Underage girl harrassed by security guard, cautioned by garda.

TadghsMuffins

Hello again,

The title's obviously inflammatory and has frustrated some responders.

To be as clear as I can:

A friend of mine, underaged and with out a guardian was apprehended outside a Pennies in which she had walked out of with an unpaid lipstick in her pocket along with paid goods.

She's now in the process of being cautioned by a liaison officer. I'd like any advice there is regarding the cautioning process and it's relevance to a criminal record - or any defense she could use to help her case.

moc moc a moc

How does a person put a stick of lipstick in their pocket accidentally? "Forgetting" to pay for it?

Maybe you should let this girl learn a valuable lesson instead of blindly jumping to a criminal's defense and looking for escape strategies.

AnonoBoy

I don't know anyone who keeps things in their pockets that they intend to pay for later.

Although the security guard sounds like he was brisk with her I don't think you could class it as 'harassment' since she had indeed taken something without paying for it.

I don't think any of her rights have been violated. I would have thought a security guard would be more careful about openly calling someone a shoplifter these days but that's about it.

endacl

Store security was on the ball! He did indeed know a shoplifter when he saw one. She admitted it.

Perhaps phone their head office and ask what their policy is re prosecuting shoplifters?

the_syco

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

Two weeks ago my friend was stopped by a security guard outside a Pennies

She stopped on her own accord, searched herself by her own accord, and admitted to shoplifting on her own accord. Tell her to pay for everything nexttime.

beyondbelief67

As far as I'm aware when they do a Garda vetting after she is 18 the juvenile caution doesn't show.
People make mistakes, it's easily done, what seems like a good idea when your young often is anything but, which is why those mistakes don't follow you through life.

drunkmonkey

She had the right to say sorry, cop on a bit and stop playing the victim.
If she does all that and doesn't put a foot or hand in the wrong place again she'll avoid a proper criminal record.

She may be a friend but it sounds like this one could drag you down with her, she changes her ways or you need to think hard about what you want in your friends.

endacl

drunkmonkey wrote: »

She had the right to say sorry, cop on a bit and stop playing the victim.
If she does all that and doesn't put a foot or hand in the wrong place again she'll avoid a proper criminal record.

She may be a friend but it sounds like this one could drag you down with her, she changes her ways or you need to think hard about what you want in your friends.

'Drag you down with her'?

Seriously?

haveringchick

How do you think Penneys should handle shoplifters OP?

colm_mcm

AFAIK they can't stop someone to search for shoplifted items till they leave the store. They may well have seen her do it earlier.

Pat Mustard

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

Two weeks ago my friend was stopped by a security guard outside a Pennies, and it was found that alongside the goods she had purchased, she had a stick of lipstick in her pocket she had forgotten to pay for.

People can leave premises without paying. It happens. However, this particular story is a bit hard to believe.

People often carry their own shopping bags these days and you would see people putting shopping into those bags, in order to take it to the counter to pay. What you wouldn't tend to see is people putting things into their pockets because whether or not it is done dishonestly, it can have the appearance of dishonesty.

Also, innocent people tend to protest their innocence. Perhaps there is something in your friend's excuse about her anxiety but that is the second excuse in a row now, after having walked out without paying for goods, which were in her pocket.

Maybe somebody could believe one excuse but two excuses in a row is something different.

If your friend thinks that she was hard done by, she should see a solicitor, tell her story and take advice. However, as the story doesn't sound very credible, it could be that the advice may not be to her liking.

TadghsMuffins

As a response to all considering I'm mostly getting some pretty off the ball responses:

I've done this before. It doesn't seem in any way unreasonable to me, if it does to you then I apologise for my portrayal of the situation.
As a matter of fact, I'm annoyed, like a human is allowed to be. I'm pretty ****ing pissed - so if it seems like I'm irrationally jumping to the defense of a friend then maybe that's because to some extent I am.

To those who seem to think this means I don't understand the security guard's position - I do. I don't blame him for how he acted. It pisses me off, but I don't blame him. I think that the whole situation and the many similar cases that must happen daily should be treated with a bit more discretion, she was never given a chance to pay it back, put it back, contact a guardian, or defend herself past protesting her innocence

To those who offered legal advice and insight - thank you it's highly appreciated.

I don't wanna start and argument here, I want legal advice, not to be told that she "deserved it" or that I shouldn't be looking for advice for her.

I'd ask with all due respect that if you don't have something constructive or helpful to say that you might go vent elsewhere.

TadghsMuffins

haveringchick wrote: »

How do you think Penneys should handle shoplifters OP?

See response at the end!

kid6

In the past I have walked out of shops with small things left in my pocket. In Tesco recently I walked out the front door with a 500ml bottle of water in my pocket. Made it half way down the car park before I realized and had to turn around and go back and pay for it. It is possible to mistakenly forget about something you placed in your pocket.

Stheno

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

To those who offered legal advice and insight - thank you it's highly appreciated.

I don't wanna start and argument here, I want legal advice, not to be told that she "deserved it" or that I shouldn't be looking for advice for her.

I'd ask with all due respect that if you don't have something constructive or helpful to say that you might go vent elsewhere.

It's against the charter to give legal advice here.

endacl

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

As a response to all considering I'm mostly getting some pretty off the ball responses:

I've done this before. It doesn't seem in any way unreasonable to me, if it does to you then I apologise for my portrayal of the situation.
As a matter of fact, I'm annoyed, like a human is allowed to be. I'm pretty ****ing pissed - so if it seems like I'm irrationally jumping to the defense of a friend then maybe that's because to some extent I am.

To those who seem to think this means I don't understand the security guard's position - I do. I don't blame him for how he acted. It pisses me off, but I don't blame him. I think that the whole situation and the many similar cases that must happen daily should be treated with a bit more discretion, she was never given a chance to pay it back, put it back, contact a guardian, or defend herself past protesting her innocence

To those who offered legal advice and insight - thank you it's highly appreciated.

I don't wanna start and argument here, I want legal advice, not to be told that she "deserved it" or that I shouldn't be looking for advice for her.

I'd ask with all due respect that if you don't have something constructive or helpful to say that you might go vent elsewhere.

Your post lacks logical coherence.

Just out if interest, you're pissed off... why?

TadghsMuffins

Stheno wrote: »

It's against the charter to give legal advice here.

Is it? Oh I'm sorry I didn't know.

Stheno

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

Is it? Oh I'm sorry I didn't know.

Yes.

TadghsMuffins

endacl wrote: »

Your post lacks logical coherence.

Just out if interest, you're pissed off... why?

Can you point out what exactly isn't making sense?

Because I have a personal connection with her and she's had a real bad time of it. I do know her very well and I truly believe she didn't intend to take out the lipstick. It's not nice seeing a friend being punished for something they didn't do.

TadghsMuffins

Stheno wrote: »

Yes.

Blimey.. Well I might as well take this post down then.

jungleman

Store security have to wait until the person has left the premises until they stop them.

The security guard has to physically see the person conceal an item before stopping them, if it was cashier or normal worker who saw it, then they are the person who has to stop the person outside of the premises, not the security.

From the sounds of it, and from what I know working in retail, it's likely that undercover security were following your friend around inside the store, probably from the moment she walked in. They saw her stuff it in her pocket, and waited until she left until a member of security stopped her.

They did their job spot on, there is no harassment whatsoever. Security don't have to be polite, and a failure to be polite isn't violating any civil rights.

Pat Mustard

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

Blimey.. Well I might as well take this post down then.

I think that we can take it that you are looking for general advice and discussion rather than legal advice.

drunkmonkey

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

Can you point out what exactly isn't making sense?

Because I have a personal connection with her and she's had a real bad time of it. I do know her very well and I truly believe she didn't intend to take out the lipstick. It's not nice seeing a friend being punished for something they didn't do.

Your friend is a shoplifter, don't be so naive as to think she didn't meant to do it or having a bad time gives you a right to be a thief.
Your defending the undefendable.

pablo128

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

Can you point out what exactly isn't making sense?

Because I have a personal connection with her and she's had a real bad time of it. I do know her very well and I truly believe she didn't intend to take out the lipstick. It's not nice seeing a friend being punished for something they didn't do.

It's hardly a punishment. A caution is the legal equivalent of a slap on the wrist.
I doubt if it would show up on a garda vetting application. (open to correction).
Let her explain herself to the Gardai and everything should be ok.

Frynge

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

It's not nice seeing a friend being punished for something they didn't do.

But they did leave the store without paying for it, and aperantly under the observing eye of security. Who's job it is to detect and deter shoplifting, I would have assumed.

TadghsMuffins

Pat Mustard wrote: »

I think that we can take it that you are looking for general advice and discussion rather than legal advice.

No, I'm looking for advice regarding the caution, and I apologise for the inflammatory title and the responses it's incurred. I can't find a way to edit/delete it right now - is there a way I can do that on mobile?

TadghsMuffins

Frynge wrote: »

But they did leave the store without paying for it, and aperantly under the observing eye of security. Who's job it is to detect and deter shoplifting, I would have assumed.

I'm aware of this, it's not the action that's the issue it's the punishment. The being apprehended is of course going to happen mistake or not. It's the caution I'd like advice with

moc moc a moc

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

I truly believe she didn't intend to take out the lipstick. It's not nice seeing a friend being punished for something they didn't do.

You're what psychologists call an "enabler".

beyondbelief67

TadghsMuffins wrote: »

I'm aware of this, it's not the action that's the issue it's the punishment. The being apprehended is of course going to happen mistake or not. It's the caution I'd like advice with

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/children_and_young_offenders/garda_juvenile_diversion_programme.html

She will see juvenile diversion officer who will talk her through the caution and listen to her, I've posted a link so you can read it. Hope this helps you.

TadghsMuffins

moc moc a moc wrote: »

You're what psychologists call an "enabler".

If you don't believe it's a mistake that's fine, but that's your opinion. If you have any constructive input I'd love to hear it. If not, there's little point in responding

Pat Mustard

moc moc a moc wrote: »

You're what psychologists call an "enabler".

Mod:

This is not an attempt at legal discussion and it's not helpful. Please try to keep on topic.