McDonald's customer accused of putting soda in water cup charged with robbery

[LaMidRighter]

well actually this is what I think...screw the soda....the guy tried to drive over someone to escape with a soda...this kid has big problems

who does that?

not a normal kid

That is exactly why I think the kid needs to be slapped down hard. He put getting away with petty theft above the life and well being of another human being, no one was critically injured this time but the kid could really hurt someone next time. That was a stupid and dangerous decision that needs a solid consequence.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Our police department here wouldn't take the time to deal with something that petty. I can't even get them to deal with credit card fraud for a lot more money.

Then you just identified the first part of the problem where you live. It is the job of the police to investigate and if there is probable cause that crime was committed, then arrest the suspect and then turn the case over to the state to prosecute. If your police are making judgments as to which crimes are punishable and which crimes are not punishable, then that is the first problem that must be addressed. If that happened to me in my area, I would go to the state's Attorney General with a complaint, and of that didn't work, I would go the US DOJ. The police do not have the power or authority to determine criminality, only the power to determine probable cause to suspect that a crime was either committed by an individual or not committed by that individual - in most cases, all that takes is a statement from a witness to a crime or an alleged victim of a crime.

 

[Southern Dad]

Then , he WAS NOT charged with a felony for stealing a soda :shock: , so why indicate he was ?? :roll:

He was charged with the felony of robbery. The theft of the soda became a robbery when force was used. The theft is part of robbery. Without the theft it would be aggravated assault.

 

[Captain Adverse]

There is also a charge that can be applied in many states of "theft of service" which is an automatic felony, it can be anything from a "dine and dash" to making a protest by filling carts and leaving the produce to force staff to restock in mass quantities(as MDA tried to do to Kroger), and this can apply because they went to the drive thru window first and did receive service, only to try to cheat the company by going in and stealing the other produce. Two of the guys tried to pay up, it was the one guy who did the most damage, he deserves an extended time out in a maximum security prison but the other two are going to end up nailed on accomplice charges, they should slap their buddy stupid for that.:doh

That depends on how competent their legal counsel is. IMO any defense attorney worth his salt will get any charges for the two passengers dropped.

 

[Southern Dad]

That depends on how competent their legal counsel is. IMO any defense attorney worth his salt will get any charges for the two passengers dropped.

Not really. If you are part of a crime, you get to face the charges, too. Just like the wheel man facing murder charges when someone is shot in an armed robbery.

 

[Chomsky]

Is the grape yours or the stores? Did you buy it before you ate it? Do you also sample the fresh baked buns and rolls? How about the barbeque chicken - rip off a leg just to see if the seasoning is to your liking before you buy?

Various places where I shop, I ask the produce manager or other staff member before I would be so bold as to assume that I can sample the product without paying.

From where I come from and from the parents who raised me, that's just not acceptable. The alternative, if there are no consequences, is increasingly abhorrent behavior being excused and/or accepted. Besides, that lost product is a cost to the vendor and as such becomes a cost past down to the consumer - may seem miniscule to you, but it adds up over time.

But the issue in your post is not one of cultural or ethical consideration, but: "Is this a felony offense, as you claim"?

It's your assertion that it is.

I claim it's not.

It even may be appropriate behaviour - read below.

Since you admit you have tasted but did not purchase. If everyone did that, is that a cost the business should absorb?

The reason I asked the question was to get a better understanding of your position. It seems your ok with theft, as long as it is not a large quantity or cost. McD did provide the cup and free water. Seems the idiots decided to take advantage of McD.

imo, felony charges for stealing a soda, not so much.
using a vehicle to possibly injure someone, felony charges may be correct.

The kid made the decision to escalate the situation. Decisions do have consequences.

Well, that's an interesting question.

I've tasted grapes with produce personal in the area, and even commented on the quality to them, so it would seem my fruit store (privately owned) has no qualms with this. Perhaps yours does?

But you do bring-up an interesting point of how far should this extend. I've never considered it for more than grapes, and like you I'm appalled at people that would intentionally scam a store or go around nibbling-on or opening the food. But this type of grape shopping was standard business ever since I can remember as a kid, done back when it was neighborhood privately owned fruit stands, usually Italian or Greek owned. I never remember there being a problem, and it only applied to grapes. Perhaps it's cultural? (Southern Italian)

 

[Captain Adverse]

Not really. If you are part of a crime, you get to face the charges, too. Just like the wheel man facing murder charges when someone is shot in an armed robbery.

Not the same thing at all. :no:

A wheelman is both a co-conspirator and an active participant in the totality of the crime.

Innocent passengers in a vehicle where the driver (who is in control) takes an unexpected action are another thing entirely.

It is more likely than not that they will be asked to provide witness testimony for the prosecution, and I would strongly advise accepting the offer or if that was not offered then I would suggest it were I their defense attorney.

 

[cabse5]

Then you just identified the first part of the problem where you live. It is the job of the police to investigate and if there is probable cause that crime was committed, then arrest the suspect and then turn the case over to the state to prosecute. If your police are making judgments as to which crimes are punishable and which crimes are not punishable, then that is the first problem that must be addressed. If that happened to me in my area, I would go to the state's Attorney General with a complaint, and of that didn't work, I would go the US DOJ. The police do not have the power or authority to determine criminality, only the power to determine probable cause to suspect that a crime was either committed by an individual or not committed by that individual - in most cases, all that takes is a statement from a witness to a crime or an alleged victim of a crime.

Like Baltimore?

 

[Southern Dad]

Not the same thing at all. :no:

A wheelman is both a co-conspirator and an active participant in the totality of the crime.

Innocent passengers in a vehicle where the driver (who is in control) takes an unexpected action are another thing entirely.

Yes, they will need to try and convince the jury of that. Picking the wrong friends has consequences. My now adult former step-son was in a car one time when the driver decided to run from the police. Five people in the vehicle. Four screaming for him to stop, the driver thinking he was a Grand Theft Auto champion. My former step-son punched him in the face when he slowed for a turn, and pulled the emergency brake up. He lost a friend that day, and narrowly avoided jail.

 

[LaMidRighter]

That depends on how competent their legal counsel is. IMO any defense attorney worth his salt will get any charges for the two passengers dropped.

Possibly, that would depend on the DA's office, if they pursue charges it's up to the judge and jury to decide if that should stick. Legally they are culpable as they got in the car knowing he just committed the crime and attempted to escape, had they refused to get in the vehicle they would be clean as a whistle. I don't think the other two deserve the charges as they did pay up but legally they are in trouble due to accomplice charges, the guy who escalated absolutely deserves to get hammered.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Not the same thing at all. :no:

A wheelman is both a co-conspirator and an active participant in the totality of the crime.

Innocent passengers in a vehicle where the driver (who is in control) takes an unexpected action are another thing entirely.

It is more likely than not that they will be asked to provide witness testimony for the prosecution, and I would strongly advise accepting the offer or if that was not offered then I would suggest it were I their defense attorney.

Agreed. Along with that testimony they need to assert that they had no prior knowledge that their buddy was going to attempt to hit the manager and they were innocent parties in that. It was probably done to be a joke initially and that is the part they need to establish, the initial intent and they need to show that they did in fact make their part right to segregate themselves from that action and hopefully plead out.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Yes, they will need to try and convince the jury of that. Picking the wrong friends has consequences. My now adult former step-son was in a car one time when the driver decided to run from the police. Five people in the vehicle. Four screaming for him to stop, the driver thinking he was a Grand Theft Auto champion. My former step-son punched him in the face when he slowed for a turn, and pulled the emergency brake up. He lost a friend that day, and narrowly avoided jail.

Smart move on his part, that was a major felony in the making.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Yes, they will need to try and convince the jury of that. Picking the wrong friends has consequences. My now adult former step-son was in a car one time when the driver decided to run from the police. Five people in the vehicle. Four screaming for him to stop, the driver thinking he was a Grand Theft Auto champion. My former step-son punched him in the face when he slowed for a turn, and pulled the emergency brake up. He lost a friend that day, and narrowly avoided jail.

From the report only the driver was charged.

Moreover:

The customers parked and walked into the store before dumping out the water and pouring soda into the cups, KHBS/KHOG-TV reports.

The manager spotted the three and told them to return the soda. Only 18-year-old Cody Morris refused, police say.

They were clearly not involved in any theft, and there is nothing in the report (so far) that shows they were willing accomplices in his motor-vehicle assault.

IMO there is little likelihood the passengers are going to face charges. If they do, my original response stands...any competent attorney can get them dropped or dismissed. :shrug:

 

[Chomsky]

I get the overall sentiment here Chomsky but think forward a bit. This kid tried to game the system, he showed a willingness to cheat, use a loophole, all while engaging in criminal activity over a cheap item. I think they did this just to do it, since it was obvious two of them had the means to pay up when caught, the other one decided to defend his crime and escalate.

When someone shows that mindset they well should be scrutinized by an employer. If I were to be a hiring manager and I see the kid went to prison for something like this I have to think "is he going to try to figure out how to steal inventory to sell to customers or other folks to make supplemental income", if he were to be a nurse, with access to the medicine cabinet is he going to raid it to either get a fix or sell to someone who needs one thus costing the hospital money and risking the DEA license to carry the needed meds. I would further have to think about whether I would want to rent to this kid "Will he tear something up and just hide it?". The fact is the charges aren't what are going to ruin this kid's chances but rather his attitude.

I don't believe in creating pariahs with criminal convictions over non-violent or justified actions. This kid started it and escalated it with no regard for the innocent manager's well being. I saw that someone mentioned unlawful detainment a bit earlier, not the case, the kid wasn't suspected of theft but caught red handed, in situations like that the manager was well within rights to detain.

You make some fair points, but I still maintain this situation is way overblown, especially in light of the age of the perp.

Unless, there's more to this story than meets the eye of course.

However, if so there have been no charges substantiating that.

You seem like a reasonable guy though. A manager would probably offer you the same chance that these kids were offered, pay the $X that the grape cost and no harm, no foul. Most reasonable people would just say, "no problem" as two of the teens did. The big problem is the one who took it to the level of robbery by escalating to force.

A manager would offer me a chance? While he or his employees are looking-on and I compliment them as I complete my purchase? Perhaps tasting a grape prior to purchase is an accepted or tolerated practice in some places other than those frequented by the complainers in this thread. I've never had a problem with it, neither has my grocer, but it would seem some here are judging behaviours that are beyond their purview.

 

[LaMidRighter]

You make some fair points, but I still maintain this situation is way overblown, especially in light of the age of the perp.

Unless, there's more to this story than meets the eye of course.

However, if so there have been no charges substantiating that.

The manager could have overlooked the theft but my guess is he wanted to make an example and this could have been a pervasive problem or he may have wanted to cut off any other potential thefts, inventory control is part of his position. The part that makes this dangerous is that the kid would be willing to injure another person or worse to get away with less than a dollar's worth of soda, he needs to face something and I think robbery because of the escalation to force or theft of service are adequate. I would say attempted manslaughter might be overkill even if legally available.

A manager would offer me a chance? While he or his employees are looking-on and I compliment them as I complete my purchase? Perhaps tasting a grape prior to purchase is an accepted or tolerated practice in some places other than those frequented by the complainers in this thread. I've never had a problem with it, neither has my grocer, but it would seem some here are judging behaviours that are beyond their purview.

I think most places will overlook a small item or two because they are such a miniscule cost that it won't effect the overall margin. Some places may have a zero tolerance but I have never seen it.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Like Baltimore?

Sure. Like Baltimore. However it is unrealistic to assume that we can require a police officer to go into areas where their actions are used against them by both the people that live in that area and the city that employs them. They do not have to put their lives at risk in areas of the city that obviously do not want their help. They have the choice to do so or not. In Baltimore, there are neighborhoods that hate the police (in fact many that live there say "F" the police) so they are getting what they want.

To apply what I stated to Baltimore, we know why the police are doing what they are doing. That is totally different than what I was responding to that fmw stated that his police would not even investigate "something that petty" and wouldn't even investigate "credit card fraud." The way to address that is to make it clear that if the police are wanted and are asked to come into the area to enforce the paw, the people in that area must stand up to the criminal element and the city must support the efforts of the police. The police should not be given carte blanche but must neither be restricted from protecting themselves and being allowed to use adequate force to subdue criminal suspects - which includes tazering runners, using police dogs, using more than one officer to hold down suspects that are resisting, and even shooting people that present a threat to the life of the officers - all of which are opposed by many that observe those actions being taken across this country.

So yes, even in Baltimore, just not exactly the same methods of doing so because they are not the same problem.

 

[Chomsky]

Yes, they will need to try and convince the jury of that. Picking the wrong friends has consequences. My now adult former step-son was in a car one time when the driver decided to run from the police. Five people in the vehicle. Four screaming for him to stop, the driver thinking he was a Grand Theft Auto champion. My former step-son punched him in the face when he slowed for a turn, and pulled the emergency brake up. He lost a friend that day, and narrowly avoided jail.

Your lucky you got a smart independent kid. Other's might've begrudgingly dealt with it. Even others may have encouraged the driver.

But I must play devil's advocate, and please do not be personally insulted by my doing so: Do you really accurately know what went down in that car that night?

Kids can be pretty good at fashioning the narrative to present themselves in the best light.

Not saying this happened, but it always needs to be considered & vetted by parents.

 

[Chomsky]

The manager could have overlooked the theft but my guess is he wanted to make an example and this could have been a pervasive problem or he may have wanted to cut off any other potential thefts, inventory control is part of his position. The part that makes this dangerous is that the kid would be willing to injure another person or worse to get away with less than a dollar's worth of soda, he needs to face something and I think robbery because of the escalation to force or theft of service are adequate. I would say attempted manslaughter might be overkill even if legally available.

Actually, I was the individual that you earlier unknowingly referenced concerning seeing additional charges due to the narrative.

Yeah, something's up here. The business supplied narrative would seem to demand further charges, yet none were forthcoming. So I'm a bit confused, and suspect charging the kid with a burglary felony, knowing it will likely pea-down to a misdemeanor, was the best way to handle the entire mess.

I think most places will overlook a small item or two because they are such a miniscule cost that it won't effect the overall margin. Some places may have a zero tolerance but I have never seen it.

Come to think of it, do I remember your posting a thread last year concerning your working experience and knowledge in this very subject?

Someone did. If so, thanks for sharing your practical opinion here, and then.

But now, here's an additional scenario: If a customer in a grocery store opens a container of food, eats some while shopping, but pays for it at the register, can I assume they stayed within their legal rights, as obnoxious as their behaviour may be?

 

[LaMidRighter]

Actually, I was the individual that you earlierunknowningly referenced concerning seeing additional charges due to the narrative.

Yeah, something's up here. The business supplied narrative would seem to demand further charges, yet none were forthcoming. So I'm a bit confused, and suspect charging the kid with a burglary felony, knowing it will likely pea-down to a misdemeanor, was the best way to handle the entire mess.

The biggest thing is the video evidence. If they have solid proof of the escalation that will be studied and applied for charging and sentencing. I think his friends made a dumb move by getting into the car but they probably didn't have prior knowledge that he would endanger the manager. He was probably just trying to scare the manager off by backing up so manslaughter may not apply but legally it could, my opinion is that would be overkill. Obviously, if one is breaking the law, their story will have less weight in the eyes of the court and especially the jury, this one is pretty serious though with the escalated escape attempt.

Come to think of it, do I remember your posting a thread last year concerning your working experience and knowledge in this very subject?

Someone did. If so, thanks for sharing your practical opinion here, and then.

I don't remember that. The only thing I ever witnessed was from my younger years in the restaurant business, one of my coworkers had a dine and dash pulled on him and he was going to be stuck paying for an over 200$ ticket. Fortunately I was a senior in high school, it was a prom group and I recognized the group, brought a yearbook and identified one of the folks. It was explained to the kid that he was up for a felony TOS charge and he peed himself while his parents found the money to keep his sorry little butt out of trouble.

But now, here's an additional scenario: If a customer in a grocery store opens a container of food, eats some while shopping, but pays for it at the register, can I assume they stayed within their legal rights, as obnoxious as their behaviour may be?

From what I understand it is theft only after you exit without paying. If you ate 20$ worth of food and paid it before you leave you are legal, if you just walk out, theft. I personally think it is rude to do that and IIRC most stores hate when customers do it but if you pay that is such a minor gripe.

 

[Chomsky]

I don't remember that. The only thing I ever witnessed was from my younger years in the restaurant business, one of my coworkers had a dine and dash pulled on him and he was going to be stuck paying for an over 200$ ticket. Fortunately I was a senior in high school, it was a prom group and I recognized the group, brought a yearbook and identified one of the folks. It was explained to the kid that he was up for a felony TOS charge and he peed himself while his parents found the money to keep his sorry little butt out of trouble.

Ah, then I mistakenly confused you with another member.

We had a loss-prevention specialist open a thread for a Q & A session. It started pretty interestingly, but only a few took him up on the offer.

 

[fmw]

Then you just identified the first part of the problem where you live. It is the job of the police to investigate and if there is probable cause that crime was committed, then arrest the suspect and then turn the case over to the state to prosecute. If your police are making judgments as to which crimes are punishable and which crimes are not punishable, then that is the first problem that must be addressed. If that happened to me in my area, I would go to the state's Attorney General with a complaint, and of that didn't work, I would go the US DOJ. The police do not have the power or authority to determine criminality, only the power to determine probable cause to suspect that a crime was either committed by an individual or not committed by that individual - in most cases, all that takes is a statement from a witness to a crime or an alleged victim of a crime.

It happens everywhere, your home town included. Better get that appointment with the AG.

 

[Southern Dad]

Your lucky you got a smart independent kid. Other's might've begrudgingly dealt with it. Even others may have encouraged the driver.

But I must play devil's advocate, and please do not be personally insulted by my doing so: Do you really accurately know what went down in that car that night?

Kids can be pretty good at fashioning the narrative to present themselves in the best light.

Not saying this happened, but it always needs to be considered & vetted by parents.

Since it was a deputy that I know that was involved, I've seen the dash cam. In addition, there were four kids whose version of the story lined up. I am actually not sure that the driver even gave a different version when I think about it. The whole reason that he ran? He hadn't paid a ticket and thought his license was suspended. It wasn't. He got probation.

 

[CanadaJohn]

But now, here's an additional scenario: If a customer in a grocery store opens a container of food, eats some while shopping, but pays for it at the register, can I assume they stayed within their legal rights, as obnoxious as their behaviour may be?

I see this frequently, when shopping, particularly when a mother is shopping with one of more of her children that are somewhat unruly or making a lot of noise. The mother picks up a bag of cookies or chips or some small snack item and gives it to her child to eat while she shops and then she brings the empty or partially empty package to the register and has it scanned and pays for it. While it's not the best of behavior, it's similar in my view to eating at a restaurant and paying after you finish eating - as long as you pay for what you consume before you leave the store you haven't committed any crime.

And as for my earlier comments about the grapes example, I was speaking of the issue as a matter of principle and not one of specifics. I highly doubt that any store owner would call the police if you sample a grape. But I can honestly say that I have seen a store manager ask a customer to leave the store after she sampled several different items in the produce department and didn't stop when asked to.

Seeing this kind of activity has led me to never shop at Costco on a weekend when there are hordes of freeloaders clogging the aisles basically having lunch or dinner sampling all the products that are being promoted. Whole families come in and line up at the pigs in a blanket counter for multiple helpings, before moving on to the pizza or some other display - saves having to feed the kids at home or at McDonald's.

 

[_Sal]

This is a kid of privilege, which is his most prized asset. If the objective is to ensure this **** doesn't go anywhere, then the biggest deterrent is to remove all those privileges while staying in the community where he can e judged by his peers. Make him do community service for a year or two, in some disgusting job like washing dishes in a soup kitchen. I suspect it will be hard to find a girlfriend when you have to mop the school floors everyday.

To his teen peers, 'prison' is something on TV. It will happen, he will disappear and mostly be forgotten, but the community will have gotten its revenge; or not. When know that prison sentences, especially felonies, simply make more bad guys and would certainly expand his sphincter muscle.

Irony is that the Vancouver Sun yesterday published an extended piece about how the prison system creates criminals in Canada and elaborates on how effective was the sentences [largely community service] were for the 2010 Vancouver Rioters, however I can't seem to find it on line

I would be fine with community service...serving up food in a shelter for 8 hours a week for x-number of months would be an awesome experience for this little s**t. No car privileges during that time except for any benefiting the community.

 

[Southern Dad]

I would be fine with community service...serving up food in a shelter for 8 hours a week for x-number of months would be an awesome experience for this little s**t. No car privileges during that time except for any benefiting the community.

Laws are not written for individual cases. This individual is facing very serious time, as he should. Besides why subject the shelter residents to this jerk?