# Do you think the store needed to apologize? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 2, 2011, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599 "2011-11-02T08:01:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/61 "2011-11-02T18:47:54Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > I somehow doubt that if it was the manager’s wife who forgot to pay for a sandwich he totally would have called the cops. > > Even if the manager \*does \*have to follow procedure, the cops certainly can use a little common sense. The person paid for all other groceries. The person had the wrapper available for the purpose of paying for it. Taking the child into custody was a completely stupid move. > > All that said, I do not think the couple should sue. Yeah, I pretty much agree with all of this. What happened to that couple was a completely insane overreaction that is the result of people sticking to the letter of the law and refusing to use an ounce of common sense. Once CPS showed up to take this couple’s child away, someone at the store should have said, “Christ on a horse, you don’t need to take these people’s kid away from them! Look, we’re dropping charges. Just pay us the five bucks and don’t shop here again.” ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/62 "2011-11-02T18:51:50Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > I somehow doubt that if it was the manager’s wife who forgot to pay for a sandwich he totally would have called the cops. > > Even if the manager \*does \*have to follow procedure, the cops certainly can use a little common sense. The person paid for all other groceries. The person had the wrapper available for the purpose of paying for it. Taking the child into custody was a completely stupid move. > > All that said, I do not think the couple should sue. Problem here (and reality of the 5$ sandwich aside) - a common tactic of shoplifters is to pay for a few small/normal/cheap items and ‘forget’ about the expensive doodad in the pocket or purse (that they only put there because they ran out of hands). I think the cops went overboard - but they too have procedures to follow - thats the problem in a ‘zero tolerance’ society that we have built these days - no one thinks - they all follow the ‘rule’ to prevent any kind of potential suit, and we end up with this kind of crap taking up resources. ---
**Author:** ![pinqy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a3d4f5/32.png) [@pinqy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinqy)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/63 "2011-11-02T18:52:54Z")
> [@treis](#): > > It’s clearly not illegal: > > [http://www.shopliftingprevention.org/shoplifting-laws/illinois-shoplifting-laws.html](http://www.shopliftingprevention.org/shoplifting-laws/illinois-shoplifting-laws.html) > > As long as you intend to pay, there is nothing illegal about eating food in a grocery store. But this couple did NOT pay, so any talk of intent is irrelevant. And since only one sandwich was eaten, why wasn’t the other sandwich paid for? Your link is also for Illinois laws. Looking at [Hawaii law](http://www.shopliftingprevention.org/shoplifting-laws/hawaii-shoplifting-laws.html) it reads > [@](#): > > A person commits theft if the person does any of the following: > > (1) Obtains or exerts unauthorized control over property. A person obtains, or exerts control over, the property of another with intent to deprive the other of the property. She was not authorized to eat the sandwich, so that’s unauthorized control. Eating the sandwich necessarily deprives the other of the property and is also exerting control. Specifically for shoplifting: > [@](#): > > 1. Shoplifting. > (a) A person conceals or takes possession of the goods or merchandise of any store or retail establishment, with intent to defraud. She took the merchandise into her possession, and as for intent, well that would be a dispute in court, not at time of arrest, but she did defraud, so it’s hard to claim she didn’t mean to. In my state of Virginia, concealment itself is considered evidence of intent to defraud. ---
**Author:** ![tim-n-va](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim-n-va/32/3001_2.png) [@tim-n-va](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim-n-va)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/64 "2011-11-02T19:00:14Z")
As mentioned upthread, the first defense of any shoplifter is that they meant to pay and just forgot. Regardless of intent, when they were beyond the checkout with the sandwich (in their stomach) that they had not paid for, they had shoplifted. All of the talk about what is allowed in some stores _ **BEFORE** _ you get to the checkout doesn’t seem relevent. A preganant woman is a very sympathetic visual so Safeway has a PR problem but did nothing wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/65 "2011-11-02T19:01:39Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > Taking the child into custody was a completely stupid move. What is wrong with people? If the parents are unavailable _someone_ has to be responsible for the child. That’s one of the duties of child services or whatever the hell it is called in that area. With both parents under arrest (rightly or wrongly) yes, calling in child services IS the appropriate response. If both the kid’s parents had been incapacitated in an accident would you criticize the agency for taking the kid until relatives could be located? Seriously - did you want the kid sitting on a sidewalk out on the street, or in a police precinct unsupervised among potentially all sorts of unsavory people? If the kid was, say, 15 maybe you could trust her to sit still and stay out of trouble while the business with the parents was being sorted out, but a toddler? The kid was in “custody” less than 24 hours, basically, the agency was acting as a short-term baby-sitter. Cripes, you make it sound like the toddler was handcuffed then taken out back and beaten or something rather than being overseen by an agency charged with taking care of children whose parents are not available to give care. Yes, some terrible shit has gone down in child welfare agencies but I don’t think this is a case of that. ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/66 "2011-11-02T19:07:46Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > What is wrong with people? If the parents are unavailable _someone_ has to be responsible for the child. That’s one of the duties of child services or whatever the hell it is called in that area. With both parents under arrest (rightly or wrongly) yes, calling in child services IS the appropriate response. If both the kid’s parents had been incapacitated in an accident would you criticize the agency for taking the kid until relatives could be located? Yeah, but the kid’s parents weren’t incapacitated in an accident, were they? They were arrested for shoplifting $5 worth of sandwiches. That’s ridiculous. You are correct. The letter of the law was satisfied when two people were arrested for shoplifting because they forgot to pay for two sandwiches that they ate in a store. It was further satisfied when their 3-year-old child, who is certainly not old enough to understand what is going on, was removed to the custody of total strangers overnight. And in this case, the letter of the law was retarded, and someone involved should have stopped the process before it got this out of hand. Here’s an idea: Arrest dad and let mom go home with the kid. Here’s another idea: Let the kid go along to the police station and hang out with alternating parents in a waiting area while the other parent is fingerprinted and photographed. Here’s a third idea: Don’t arrest anybody and just let them pay for their fucking sandwiches. The last I checked, habitual shoplifters usually don’t bother to pay for $50 in additional groceries to cleverly cover their tracks when sandwich-stealing. ---
**Author:** ![pinqy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a3d4f5/32.png) [@pinqy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinqy)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/67 "2011-11-02T19:13:26Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > Finally, you forget the intent part – if it’s custom somewhere to allow this, how the hell are you going to call it stealing? There’s no sign. What’s social norm in one spot isn’t in another. It’s custom somewhere to eat a sandwich and then not pay for it? Where? And as far as I know taking an item, consuming it, and not paying for it is theft. What else is there? ---
**Author:** ![Lightray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightray/32/391_2.png) [@Lightray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightray)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/68 "2011-11-02T19:26:41Z")
> [@MsWhatsit](#): > > Yeah, I pretty much agree with all of this. What happened to that couple was a completely insane overreaction that is the result of people sticking to the letter of the law and refusing to use an ounce of common sense. Once CPS showed up to take this couple’s child away, someone at the store should have said, “Christ on a horse, you don’t need to take these people’s kid away from them! Look, we’re dropping charges. Just pay us the five bucks and don’t shop here again.” Are you somehow under the impression that the police were calling Safeway every 5 minutes with an update of the arrest process? “Okay, now we’re fingerprinting them. And now… we’ve taken their kid away. Do you want us to waterboard them now?” Once the Safeway manager called the cops, it was out of Safeway’s hands what happened to the shoplifters. You want to go all Maude Flanders, blame the police. ---
**Author:** ![shijinn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cc9497/32.png) [@shijinn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shijinn)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/69 "2011-11-02T19:27:40Z")
> [@simster](#): > > Problem here (and reality of the 5$ sandwich aside) - a common tactic of shoplifters is to pay for a few small/normal/cheap items and ‘forget’ about the expensive doodad in the pocket or purse (that they only put there because they ran out of hands). … again, this does not appear to be the case here. it seems to me that if there had been an intent to steal, the wrapper would have been discarded or pocketed/hidden instead. ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/70 "2011-11-02T19:33:25Z")
> [@Lightray](#): > > Are you somehow under the impression that the police were calling Safeway every 5 minutes with an update of the arrest process? “Okay, now we’re fingerprinting them. And now… we’ve taken their kid away. Do you want us to waterboard them now?” No, but I was under the impression that CPS showed up at Safeway to take their kid away before the couple was taken to the police station. My impression is supported by TFA. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/71 "2011-11-02T19:47:03Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > I happen to think Safeway did the right thing and shouldn’t apologize. If this had been a Black, Latino, Poor White, or Roma mother far fewer (if any people outside her minority group) would be rushing to defend her. I don’t think most of us here in the United States would know a Roma if it slapped us in the face and called us Susan. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/72 "2011-11-02T19:54:47Z")
I’m not a fan of eating food from a store before paying for it (the woman could have gone to a register, paid for the sandwich, and then continued shopping). However, the store manager definitely overreacted here. Just reminding them to pay as they were leaving would have been enough. One time when I was in my 20s I was on my way to a party, and needed to bring a couple bottles of soda. I stopped at White Hen, thinking about how I was going to get to the party and who would be there and how long it was going to take to get there. I put the soda on the seat next to me and started to pull out of my parking spot when the manager ran out. “Hey are you gonna pay for that?!” Man was I mortified! I had to go back in and face all those people in line! ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/73 "2011-11-02T20:12:48Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > I don’t think most of us here in the United States would know a Roma if it slapped us in the face and called us Susan. Aren’t they a kind of tomato? ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/74 "2011-11-02T20:14:57Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > I don’t think most of us here in the United States would know a Roma if it slapped us in the face and called us Susan. Law enforcement and security are sometimes given training in spotting Roma or Travelers because of the stereotypes about the cultures. I know not to speak my native language in Macys (and many other stores) unless I want constant attention from loss prevention. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/75 "2011-11-02T20:15:46Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > I don’t think most of us here in the United States would know a Roma if it slapped us in the face and called us Susan. If they drew a wizened old hand down our face and rasped, “Thinner,” we might figure it out. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/76 "2011-11-02T20:26:10Z")
Intent is impossible to determine after that fact. As has been pointed out, a lot of shoplifters have used the ‘I just forgot to pay’ technique, and will continue. Accomplished liars can make you think they are sincere. The store’s actions were appropriate. I don’t think an arrest needed to be made, but the _store_ did nothing wrong. If you are going to do the ‘eat it now, pay for it later’ bit, it falls on you to follow up. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/77 "2011-11-02T20:26:35Z")
> [@shijinn](#): > > again, this does not appear to be the case here. it seems to me that if there had been an intent to steal, the wrapper would have been discarded or pocketed/hidden instead. My comment wsa intended about regular/intentional shoplifters - not necessarily the actions of this couple - hence the “reality of the $5 sandwich aside” comment. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/78 "2011-11-02T20:30:44Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > There doesn’t seem to be a universal policy. Like other posters have mentioned, they’ve done it or seen it done. I shop at Safeway and I’ve yet to see someone get busted for eating a grape. Or even opening a soda. > > Finally, you forget the intent part – if it’s custom somewhere to allow this, how the hell are you going to call it stealing? There’s no sign. What’s social norm in one spot isn’t in another. I think you misread the article. The couple have said it was their intent to eat the sandwiches in the store and then pay for them as they checked out. But that’s not what they did. They checked out the other groceries in their cart and were then leaving without paying for the sandwiches. So the issue isn’t whether they were eating in the store. The issue is whether they were leaving without paying - which they concede they were. The defense is that it was a mistake not an intended act. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/79 "2011-11-02T20:38:44Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > This is the point where I feel compelled to suggest that store managers aren’t brain dead morons. They might, just might, be able to distinguish between a family who ate a sandwich and forgot about it on the checkout line, and a guy who is trying to steal as much as he possibly can. Playing devil’s advocate, how do we know this isn’t a case of a couple of people figuring “Hey, we’re buying fifty dollars worth of groceries. We’re entitled to a free sandwich while we shop.” People shoplift for stupid reasons. You have rich people shoplifting trinkets they could have easily afforded to buy and teenagers shoplifting junk on a dare. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599/80 "2011-11-02T20:49:16Z")
> [@runner pat](#): > > Safeway is right to go after shoplifters. > > However, everything points to a mistake being made, not a deliberate theft. > > The manager was a complete idiot. How do you know that the manager was instrumental in the arrest? Far more likely, the LPO of the store called the cops as a result of a routine shoplifting. The manager’s apology is for the actions of the LPO. And no, the store did not need to apologize for the stupidity of this woman even if she was hormonally affected. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-the-store-needed-to-apologize/601599.md?page=5)