Theft by Consumption

[lovemybabas]

I was recently thrown out of my local supermarket because I'd allowed my 18 month old daughter to eat a banana while in the trolley. I had intended to pay for it by asking the check out staff to put through a similar sized banana twice. I did explain this to the manager but he insisted that it was theft by consumption and threw us out of the store.

I realise now that perhaps I should have given her something with a bar code which could more easily be paid for later but really - to throw out a toddler and her 7 month pregnant mother?! I don't think it was necessary.

I've tried to look up 'theft by consumption' but can't find it anywhere. Is it really a thing and if so, could they really prosecute me for giving my kid a banana?!

[daffy654]

Not all supermarkets have self service tills DaisyMae,our local Morrisons removed it years ago as people were not paying for all of the shopping they had in their trolley.

[pink-kittens]

good idea daisymae, even with no self serv checkouts, you can still buy the banana before consumption - no stealing involved

[DaisyMae]

I agree daffy, but I was referring to the weighing machines which are in the fruit & veg part of the supermarket, I think most of them have these and they issue a bar-coded price tag which you are supposed to stick on the bag of whatever you have bought. You can then present the now empty banana skin with its barcoded sticker to the cashier at the till and she will scan it with the rest of your goods - she will also dispose of the skin for you if you want. This is not a crime because you have demonstrated that you had no intent to defraud so no mens rea.

[daffy654]

Sadly we don't have those weighing machines any more either.lol They now just weigh all loose fruit and veg at the tills. :(
I do understand what you mean though-most supermarkets have those machines.....just not ours.

[Mikkanjazza]

Oh dear, oh dear! This would make a really good question on a law exam paper, and the answers so far have covered most of the bases. You would have to discuss the extent to which a parent is responsible for the actions of their children, the difference between actus reus and mens rea, you would have to go into contract law with particular reference to shops - when is the contract of sale made (I seem to remember there was a case involving Boots the chemist back in the 50s which held that it is made at the checkout), and also that it is the shopkeeper who has the final say on whether there is a sale or not. You would dismiss as irrelevant the fact that the lady was pregnant, and also that she was thrown out (I assume not physically) of the shop - any shopkeeper has the right to refuse to serve anybody for any reason - or indeed for no reason. Like I say, not by any means straightforward.

[paraffin]

pink-kittens:
You clearly do not know what constitutes the offence of theft. We don't have kangaroo courts in the UK making it up as we go along.

This type of thing, unacceptable though it may be, is sadly commonplace in supermarkets, simply because some people cannot resist the temptation to have a nibble on the way round.

The real issue may be how to try to prevent it in the first place but I fear that would be virtually impossible given the fact that there are so many unmanned displays of food in supermarkets
giving us all the freedom to make our selections without having to queue up.

[paraffin]

Mikkanjazza:

The offence of theft requires the element of "mens rea" to be present during commission of the offence. That also applies to what's commonly called "shoplifting" or, to give it its correct title Theft(Shop).

Therefore, for the uninitiated on this thread, "mens rea" creates the intention to commit the offence and the prosecution have to prove this element. It is clear that in this instance "mens rea" was NOT present, nor could have been proven, hence the offence of "shoplifting" could not have been committed.

[lovemybabas]

Thanks again for your answers. I'd just like to clarify that I didn't expect preferential treatment because I'm pregnant in relation to the 'theft' issue - I just thought it was worth mentioning.

I did A level law a while ago and remember bits about 'mens rea' - this has formed the basis of my argument in the letter of complaint I have submitted - although it is mainly about the way the manager dealt with the whole situation than the 'theft'.

I'd also like to comment to buildersmate that my 'little wrong doing' of allowing my child to eat a banana couldn't possibly have had any consequences more severe than what has happened. However, you speeding is not just a 'calculated risk' to yourself but potentially life threatening to others around you. Perhaps your little wrongs are therefore slightly worse than mine and you should be more staggered by your own actions than mine x

[Mikkanjazza]

Paraffin - I assume we are saying that "I had intended to pay for it" means there was no mens rea? Not sure about that as a general principle, but in any event this is what I was on about when I said that contract law comes into it. At the point at which the appropriation took place, there was (in strict legal theory) no guarantee that there was going to be a sale, and without a sale, then whether or not you intended to pay for it becomes immaterial.

[factor-fiction]

If bananas are sold by weight how could you pay at the checkout for a single eaten banana - how would they know what to charge?

[tinyterror]

Oh dear , I always open a packet of croissants and eat one on my way round Asda and no one cares.Im not going to stop . It was madness they threw you out , havn,t they got bigger fish to fry/ Its a joke

[caththecrazy]

Paraffin you say

"which she says she intended to do, instead of having her ejected? He exceeded his authority. "

How did he exceed his authority in throwing her out of the shop? I think it is up to the manager if he wants to eject people from the store.

I agree he exceeded his authority by saying she had commited theft by consumption but anyone can be asked to leave a store.

I've never given my 2 boys anything to eat in the supermarket and never would.

Perhaps people don't like hearing other people's children screaming but that is no reason to give a child something which you haven't paid for, although I don't think lovemebabas hasn't said her daughter was screaming.

[Knobbenda]

I'm leaving