wolves would go ahead and eat them at some point.

6

Yup, I agree that he *attempted *to steal it (or take something without authorization). Intent is only a portion of that. He still needed to succeed for it to be considered theft. Succeeding entails not only the concealment but the actual taking of the item past the point-of-sale station.

Notice the ‘and’ clause in the presumptions – not ‘or’.
Full text of statute here.

7

Oh hell. I’m sure it’s not a good idea to be laughing this hard late at night.

8

Notice the word “presumptions.” That is a procedural rule describing the relationship between removing concealed merchandise and the intent element, but it is not necessary to show these things to satisfy the elements of the crime of retail theft. Once he put it in his pocket, he took possession. If he also had the intent to permanently keep the candy or deprive the merchant of the benefit of the candy, he committed retail theft.

9

Bah. I don’t want to hijack this any further, but I think proving intent when someone sticks something in their pocket but doesn’t walk out of the store is going to be futile.

You and I know what the kid was intending to do. Duck Duck Goose and his manager knew what the kid was intending to do, but I don’t think it’s all that likely, given the statutes, that the kid would have been arrested or prosecuted for stealing given the turn of events if the police had become involved. He probably would have gotten a lecture and been sent on his way. Now, if he had walked out without paying for it, things would have gotten a lot more serious, especially if his mom displayed that attitude in front of the police. Heck, someone’s got to teach that kid a lesson because it sure doesn’t look like he’s going to get those important lessons at home.

10

Actually, the mens rea would be the only thing at issue here. The fact that he put it into his pocket is irrelevant. I can put half an aisle into my pocket and I’m not breaking the law if my intent is to cart it all up to the cash register and pay for it.

But then again, this entire line of argument is completely irrelevant. Walgreen’s manager was never going to call the cops on a six year old, the police were never going to arrest him, and this pit thread isn’t about whether he broke the law or not. It’s about a kid doing something we all know was wrong and not getting punished for it.

11

Wow, what an appalling story.

I remember going through a shoplifting phase when I was ten or eleven. One time I stole was a $10 video game watch from a department store. Not coincidentally, it was both the last thing I ever stole, and the only time my mom caught me stealing. That was one of those rare times I got in trouble and Mom didn’t yell at me. She was too disappointed in me to do so. It made for an unbelievably powerful deterrent.

I feel sorry for the candy bar thief because he desperately needs a similar experience, but he’ll probably never get it.

12

#1 a lovely example of piss poor parenting

#2 a lovely example of piss poor management

If the manager had 1 ball in his sack he would have ejected them and not allowed them to make their purchase, not helped them in photo, and told them never to come back.

People with this kind of attitude in the amusement park I worked in were often shocked at how fast they found themselves being removed from the park, not for the childrens actions, but for enabling it or expresing anger at us when confronted with the childs misdeeds.

13

You said it was attempted theft. You cannot attempt to commit a theft without intent. If it was attempted theft in this case, it was actual theft.

Which is why I said there would still be a question of the mens rea element. I was just assuming the kid took it with the required intent because the poster said it was attempted which would require intent. I was pointing out that putting it in his pocket satisfied the actus reus.

14

Can a six-year-old form the requisite criminal mens rea?

15

I’m not sure what the exact law on the age at which a minor may be legally considered to form mens rea in Illinois, but yes, a six year old can form the mental intent to steal a candy bar.

Billdo, former six year old.

16

The presumptions are that if he (a)conceals the item, and (b)takes the item beyond the last known point for making a purchase, then theft can be legally presumed.

That is, if the customer needs to walk through a check-out area to reach the exit, he could be stopped and charged after going past that area but before leaving the building. This case doesn’t appear to have satisfied both presumptions. For the purpose of putting the fear of Og into a would-be thief, however, go ahead and tell him whatever you want.

17

Oh, yeah, I’m with you absolutely on that. However, the (actually just an assistant) manager in question is a Very Nice Church Lady who is new to our skanky store with its congenitally skanky clientele, having worked for many years at one of the Nice Stores, has only been here in the Jungle for a few months, and is still having trouble wrapping her mind around our whole Survival-First! mindset. I amused myself during the remainder of the evening last night by mentally listing the assistant managers I have worked with in the past who would have politely but firmly escorted the whole crew out the front door.

She saw only a little boy caught stealing, “poor little thing”, whereas I saw yet another one of our chronic candy shoplifters in embryo. Well, I thought, “You are young…you will learn…” :smiley:

18

I know some of you are firmly against corporal punishment, but by god, if someone ever needed a good spanking it was that mother.
In all seriousness… I am against corporal punishment. But by god, that kid is up for a great future. **Duck Duck Goose **should have taken his autograph before he makes the FBI’s Most Wanted. It will be worth something on eBay.

19

The manager should have ejected both and banned them from the store.

Now if only those pictures get lost, you can say some child was behind the counter and must have stolen her pictures. Your store is willing to give her this lovely set of a couple that didn’t want to pay when they came back.

20

Manager should have asked for permission to address the child, then spoken to him very seriously, and told him: “You have just got your mother kicked out of this store, and she’s going to have to find another place to get her pictures developed from now on. I hope you’ll think about that. Enjoy your candy bar.”