Ring Theft

[Amina516]

http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/245149

An article from a local paper in my area.

A woman is being charged with theft b/c she found a ring @ walmart (that wasnt part of the merchandise) and did not return it.

I mean, she didnt do the morally right thing, but to charge her with theft? IDK how I feel about that.

Thoughts?

Ive also noticed that the little article doesnt mention if she saw it fall off the guys hand or not, just that she took it.

[jackfaire]

I am torn. When I was a kid being brought up I was taught if you found something in say a park and there was no one around and it is something pricey like a ring you turn it into the police and after a certain amount of time it is yours.

However in a store or other place where you can turn it in you do so and you get it if no one claims it within a certain amount of time.

Again it comes down to morality but at some point that is what law boils down to. Just means we need to refine what we define as theft.

She was clear on the fact it wasn't hers and she was in a place where there was a good possibility that the person who lost it would come back looking for it.

She took it either knowing these facts or being willfully ignorant of these facts.

[BroomJockey]

"Finders keepers, losers weepers" is not a defence outside Kindergarten Court. Theft is the taking of property which isn't yours. This *is* theft by the strictly legal definition.


That said, I think charges are a bit much if she had given it back when confronted. However, in this case, she pawned it. That's fencing stolen property. That's up a notch. She'd done wrong. Charges ahoy!

[crashhelmet]

One of the comments on the site brings up a good point. If I find a $20 bill on the sidewalk and pick it up, did I just commit theft? Are kids committing theft every time they pick up a penny or a nickel from the ground?

In addition to that, should the pawnshop be charged or at least investigated with aiding and abetting a crime? They paid $52 for the ring valued at $1371. I know they pay cheap, but that's not even 4% of the value. Pawnshops are usually trained at judging the value of jewelry.

What the article doesn't say, however, is how much time lapsed between when he lost the ring and when she found it. Was she directly behind him in line and watched it fall, waiting to scoop it up?

As much as I'd like to see this woman taught a lesson, I think that what she did is a morality issue, not a criminal issue. At least from the evidence given thus far.

CH

[Mr Slugger]

You know I'm somewhat up in the air on this one because yes it was an expensive ring, but obviously she didn't know the value of it, because she accepted so little for it. And while yes I think it would have been nice of her to bring it to lost and found at the same time like crashhelmet said I wouldn't want any person who picked up a $20 to be arrested for theft. But money is money you know what the value is. And I mean if I found say under $50 in a store I'd pocket it. Anything higher I'd bring to lost & found and make sure it gets returned to me if no one claims it. But a ring, I mean it could be junk jewelry, it could be real, etc.

In this case I think the women who found the ring was in the wrong, but like I said I think that arresting people and charging them with theft for taking something they found in a public place could be a slippery slope, because where do you stop?

[BroomJockey]

Like I said, for me, it's that she took it, then sold it. She removed the possibility of simply giving it back, which is what sets it apart from finding a $20 on the ground. It's the selling it that makes it worthy of pressing charges, imo.

[jackfaire]

In this case I think the women who found the ring was in the wrong, but like I said I think that arresting people and charging them with theft for taking something they found in a public place could be a slippery slope, because where do you stop?

To me it is as simple as here is property I know isn't mine I am going to take it knowing someone lost it and then I am going to sell it. This is theft period end of story.

If you break the law you should be charged with a crime. Yes I think there are extenuating circumstances but I don't think finding something in a public place and then attempting to profit off of it is one.

Charges fit because it went from innocent, "oh woops someone dropped this pretty ring" to guilty "oooooo money"

[Amina516]

Charges fit because it went from innocent, "oh woops someone dropped this pretty ring" to guilty "oooooo money"

Soooo..if she had simply kept the ring for herself...no theft charges should have been filed?

[jackfaire]

Soooo..if she had simply kept the ring for herself...no theft charges should have been filed?

Actually that would be profiting from her find so no charges then too.

Unless she made the attempt to locate the owner which given she was in a store with a centralized location someone would return to for lost items it was reasonable to expect her to make such an attempt.

Edit:

We already do legislate morality. We decide what is or isn't against the law based more on what we feel is right and wrong than anything else. As long as the law is the law we should all abide by it or work to change it depending on our feelings on it.

[blas87]

Maybe this can help...

I try to do the right thing....

If I find a wallet or something expensive at work (we've had lost rings many, many a time because we aren't allowed to wear them, so sometimes people wear them on a chain around their neck or try to put them other places and lose them) or even elsewhere, I will turn it in and do my best part to try to find the owner. That's what I would want if I were the one who lost the item(s).

If I found money on the ground, and no sign of anyone who dropped it or didn't see anyone looking for it, then it's mine. That's about it, though....I wouldn't attempt to keep jewelery because I can't even really wear it most of the time and I figure most jewelery has a meaning behind it to the owner.

But if the money is in a wallet or a purse, then no....turn it in.

[Slytovhand]

So.. who missed the bit a the end that said she was charged with

theft of property lost or mislaid.

Thus - illegal!

[DesignFox]

In this case, I think she should be dealt criminal charges. It sounds like she saw the guy drop the ring, and she didn't bother to try and return it, or even turn it into lost and found if she was unsure. She grabbed it up and sold it!

This is nothing like finding a random bill on the ground. Afterall, if there aren't any people around, there really isn't any way of identifiying who owns that single dollar bill or coin.

But if you can identify who it belongs to, or you see someone drop it, you certainly have an obligation to return it (or at least attempt to).

I saw someone drop 50 bucks at the food store, once. While most passersby were ignoring the situation, I took action. I picked it up, ran over to the person (they were obviously in a rush and not paying attention) and handed it back to them.

I don't make a whole lot of money. Losing $50 would be a big deal for someone like me. I would HOPE someone else would do the same for me if the roles had been reversed!

[Amina516]

So.. who missed the bit a the end that said she was charged with

Thus - illegal!

LOL! I totally missed that.

You win.

[lordlundar]

It's interesting the money thing has been brought up, because I have a question to ask everyone here and answer immediately, no looking it up or it's cheating:

Name all the serial numbers on your bills that you have on you at this moment.

Can't do it, can you? Most people can't because they don't bother. And therin lies the problem with the comparison. Apart from the serial number, you cannot differentiate one $20 bill from another (yes, I know about the different prints, but those fall in the realm of collectors, who also track serial numbers) So unless there is identification attacked to the money designating a single owner, finding the original owner of said money is going to be borderline impossible. That's why in small dollar amounts, most police adopt a "finder's keeper's" policy, because tracking it down is not worth the resources.

(that said, if ID can be attached to the money, regardless of the amount, it can still be considered theft)

Most rings on the other hand, is unique, and given the price tag for it, would have distinguishing features that would make locating it easy to do. so no, the comparison is not nearly as close as most people would like to think.

[jackfaire]

(that said, if ID can be attached to the money, regardless of the amount, it can still be considered theft)

I admit most people would consider it morally ambiguous but I wouldn't if we are talking a large sum (not a bill here or there) then yes it is theft. Screw the serial numbers you turn the money in if someone comes up and says I lost X amount of money and it matches the amount clearly the money is theirs. You don't advertise how much money it was.

When after a reasonable amount of time no one identifies it then the finder keeps it.