Brazen theft; BUT must they leave the store first?
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 04. 2024
- Do you have to leave the shop before it becomes theft?
Free £50 when you switch energy suppliers:
share.octopus.energy/happy-hu...
Exclusive content: www.blackbeltbarrister.com
Become a Channel member: / @blackbeltbarrister
Support the channel: buy.stripe.com/14kdUS6gb4f26e...
or one-off: buy.stripe.com/bIYdUSfQLcLy7i...
TO CONTACT ME: Follow & Message on Instagram:
/ blackbeltbarrister
For FORMAL ADVICE Requests ONLY:
clerks@ShenSmith.com (non formal requests will be deleted)
💌 Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @blackbeltbarrister
MY CAMERA GEAR
🎥 Big Camera amzn.to/3tW8nPU (amazon link)
🎥 Small Camera amzn.to/2RB7ez9 (amazon link)
🎙 RODE VIDEOMic Pro+ amzn.to/2QCJURi (amazon link)
Gobe ND Filter amzn.to/2R3eEuA (amazon link)
Neewer Ring Light amzn.to/3aOkLtT (amazon link)
Switch Pod amzn.to/3sZb8yA (amazon link)
JOBY Tripod amzn.to/3dXJYDT (amazon link)
External Media Drive amzn.to/3uxNDOQ (amazon link)
BE PART OF OUR LAW COMMUNITY HERE:
/ blackbeltbarrister
/ blackbeltbarrister
/ blackbeltbarrister
/ blackbeltbarrister
🎓 Brilliant contract law book:
amzn.to/2PHC2O1 (Amazon link)
🎓 Excellent book with an overview of criminal law:
amzn.to/3gTPEAV (Amazon link)
🎓 Learn more about trespass and tort law:
amzn.to/32N6TLS
(Affiliate link)
LAW FAQS
• Common Law
CONSUMER LAW PLAYLIST:
• Consumer Law
TREE LAW PLAYLIST:
• Tree Law Miniseries
ROAD TRAFFIC LAW PLAYLIST:
• Road Traffic Law
FAMILY LAW PLAYLIST:
• Family Law
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.
#blackbeltbarrister #lawvlogs
Description contains affiliate links; I will occasionally earn commissions from qualifying purchases or leads generated.
All of this talking is just another waste of words and time. The plain fact of the matter is the system now just encourages this type of behaviour and if by some miracle they end up in court they are let off with a slap on the wrist even if they are found guilty of several offences.
This kind of antisocial crime begets more antisocial crime a bit like the so-called broken windows theory.
It's all part of a failure of basic policing, which includes being tolerant of begging and rough sleeping.
This is going on in SanFrancisco and Los Angeles as well. As a results, so many stores have closed down from those cities.
But they will ruin your life if you dare defend your business against theft.
@allenjenkins-xd5uiYou steal because you're selfish, not because the Prime Minister is corrupt.
@allenjenkins-xd5ui I can see the headlines now "Suspended Sentence for One Punch Killer of Autistic Man".
This isn’t shoplifting this is looting.
But, a 45kg girl on minimum wage should now be expected to attack and control them as part of her job description? I'd like to see someone with black belt doing it. For our entertainment. Get out into the shops and show us how it's done Dan (I assume that's 3rd Dan?)
This is bulglary
As a retired Police Officer, I totally agree with you, that leaving the store is not necessary... however, the CPS is far more likely to take on the case if leaving the store without payment is an element of the modus operandi.
Now in my 70s, I am a disabled person, and my local One Stop Shop staff know me. The store has no baskets or trolleys. I have a large shopping bag, into which I place my shopping. Once I have done shopping, I take my bag to the checkout, so that the staff can register my purchases. I then pay for my purchases by ApplePay.
Then again, had I decided 'do a runner', at my age, I severely doubt that I'd make it out of the store! 🤣
I do a similar thing, placing the goods in a bag on the front of my mobility scooter and then go through a non-self-service checkout so that the bag is empty when I place the goods back in the bag.
The saddest part…
If you try to stop this behaviour.
The courts will punish you more than the thief!
Not true, but what is common is for the thief to be prosecuted and you prosecuted, in this country, for stopping them because the police, the worst criminals going will claim you assaulted them
Don’t agree, I went to many shop thefts where the offender was detained by store staff … none were ever prosecuted or even threatened with it. You just have to be sensible and use reasonable force. You can’t batter them if they are putting up little resistance as an example.
@@dalet1001 Just because ignorance of the law was shown, it does not make the law null and void.
Young student, from abroad, was prosecuted for stealing a bar of Toblerone. Both barristers agreed, and the judge, that concealment of the bar, about the lads person, was enough to find him guilty of theft, and he had to pay four hundred pounds and was deported
Shoplifting is a huge problem in Britain, and I don't see any way to stop it.
It's called a change in law. If these are immigrants, then they need to be fast tracked out of this country.
@@MrPDawesWe can't change the law. And no one who can cares what we think.
Fund the police?
@@gdwe1831 Change every last officer for decent officers, as they once had to do in New York, some years ago. Our police force is as corrupt as hell
We could start by protecting our borders. See how shoplifting decreases and go from there.
As a retired police officer obviously I was aware of the law around shoplifting. However I agree there should be something done in relation to this new type of blatant shoplifting, the people doing this are not trying to even hide the fact they are being dishonest. These gangs that just walk in and blatantly steal these items in front of staff and on lookers know that everyone it to worried to do anything about it as unfortunately the courts would come down hard on anyone stopping them with force.
Unfortunately bringing the third world into the UK just brings in how they live.
Whomever has the biggest machete is the leader or owns the item.
This is only going to get far worse unfortunately.
Until the lives of the MPs or their families are affected nothing will be done.
Sad state of affairs.
Well said
There is ZERO deterrent. That's the problem right there....
Because increasing numbers of people have no shame. It's a general, societal problem.
also the shop workers are treated like trash so have no motivation and owe the shop nothing. Most supermarkets and chains are getting there just desserts half the time. Not that those who need to feel the pain from this do sadly
If they get caught they'll just say they are hearing voices, they can't be sent back as that would put them in danger, if anything IF they do get caught it probably gets them out the free Hotel accommodation and into that New House.
It's a real mystery why they flock here like a stampede 🤔 Also! migration is a good thing, apparently!
As a security officer in the UK, we are trained on the ASCONE model, which stands for Approach, Selection, Concealment, Observation, Non-Payment and Exit. It's the Exit part that makes this really difficult, because by the law of Theft, they don't have to exit, but security officers can't actually act unless they are leaving the store in terms of how we're trained. This is where the discrepancy comes in.
Surely you could stop them leaving the store until police arrive...? But then the police would probably let them go...too hard! 🙄
@@freespirit1411 When I worked it, I did this, but technically yeah that's where the problem lies. But if I see them attempt to walk out without payment that is my queue to detain them. The police won't pick anything up if it's not of much value either. I've had instances where I detained someone for stealing 2 bottles of £30 alcohol, this was a repeat offender and the police refused to arrest. But £200 worth of chocolate went to caught.
Is this why many stores have reintroduced barrier systems for the umpteenth time, that you could act if they are the wrong side rather than outside ? cheers.
@@ooslum They have never not really been a thing in my area, but EAS gates are the point of exit so would be where an officer can act, but this brings up a rather interesting problem. Security officers cannot search bags or persons without their consent, so a shoplifter can literally say 'no you can't search my bag' and they would have to be let go, or detained if you believe that enough value was stolen to warrant calling the police. We all know how police treat this though.
@@RibombeeTeacher I have been told by a store security officer that the Greater Manchester Police won't attend if a shoplifter has less than £80 stolen goods. Don't know where you are based, but sounds like you're local force have a similar policy.
I have been harassed and even had my life threatened by a fly tipping local shop
this has gone on for 5 years now
the council literally does NOTHING even with evidence and the police last I heard wanted us to "come to a mutual understanding"
basically saying it is BOTH of us!
only ONE has consistently BROKEN THE LAW and made death threats
I have also been injured twice due to cyclists avoiding the waste piled opposite my door!
but she is the victim!
I have literally given video and photo evidence every time yet she just lies and they swallow that as fact!!
if I was told this ten years ago I would have never believed it
but this IS reality in the UK now!
the Law protects both criminal and predator
with ever more racists in charge!
Not the place for your personal problems.
@@snowflakemelter1172triggered? 😂
Britain is broken. It looks dirty tired old fashioned and scummy😂
I think this is becoming the norm, no police, no consequences and no one has any pride or decency anymore.
@billpugh58 I've been called Snowflake, so many times, I just say born and proud
I am a security guard and i had a situation where this guy comes in and says " I'm cold hungry and its a bank holiday , so I'm going to get arrested for shoplifting and spend the weekend and the Monday in Police cells where it will be warm and i will be fed"
He promptly grabs a microwave and walks out of the Tesco without paying and he turns around and says " Now you have to get me arrested "
I replied " OK sir what are you going to do with a microwave? You're clearly homeless"
He made the mistake of trying to be smart and replied " Oh nothing i don't even want it"
Well at that point he no longer wishes to permanently deprive Tesco of the microwave , so i walked up to him , picked up the microwave and told him to be on his merry way ,
He then tried to re-enter the store where i politely told him that he wasn't welcome
I’d have directed him to the bedding section where he could at least have got a blanket.
As a security guard back in late 2000, I never came across this type of brazen theft. We had people walk out with entire suitcases, but we were instructed not to engage until they left the store. I didn't listen though because i wanted them gone. Where the store wanted civil recovery. Excellent and concise assessment of the legal situation.
I work in a food shop in Liverpool, shoplifting is off the scale, from clearing shelves of high value goods, to just scanning half of goods at a self checkout (there are manned too) to just helping themselves to 'free' carrier bags.
The shop gets rinsed to point I actually start to feel embarrassed for those paying in full. How much longer before these honest individuals start too?
Society is in terminal decline and this is just a symptom, one that can't be treated until people realise it's NOT 'someone else's problem'!
Agree, sadly have to agree
I'm not sure you can compare stealing shelves of high value and not scanning a carrier bag, With supermarkets expecting us to do all the work I wouldn't begrudge someone having a bag that will cost the supermarket less than a penny at cost for doing all the scanning.
@@pjuk Theft is theft
@@pjuk Supermarkets have to pay the government 10p for each bag they sell. So ten times more than you said. Also, maybe the produce is cheaper as you have to "do all the work".
@@caparn100no, the supermarkets costs are lower, and their profits higher, because you're doing all the work. Look at the profits of the large supermarket chains, and the salaries of their directors. That is where the high cost of food is coming from. Not from the farmers.
That's the problem with online shopping, they won't let you put something in your trolley without paying for it....
😂
That’s also not true
@@Cartsp70 I was being sarcastic.🤣
I worked as a store detective many years ago and in our training we were told we could never approach a shoplifter until they had left the store. We were taught a system called SCONE (selection, concealment, observation, non-payment and exit) and we absolutely could not detain a shoplifter unless we were 100% certain and could prove all 5 points.That was the offical guidance then but I am going back about 20 years here so it could have changed in the meantime.
The problem for security guards is that they don't have a specific power of arrest beyond what the ordinary citizen. Unlike the police if a court finds the shoplifter not guilty, then a security guard, as I understand, could be found guilty of wrongful arrest. Though, as the video says, they don't need to have left the shop, I believe it does increase the probability of a guilty verdict, which reduces the risk of the security guard being prosecuted for wrongful arrest.
No - its very much still the same. I worked in the same line of work for over half a decade a few years ago and SCONE was still being taught to SDs and also to regular security staff as well. Basically its a framework so there can be very little to no chance of any sort of reverse litigation from the offender. Like you literally have them bang to rights shoplifting so they cant take you to court to say you unlawfully stopped, searched or detained them or accused them being a shoplifter.
The premise being that to detain someone is serious serious business as you are taking away this persons freedom, and accusing someone of being a thief without 100% proof is also serious business as it is deemed libellous and they can take you or your employer (if not both...) to court for defamation. Your employer is 100% certainly going to throw you under the bus in that situation because thats what they always do to avoid taking any sort of heat.
We also use scone, but when they've actually left the store, you can't realistically do anything, as if you get hurt, you are not insured , thus have no cover.
@@lindakeyes9353 No, if you get injured, there is compensation payable by the state.
@@user-mu8cp4mo1x There is a difference between arrest and detention . Shop security can outline their suspicions to a suspect and tell them they are being detained until police arrive , after which , depending on the police investigation they will either be arrested or released with apologies .
An innocent person who has done nothing wrong will rarely object if this is done tactfully and quietly , by taking them to a less public area before confronting them ; more usually , the ones who make a lot of noise will be guilty , and innocent but 'entitled' people are probably customers you don't so much mind losing .
The problem is that these large shops and corporations are not taking proper action which is now becoming a precedent. Instead of applying the law, these shops prefer to take the easy option and make honest customers pay instead by raising their prices to offset shoplifting losses. The cost of shop lifting should be deducted from the managers salaries and the bonuses for the board of directors instead of their honest customers.
Who would be a Manager?
Large businesses helped the theft rings thrive because the policy is for employees not to intervene. As an employee there is no need to risk themselves for shareholders. As the owner of a private business I would possibly intervene because that is my personal property and I would be armed to defend myself where I live.
But why should someone working for a minimum wage put themselves at risk for a large company.
I certainly wouldn't.
Pay for security.
I'm talking the big supermarkets not small shops.
I've never worked in retail I was a street cleaner.
And some alcoholic tried to push me into moving traffic because I almost picked up what I thought was an empty can
@@good7saint The retailer I work for on a shopping park has no security guard anymore because it’s ’too expensive’ but expect the shop assistants to stop the shop lifters with no training - especially regarding what is acceptable to do in intervening. I didn’t sign up to be a loss prevention officer but it would seem they don’t care about that.
What happens in a world where you can’t stop anyone without getting done for assault, people do nothing because they’ll lose in court and go to jail
We live in a world where the law has been made complicated so that it can be used as a weapon. Best off just going on with your own stuff, why anyone would want to try and stop these people is beyond me. I'd get involved if someone takes an old persons handbag in the high street, but anyone steeling from the shops I just walk by.
@@jsteadman9262that means prices go up to cover the loss, so you pay in the end. Guess it's welfare for the criminals?
If a customer puts an item in their bag or pockets and i have seen this. I say directly to them i do hope you are going to pay for the item. This calls them out and more times than not they pay or give the item back. Love this channel❤.
I’m in a wheelchair, I go in with my bag for life and get my items(putting them in the bag) and then go to the register and pay for my goods. I found that the wheelchair trolleys are not good option. So the I use the bag for life with no intention of stealing the items.
And if you said that to me I’d say F-off & mind you’re own business..
Also a wheelchair user here and in the past without thinking I have just nipped into a shop and put items in my pocket because I spasm and items fall of my lap and they don't have a disabled trolley. If I'm buying allot I will get help but I'm I'm just in there for a sandwich or something I might without thinking how it looks pocket the item I told I go to the till.
It's only when thinking about it after I can see how it looks lol.
I did once nip into a shop grabbed a chocolate bar put it on my lap and spent about 15 minutes trying to find something, failed to find it so left and realised 10 minutes later the item was still on my lap unpaid for. Because I could not feel it I forgot about it. I went back to the shop and paid, no one even noticed I had took it. But since then I am more careful as I can see that looking to others like I beyond any doubt was intending to steal. This is just one reason why I often given benefit of the doubt to others allot and why I'm wary of rules and powers that assume guilt.
As for the question about tasers I think it's an absolute disgrace how we have zero rights to a defensive weapon on this country. Knife crime would drop allot of we let the scared and vulnerable just carry a less lethal option with them.
We offer them a basket to put the items in.
@@lindakeyes9353 Unergonomic cheap rubbish touched by dirty people.
Simple we return to the 1950-60's pre supermarket. Everything behind the counter and you have to ask. I remember a shop that had wire grill to shoulder height. No one was to be trusted but that also comes at a cost.
That probably works when there's virtually no choice what you can buy.
@@ROFT Yay! A Brexit benefit! 😉
Most supermarkets don't even seem to have anyone on the tills anymore, far easier to make people use self service.
This is the real point. The shops save more money on staff (compared with the shop counter system) than they lose to shoplifters. When shoplifting gets beyond that point the store owners revert to the system where everything is behind the counter, as one local off licence has done (liquor store to any North Americans)
Years ago I worked after school in a supermarket. I observed the following and the person was detained before leaving the store as it was apparent the unusual method of carrying the items left no doubt they were being shoplifted. A woman of large size in her fifties wearing an overcoat was seen placing several pounds of butter inside her coat and holding them in her armpits. 🤮
Did they appear in the reduced section?
What ever the solution it will impact the honest ones of us who shop and pay for our goods 😢
Having studied law at University, I know this well but whenever I mention it to anyone, they always say I'm wrong. Hard work
Crime pays for those that arrived here Via the black market with No passports, Such people are Special.
It's easy to prove if they are outside the store. Inside and their lawyers will have a fighting chance.
A taser? Pepper spray is not even legal to own. Only non lethal self defense tool allowed is a rape alarm. The law demands you be a helpless victim.
Correct.
How about a PA system in the store for "alarm situations" that can be triggered in such a case?
120dB sirens (like the rape alarms) is a very good incentive to leave the store asap. If the doors happen to lock as they try to flee it's just unfortunate. Then the smoke system triggers and now they can't see anything either.
@@1kreatureSilly fantasy.
@@1kreature It runs into problems with potential risk towards members of staff and other customers. Having such a loud noise 'may' cause someone to suffer hearing damage and locking doors 'may' trigger a violent confrontation towards the staff, all which cost significantly more in insurance claims and litigation than just leaving the shoplifters to do what they want. The actual loss is minimal and no one gets hurt. This is exactly why shoplifters are getting away with it because they know that interference is against company policies.
@@GunnyWombat Well, the smoke systems seem to do a great job so far. Density, UR Fog, Fog Security, Protect Fog etc. Lots of good videos from surveillance cams showing reactions to these.
Security teams in retail across the country have to prove with every case that they have followed A.S.C.O.N.E guidelines in order to not be accused of false arrest. Otherwise they face losing their license and disciplinary action from their employers.
While I agree with what you’re saying, the security guards don’t have much choice but to wait until the person attempts to exit - which would be seen on CCTV and mean the guard has followed all the steps.
Any other intervention before the person has tried to leave the store is classed as a ‘deter’ where they are made to give the items back.
Security guards are fearful of losing their licenses.
In my supermarket a well know shop lifter to the security guards was caught leaving the self checkout paid for most of the items but was taken back to the till and forced to pay for the stolen items maybe just more cost effective than the legal bill taking the shop lifter to court.
You can't do anything, even the cops don't do anything, so what do you expect these types of people to do 🤷
What are they nicking which would be of value?
@@123MondayTuesday Everything to these people is of value, they don't have such stock where they departed from, this is all new to them.
Dan: you are off course right as to the law.
You are wrong if you also consider the effect of corporate policy which actually sets the rules for apprehending crooks in chain stores. The fact is that the compensation for a wonderful arrest is sufficiently high; plus "wrongful arrest" means that the defence only have to find a "reasonable doubt" and the crook then starts a civil action for compo. Even if that action fails (because the burden of proof is lower at that stage) the costs are enormous, and the crook won't have any assets to cover any costs order.
This is the reality of living in the society where everything is decided on a cost analysis basis, not in practice by the law as applied in the courts.
It used to be different. Growing up in the sixties i am pretty sure that most shops would feel a moral duty to society to go for prosecution, but that changed with the ethos that "there is no such thing as society". We've been encouraged since the seventies to ask "what might it cost ME if i do the right thing"
And we are now reaping the consequences of that deliberate change in social attitudes.
Not if they conceal the goods upon their person. I have sat through courts cases where the defendant has been found guilty because of intent to steal by concealing goods about their person. It is ignorance to think that a person has to leave the store before they can be arrested. If you consume something that belongs to the store, you can be arrested for that is theft, no matter if the person says they intended to pay. Contract law comes into place
Shoplifters do not have to leave the store, i.e. theft by consumption, concealment, not paying, its a deliberate act.
No intention to pay.
You have to prove it though and that is made easier after they have passed the tills and are about to leave. If I put stuff in my bag and I am halfway around the shop, you have 0 evidence to prove anything. I used to fill my rucksack as I went around the shop, that way I knew everything would fit in and I would not have to carry extra bags. I then get to the till and take everything out.
Now what these people were doing is obvious and looks very different to when I do it, but it would still be harder to prove.
@@jsteadman9262 Nah, if they behaved like the guys did in the video, all you need is witnesses.
@@jsteadman9262 That's why a lot of shoplifters that are caught, generally want a trial by jury, if its on camera and it shows their intention, concealment etc, it can be deemed theft. I was taught at a very young age, don't tough unless you can pay, and taking sweets, food etc. and eating it, is theft by consumption if caught.
I was in Curry's and they told me every day they get people walk in and cut the wires on laptops and Dyson hairdryers and simply walk out with them and theyre told to let them because they're not insured to challenge them.
Actually witnessed this type of brazen looting the weekend from a corner shop
I seen it at my local Greggs the other day. Two chavs were walking past but then stared in the windows and decided to go in and took time to look through the sandwiches before deciding to take 4 without paying, no running in fact they stood outside eating them
Greggs have a policy of not taking any action on theives, that's why they get looted.
Yep, regulars up our high st help themselves every morning and afternoon. Staff told me they are not allowed to say anything.....when I asked can I also get mine for free, they just smiled.😑
Greggs are everyone's favourite .
Yeah greggs here gets robbed often, they have all the rolls right by the door though, people don't even have to enter the shop to take them, staff never do or say anything. Meanwhile next door at Costa, everything is behind locked glass cabinets yet they have a full time Security staff. No one takes anything from there, his only job is to stop people sitting on the chairs outside.
Thanks for that clarification. I recently spent sometime in Paris and I noticed that whilst supermarket shopping their, the majority of shoppers were placing goods straight into their own bags. I felt very uncomfortable doing this but realised that many of the supermarkets (e.g big ones like Lidl) had hardly any baskets if at all. It was clearly the norm. I would not place items in my bag in this country unless it was it a trolley as you’ve stated. I don’t know if this practice is normal in the rest of France or Europe more widely. At many self service areas, I needed a bar code (printed when goods were paid for) to open a gate to get out of the supermarket. Not something I’ve seen here yet.
In the Netherlands you also need the bar coder receipt to exit the service area. I have never heard that 'item in the bagging area ' nonsense message, I think the area is not actively scanned. However, an algorithm may occasionally randomly selected you for manual inspection of your items when you are about to pay. Also increasingly every self checkout has its own camera trained on it! It's a fear of mine to one day accidentally forget to scan something I put in the bag!
@@jamessmith1652 It's okay to forget.
The problem is that in most cases the Police are unlikely to arrest anyway, as their first question is always ‘did they leave the store?’ And the CPS are even more unlikely to prosecute. I’d hope the example featured here would be an exception to the rule.
Technically, they are actually committing burglary. The implied right of access given by the shop owner is for people to come in and browse and or buy things, so for the thieves that enter with the intention of stealing they are trespassing, as the shopkeeper would not permit access if they knew of their intention.
" A hand chopped off can steal no more. "
They avoid those Countries for a good reason
aaaah yes but In saudi Arabia, where they cut of hands for theft, nobody has to steal because every Saudi has a basic income, and a right to a home. So great Idea. lets do it the Saudi way.
@@PeterWildman-gm2gq Yes, because Saudi Arabia doesn`t allow mass immigration.
@@magnuscarter9195 So who does benifit from mass immigration.Not the workers. Must be the employers, landlords and finantial speculaters. maybe if we stop bombing their counties and stealing their commodities they will stop comming.
I lived in France for 9 years and lots of people put stuff in their own shopping bag and take their purchases to the till.
I work security and have detained people inside the store for theft and have had a successful prosecution
Security need to be able to detain, many companies don't want the aggro of a detained shoplifter anymore
S.c.o.n.e is for amateurs 👍
In the new world I have seen workers and owners use fists, clubs, firearms to stop criminals before leaving the stores and they don't seem get in trouble stopping the crooks. Now the people stealing are not just taking a bag of crisps but taking merchandise in bulk.
I think ppl think this because security staff apprehend thieves as they are about to leave the store with their stolen goods. They wait for them by the checkouts, having observed the thieves on camera. That's what I've observed anyway. In smaller establishments, it may well be different.
Yes. Spot on. If someone leaves a store with the goods, it’s just better evidence of dishonesty and an intention to deprive. That’s probably why some security staff wait until this point. It isn’t necessary, but it’s just better evidence that the offence has been committed.
Have you read the comments by security staff? Those comments explain exactly why it absolutely IS necessary.
BBB is correct that it's not necessary to get a conviction, but he and you are missing the point that corporate policy (by the stores and security companies and insurance companies) is that without Exit the costs of a possible failed prosecution make it non viable to go for an early detention.
This is the reality of a capitalist society where every organisation only considers the financial cost to themselves of any action.
And from the point of view of the individual security worker: they might lose their job if they detain someone who ends up not being found guilty: and not only that job but also lose their licence to work in the security industry. That's why they wisely stick to the ASCONE or SCONE criteria before draining someone.
I understand what you are saying. Company policies are based on financial considerations rather than law. It’s all a bit grubby really. Companies want (presumably) to prevent theft, but are unwilling to act against it for fear of financial loss in all but cast iron cases.
A police officer has protection in law if an arrest is made on reasonable suspicion. Security staff should have the same protection. Not dealing with someone cramming goods into their pockets is crazy. Security staff should have protection based on the facts, and their employers should have the moral courage to support them.
Thank you for correcting my misunderstanding, Dan. I, too, thought that the theft took place only after leaving the store. I guess that until someone does leave a store without paying for goods, some doubt as to their intent could exist, however slight. After leaving the store, it's more or less a slam-dunk.
Yes, though even then you could still claim that e.g. you were just popping out to check on your dog or whatever. That's why we need the "balance of probabilities"
Regina V McPherson 1972 was precedent defining case regarding appropriation - not having to have left the premises.
Every day occurrence in the local Co-op - usually the local school kids that think it's a game - I sometimes wait by the door and ask them if they're going to pay for the stuff they were just about to walk out with - it makes them think some times before they leave (albeit with fear of repercussions when they decide to retaliate)
The clinical application of four aspects of theft I accept BUT in reality the magistrates in my experience would not convict unless the suspect has been stopped either after passing through the tills or better still having left the shop. Intent is a very subjective thing to prove and even after they have left the shop gives best evidence of their intention to permanently deprive , even then an " oh sorry I forgot" would probably get them off the hook in today’s system. The plain fact of the matter is the legal process is such a time costly and inefficient dinosaur that offers little or no deterrent, most retailers cannot entertain the 'hassle' of the legal process not to mention the Police who are equally apathetic. Let us also not forget the offenders that are involved are more than likely carrying blades or worse and couldn't care less.
Londoners and other metropolitans vote for this state of affairs.
I'm one who thought they had to leave the shop before being accused of shoplifting ! That's how it is often portrayed on reality TV channels.
Although they don’t have to leave, proving intent is difficult if they don’t. “They looked a bit dodgy, as if they didn’t intend to pay” is far less convincing than “they walked out without paying and didn’t come back”. I suspect anyone trying to use the former would have their mind-reading abilities challenged.
Maybe that is the law but it isn't how security or staff are trained in any place I have ever worked. I had a booklet in Tesco to train staff with a system called S.C.O.N.E where the E is exit and until all 5 were ticked off you don't even try to intercept someone. This even bit me with a staff member who stole money from the office because the O for observation was failed. There was a gap in the camera coverage just outside the office door and the union managed to argue that she put the money down in that gap and someone else picked it up and tribunal upheld that version of events and I had to keep her. I transferred her out asap but nevertheless, she got away with it. We used the same system in the shop where if you broke visual contact with the thief for more than a second you would let them leave because if you stop them and they try to fight and you put them down and it turns out they put the vodka down out of sight, man, you're in a world of trouble.
Back in the mid 90s I had a menial job in a smallish supermarket we had a list of call numbers for use on the PA, so it would be something like "Staff announcement 7 isle 4" or something to deal with many things.
It's a sad state of affairs but i honestly can't see a solution other than either locking away all goods and serving each customer individually or allowing shop security to use greater force. The police are not doing enough or treating the offences with a great enough degree of seriousness. People foolishly think big corporations can afford the loss; they can, but they'll pass it right back to the customer with price increases for everyone.
Or they will just shut that branch down due to too much shrinkage, meaning everyone there loses their jobs and the local community loses the convenience of having that shop.
IF THEY LOCK IT AWAY , AT LEAST PEOPLE WILL BE EMPLOYED, We have almost perfect laws govening the use of force in the U.K. do you want a gun under every counter. just look at the us gun deaths.
Price increases for everyone except the thieves… in fact it directly benefits any thieves selling on their stolen goods because they get more money for them 😢
Or do what Amazon does in their physical shops, which is for every customer allowed to enter the shop to already have an app with a verfified payment card registered to it, then as a customer walks around the store and removes items from the shelf that item is automatically added to their basket within the app, and removed again if they put it back on the shelf. The shop would have to be phenomenally confident of the accuracy and reliability of the IT involved though, and also confident that customers would understand the system and not give up and go to a normal shop.
@@MrDannyDetail So you haven't heard that Amazon was employing staff in India to check the live footage because the technology still isn't there?
I've considerable experience with this. An Argos style shop where you ask for the items, pay for them then a person behind a counter gets them eliminates shop lifting.
That being said, the majority of big shops aren't that interested because they'll get the money back eventually through gradually increased prices or taking it out of a manager's bonuses. They'd lose more money to lost customers having greater security. Police do less with shops because the shops could do more to make it harder. Theoretically.
I used to do retail security in Scotland. I’m not sure if you have the same offence in England and Wales, but there is the offence of Concealment in Scotland and placing items in your pockets or even you own bag etc so that the item cannot be easily seen by shop staff/security is an offence and treated exactly the same as shoplifting. We had to constantly be vigilant of OAPs that quite often used to bring their own shopping bag that has a metal frame with wheels on it (don’t know quite what the actual name of it is) when they go around the shop picking up the items they want. Unfortunately there are old people that still want to steal, some because they can’t afford the items they want, some because they want the thrill of stealing and some because they’ve done this most of their lives and treat it as just a way of life.
One woman managed to push down three flat packages into her jeans. The police kept laughing on body cam as they managed to fish those all out. Still inside the store but of course those had to get tossed out. She intended to pay for cheaper meat.
She did not even use a loose coat to cover herself up so they noticed it fairly easily.
Three flat packages of expensive raw meat ... I cannot open Edit now, sorry.
But how do you know what their intention is if they haven't yet permanently deprived the owner of the goods. At what point do their intentions become clear enough to arrest? Can't they just say, not having left the store yet, I was on my way to the till?
In the States, some big city stores are just closing down. Next step - total anarchy.
Presumptions of theft before the act. You can put items to buy in your pockets or a non- recognised shopping bag. But you will attract attention of suspicion/Presumption that you may take goods without paying, and you may be asked to provide evidence before leaving the threshold of the store even if you have paid for goods. Co5id days, I used my pockets for reasons of hygiene, but only about 5 items at lunchtime. And yes, I paid for the goods and never got stopped, but I was a frequent buyer at the store/shop.
In China - a jaywalker, for instance, will have a CC Tv camera capture his/her picture; the picture is then posted nearby where the public can shame them, or warn them, perhaps. However, England thieves may not feel shame the same way as the Chinese. But maybe storekeepers could bar them entering their businesses?
They don’t have to leave the store first. The definition is permanently depriving. I think that can be proven by their actions not being in line with a normal and reasonable shopper.
Leaving the store with the goodies is the cherry on top.
Very true and one way to remove doubt is to ask them to show their means of payment ….
If I had a retail outlet in a place like London I would have an "airlock" entry and exit. Shoplifters would find themselves locked away out of harm's way until the police arrived.
But I would not have a store in such a place.
That said I have no sympathy for big box stores who creamed it during the pandemic fiasco at the expense of small businesses shut down by the criminal governments.
As they now close down and leave the unwanted migrant residents without a food supply it will be hard not to laugh as they fight among themselves, which they do.
Civilisation just does not take with some people.
you are correct but a thief leaving the store with concealed goods removes reasonable doubt. Staff apprehending thieves need the rules in bite sized chunks to deal with everyday happenings and can not consult with Lawers at that moment
I always thought it was theft if a person is concealing an item I always thought it's ridiculous to let a person leave the store as they will be running and get away
Regards. Haley
I am pleasantly surprised and gratified at your interpretations of the law of shop lifting (retail theft).
The police rarely attending if the theft is under 200 didn't help, unless it's changed in the last 5 years. When I was Store Manager at Maplin (RIP) they wouldn't even attend, and might pick up CCTV footage on USB later. I gave up reporting it, in my time off the shop floor reviewing the CCTV we'd be more likely to get another theft!
Some days I'd write off more stock than we sold, and I guess nationwide that helped the chains demise (along with the pricing versus Amazon etc).
I was food shopping in M&S and a shop assistant asked me to remove the shopping i was buying from the carrier bag in my hand as it could be construed as theft and she'd have to ask me to leave the store. I told her politely to fetch the manager if she wanted a discussion about it. She walked off! Glad to be proven to be basically correct...i dont need to take SUV sized trolley around a store to buy 5 items!
there are the baskets for the small shoppings 🙄 is it hard for you to follow the rules
@@46rrodriguez "follow the rules". hehehhehee
I actually watched someone shoplifting because they wanted to get arrested so that they could get help with their alcohol problem and refused to leave the shop until the police were called and when they turned up they flatly refused to arrest the shoplifter saying that until the thief had left the store they hadn't commited any crime!! and I heard this straight out of the police officers mouth so was he right or wrong? methinks that it's a bit of a grey area!
About 30 years ago that is how
Shoplifting worked you had to leave the store with the goods being unpaid for because that left the perpitator with no defence and any case against them being a slam dunk also it is a very easy way to get found guilty by association if you are seen just talking to someone who then decides to do a bit of the five finger discount afterwards so you have to be very careful who your friends are as they can land you in trouble
What in the case of Sainsbury's Smartshop? They encourage using your own bags after scanning in your phone. I just put straight into my rucksack, then pay the total at the self service till and walk out. Obviously different than filling up big bags with lots of the same product as in the video but it's a fine line on stopping before someone leaves the store.
In California, shoplifting is defined as the willful concealment of retail merchandise. It is not necessary to leave the store.
Isn't it true in the USA, if items accumulated under a certain price being stolen, police won't bother to even attend the robbery?
@@kippertrace5808 If so then it's different to the UK - here it doesn't matter the value being stolen; no police attendance unless there's a celebrity involved!
😂 I’ve just spent a year in SF - anything under 1k isn’t prosecuted- what are you on about? It’s chaos over there!
@dughuff8825 I know...I live in England
Police Service of Northern Ireland still attend every single reported theft shoplifting
Daniel, would you please answer the following: In a local supermarket to me there was a family who my beliefs are may have had a restaurant or were reselling produce such was the quantity involved. The supermarket would reduce prices on final date products by say 50% at midday, then at around 18.00 the items that hadn't sold would go down to small change prices, 10p to 50p for example, and there were lots of it. This family used to fill a trolley with 50% reductions around 17.00 onward or anything going out of date that hadn't already been reduced, and I'm talking on the first few occasions an entire trolley of fresh meat, especially mince. Then at around 18.30 hrs when most of the reduction hunters had left disppointed without much, the family would appear and ask the staff to reduce it to the small change amounts. It worked for them for a few days, that was until I challenged them and reported it to the manager stating I believed they were committing fraud. The fraud was by way of preventing the supermarket from selling the goods at the 50% discount by removing it from display thus preventing other customers from viewing it, in the knowledge, and with the intention, that they were then likely to obtain it for small change. A week later to their surprise I exposed them to all the regulars and they were rarely seen again. I understand they'd been banned by another supermarket in the next town for the same conduct. Your thoughts please.
I saw a guy doing almost exactly this with tins of cocktails in the walk-in drinks chiller in a large supermarket in Edinburgh. I told the member of staff on the self service tills what was happening and he headed off towards the back of the store. Not long after, he came back, and I asked him what was happening. He said he had spoken to his manager, and the answer was that since there was nobody on security that afternoon, that was that and the guy had been allowed to go on his way with (I estimated) £100 pounds worth of stock.
So there’s the problem: there was no way the police could get there in time to intervene, and the store reckons it would cost more to have someone on security than the value of the stock they would expect to have stolen.
Police can arrest on suspicion.
That means they themselves need not witness the crime. They can go on what someone has told them.
Citizens arrest,which is employed by security guards, is different.
You do need to be certain that an offence has been committed, and that the person you intend to challenge is the correct offender.
That's why security staff shouldn't apprehend someone based off second hand information.
Leaves them open to all sorts of tort / delict issues if they stop an innocent person.
@@geordiewishart1683 I would hope that distinction is not relevant. You seem to be saying that a member of staff could not stop someone lugging a bulging bag stuffed with goods - in this case, tins of cocktail - unless they had actually seen them take the goods from the shelves? That they couldn’t stop someone on the basis that had the person had a really heavy bag on their way into the store, they (the security guard) would have noticed, and since he didn’t see that, the dozens of tins of drink that they are now carrying out of the store without paying for them are being stolen?
I shop like this sometimes. If I have my backpack with me I might just use that and load the goods into it as I walk around. To me it just makes sense to - I already have it with me, no need for a trolley, and it's less painful to carry around. Never stolen anything.
Same here, also means I know everything will fit in the backpack too. There's lots of reasons someone may be doing that. That's why it needs to reach the point where they pass the tills before you can really accuse them of theft.
I've been shopping at my local Lidl for longer than most of the staff have worked there (more than a decade), so I know most of their faces and, I guess, most of them know mine.
I always use my own shopping bag (or, very occassionally, 2 bags) to collect the items I want to buy as I walk around that Lidl or the local Sainsbury's. I walk to the town because I don't have a motor vehicle, so filling my own shopping bag or bags tells me the max I'll be able to carry home.
I take the items out of my shopping bag(s) at the checkout and pay for them, then load them back into my shopping bag(s). I've done my shopping like that at my local Lidl for all of that ten years and more. Nobody has ever raised a question about it.
There've been a few occasions when I've loaded items I already bought at Sainsbury's onto the checkout conveyor at Lidl, but when the staff couldn't get the barcode to scan I realised I was trying to pay for it twice!
In all that time there have been just two incidents when I got home from Lidl and found I had an item that wasn't on my receipt - maybe worth a pound or two - I must have not seen it in the bottom of the bag and so failed to put it onto the conveyor. Next time I went shopping at Lidl, I took my receipt and the item (or it's box/package) that I'd inadvertently failed to pay for, explained what happened and asked the checkout operator to scan it onto my next shopping bill. They thanked me for my honesty and did as I requested. Maybe it's part of the reason nobody ever tells me I must use a trolly/basket.
In West Australia, the shops allow children to have a free piece of fruit ( ostensibly to teach them healthy habits ) but cynically maybe to stop them nicking the choc and lollies. I actually dont agree with it because it looks to the child like " well if I can take fruit why not something else"? I think its already confusing enough to children when all they see is people paying for it eith plastic- no real money as in the " old days". Hard to teach children about money when they dont actually see it.
They do that at Tesco here in the UK too
I’ve caught loads of shoplifters in my time as a retailer and the police have always asked did they leave the premises
"You can use reasonable force to detain a shoplifter in a situation such as this"
Is that true? Can you do a video elaborating on this please?
Another interesting video, thank you. 🙏
It appears obvious that supermarkets have all but abandoned the prevention of looting even when it’s openly committed on a large scale.
Why then have video cameras been installed at every self checkout? Are they hoping to mitigate their looting losses by prosecuting people who accidentally enter the incorrect number for loose onions or bananas they’re purchasing? Crazy world.
I believe I’ve read/heard that stores in Vietnam make shoppers leave their shopping bags at the front of store lockers to be retrieved after paying. No idea about practicalities but in principle it has merit. Shoplifting costs us all and the staff must be terrified.
My local shop puts screenshots of shoplifters, from their cctv, in the window under a sign saying "These people are banned from this shop".
which in itself is illegal, the shop owner could get prosecuted under Data Protection Law
@@AndyR072 I remember looking into this years ago and there is some loophole that lets them do it. I honestly can't remember now why but it is a technicality. I wonder now if it's because they don't publish their names. I honestly can't remember but the police use the shop frequently and it still continues to do so.
Interesting! Since covid I don't use baskets, dirty grubby things. I put my shopping into a reusable bag which I empty at the till. So I am a shop lifter...almost!
Automatic Locking Doors...Like some banks use..!
There is no "more dishonest" there is honest and dishonest and the issue is intent; someone can only have proven intent after they have left the store and here is the issue, when does it become intent as many people have put things in their bags or pockets and intended to pay for them and have either forgotten or just thought they have pulled numerous things out of a bag or pocket and unintentionally left something in; no intent. It is generally acepted by leaving the store that there is then intent as you have not paid for it and by leaving the store you have no intention of paying for it. Both the store, store security, and the police need something clear to work to and leaving the store proves all 5 elements.
In most cases of shoplifting it would be a reasonable defence to claim there was the intent to pay before leaving the store. It's not so easy to make such claims if someone is sweeping the contents of shelves into backpacks. It is better for retailers to adopt the policy of taking action while suspects are leaving or have left the store. That said, whole towns have been told by local police that they will not respond to shoplifting incidents unless there is some form of aggravation or the goods are valued above a certain amount, leaving some places having to implement the commercial equivalent of neighbourhood watch groups, warning when known shoplifters have come into the area, and distributing CCTV stills amongst themselves.
I knew this - and it has been easier to make a citizen's arrest since 1984 before which you could be in trouble if no offence was actually committed. Now reasonable suspicion suffices (as with a police arrest). The issue is safety. Shopkeepers should be encouraged trained (deploy - explain - call police) and supported to use something like BolaWrap remote restraint netting. Gov could help by making it's use in such cases a specific defence to a potential charge of assault / fale imprisonment.
Yes this is happening in the SF, CA also. Stores have closed down in areas this is happening. The police have to go after them and stop them.
In the age of "bring your own bag" I routinely go into shops with my reusable bag and will place items in it when I go for a "small shop". I do make a point of flattening the bag when I get to the tills however just to make sure the business knows I put everything I selected out to pay for it. That said, I don't go around dumping whole shelves into my bag either. -edit spelling mistake
Good post, informative, thanks for sharing. Now following you on X and on this platform.
It’s not permanent intention!! It’s permanently depriving. Come on Black Belt Barrister.
i work at Tesco, and no one does anything to stop them. even if the police catch them they just let them go after collecting details. everyone should just start steeling for a week, the government will start enforcing laws very quickly then.
A lot of these myths come from the fact many businesses take a "better safe than sorry" approach whenever they can and the only way to absolutely prove they didn't intend to pay is when they leave the store without doing so. It reminds me of another myth people often claim which is that it is illegal to give someone a bad job reference. This isn't true either, it's just 99% of companies avoid doing so as it could lead to them being sued for deformation if they can't provide evidence of the undesirable behaviour from the former employee. I think a lot of these myths come from company policies being misinterpreted as law over time
*EXACTLY THIS!* And you're right about the references, too.
I always thought they had to leave the store. Otherwise they could just argue they were going to pay for it before leaving.
Once behaviour like this becomes "normal" others will be encouraged to do the same. Needs a deterrent campaign by the Police to crack down on this.
There have been a few YT videos of cities in the US (Chicago was one) where the retailers have decided to close down their city centre stores and move to the suburbs. That's the long term consequence at risk here, which would inconvenience all of us.
Something being illegal is not the same as it being enforced.
I work for a large UK clothing retailer & as shop assistants we’re constantly told to look out for shop lifters & try to stop them. The store loses significant money through this & yet refuse to hire a loss prevention officer. I’ve taken merchandise off a few thieves but there are literally no consequences for these people & I certainly wouldn’t try it if I worked in London given the level of knife crime that is allowed to exist there. The same people just come back.
❤😂🎉Well. I am curious about making an arrest. It might be a dangerous thing to do . Without the threat of overwhelming force .
Yes exactly right, i did know the definition word for word, theft act 1968.
So my wife is a disabled powerchair user who cannot carry a basket or push a trolley. She puts her purchases in a string bag and then takes that bag to the till. Is BBB saying that she is potentially committing an offense?
No. If she went past the till, towards the exit yes, potentially.
If this continues perhaps we will return to shops serving people rather than self service. How much theft by shoppers takes place at Argos stores? Click & collect? Home delivery?
In the entire UK sadly.
There really aren't any penalties my wife and i were in a supermarket recently and a girl had a full trolley of items and she brazenly just strolled out the door without anyone stopping her.
Thankfully a store worker saw her when they went outside she was calmly loading the goods into her car.
All they could do was confiscate the items and tell her never to come back
Shame they didn't effect an Arrest Without Warrant and call the police.
Probably instructed not to by a corporate team too scared to try to protect their property.