Dan White Bad form to alter quoted posts in that way to make a point, especially when you are wrong and HtH is correct. Oh look, a MongFest... Go on then, seeing as HtH hasn't got the bottle to back up his erroneous statement, you go and prove me wrong. I'm happy to state it as fact based on five years of watching scumbags try it on a daily basis, CCTV footage, and guidance from the Police who had their own station within the shopping complex because there were that many idiots getting caught. Pitching that against the diligently researched word, "Rubbish" from HtH, I feel completely comfortable in maintaining that he's full of poo.
Firstly, as has already been pointed out, the act of theft has already occurred at the moment the suspect dishonestly takes the goods with the intention of stealing them. This has been established in case law, which I am sure those with greater knowledge and access to the resources would be able to quote if they wished. I can't do that because I wouldn't know where or how to search for it.
Speeders are SAFER drivers 623Wow, that's the best you can manage after two days thinking about it? You really are... adequate, aren't you? Explain to me then, a mere mortal why you believe that a department store is not...
Secondly, as has also been mentioned, the difficulty with convictions is not a legal one, given that theft *has* occurred, but an evidential one. That is the reason why best practice has been established as to when and where to challenge the suspected thieves, in order to have the best possible chance of a conviction.
Lastly, have you ever considered what would happen if you challenged someone furtively stuffing things down their trousers, and they admitted trying to steal it? Do you suppose they couldn't be prosecuted?
-- Rob
Speeders are SAFER drivers 624Plenty? I can think of one of two. I would say that that means that the limit in question is wrongly set, if it is true that normally a speed higher than the...
