How can my friend prove he didn't swap item purchased from Circuit City?

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Corn
The cops will dust the TV for prints and match against your friends prints. Problem solved.

And how are they going to match them? To have them on file he has to have been arrested previously and without his consent or the order of a judge they won't get a copy of his prints to compare it with.

During an investigation of theft they could detain him. All they have to do is sweat him or arrest him and get his prints. Polce can arrest or investigate without a warrant.

Only if they have probable cause. That they do is debatable in this case. If arrested (and if innocent), the wise move in this case would be to simply tell the truth and no more. Cops do not keep their promises about being nice to people who tell them what they want to hear.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: wje

They most certainly CAN do something, its called RETAIL FRAUD. They can call the cops, the cops will take a complaint and possibly make an arrest. They asked him nicely to come in, which is often a ploy to get you in there. Once you're there, they call the cops, who already have been informed of the incident, and they keep you occupied until the cops get there to arrest your butt.

While Circuit City could go this far, I doubt they would. The police departments don't have the resources to respond to $200 incidents. If your car is parked on the street and someone smashes a window and rips off $200 worth of your CDs, try calling the police. At best, they might take a report over the telephone. It would be quite rare if a cop drove over to inspect what had happened.

This is totally dependent on the size of the department and the policies. I know departments that will respond to anything. Most GOOD departments respond to anything if there is a call made.

 

[WAZ]

Originally posted by: tcsenter
See, if they can get your friend on their premises, the police DO NOT NEED A WARRANT to arrest him. All they need is a complaint and probable cause. However, if they can not get your friend on their premises, the police will need to obtain a warrant to arrest him, which is not only a higher legal burden, but is more of a procedural head ache for the police. The police prefer not to have to go around town LOOKING for someone and generally don't have the time or manpower to do so for such a petty crime. But it Circuit City can get your friend to come in, the police will be glad to come pick him up.

Is that some kind of entrapment?

Regardless, we feel like CC has assumed my friend is guilty and was giving a last-ditch effort to get him to return to "the scene of the crime". Though, as it seems, nothing can really be done to him if he doesn't go into the store again... short of getting the police to hunt him down, based on a CC worker's report that an hour after the customer left the store, the worker found that the box had supposedly been opened on the bottom and ended up containing another TV.

(For the record, katka, I have no idea why they decided to open the box... I don't know if they told him or not. I'll ask him when I see him tomorrow).

Anyway, having heard all of these responses, he's decided to basically ignore CC if they call again. He said he may talk to them to tell them that, again, he had no idea what happened with the TV, but all he knows is he returned the one he bought, got his money back, and left the store a happy, normal customer.... if CC had checked the box and found the other TV at the time of the return, while Jay was there, at least they could have worked it out at that time, at that place. But they can't wait an hour after the customer leaves, then decide, hey, we'll check the box and call the customer and accuse him of swapping products, then telling him he has to come back to the store to "discuss" it with them.

As long as they don't follow up and try to drag this out, I think he's going to be okay and everyone involved can just move on.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

So I have a LOT of people telling me "Screw CC, they can't do anything, do NOT have him go back to the store" a few saying they could get the cops involved, and a few saying he should go back and get it worked out.

You will be amazed at what people think they can do because they are "untouchable", "Screw that I'd just tell them to shove it and there is nothing they can do to me because I'm The Terminator." A lot of people watch too much TV.

If Circuit City wants to file a complaint, and a representative of Circuit City who is in a position of responsibility is willing to make a sworn statement, the police WILL be paying a not-so-friendly visit to your friend, sooner or later. Its really up to them and whether they want to pursue this.

At the very least, even if they don't have enough evidence for a conviction, they can make life for your friend a living hell for a few months.

The thing that was weird to me was how they refused to talk about it over the phone to him -- how they insisted he come in to the store while this particular guy was there.

lol! I'm sure they did! Nothing weird about it.

See, if they can get your friend on their premises, the police DO NOT NEED A WARRANT to arrest him. All they need is a complaint and probable cause. However, if they can not get your friend on their premises, the police will need to obtain a warrant to arrest him, which is not only a higher legal burden, but is more of a procedural head ache for the police. The police prefer not to have to go around town LOOKING for someone and generally don't have the time or manpower to do so for such a petty crime. But it Circuit City can get your friend to come in, the police will be glad to come pick him up.

Exactly. If the case of misdemeanor theft they would have to get a warrany to arrest your friend unless they saw the crime occur. In a felony he could be arrested if the police offiect saw the crime occur or had probable cause to believe that particular suspect committed the crime.

They want you friend to come to the store because they want to call the police and have him detained. Once he is on the property the police would be allowed to detain him and make a warrantless arrest or simply detain him and continue to investigate. If your friend did not do what Circuit City accused him of, then it would be in his best interest to go down to the store. If the cops come tell him not to act like a freakin' felon and he will be alright. If he did do it, then sooner or later he will get caught.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: WAZ

Originally posted by: tcsenter
See, if they can get your friend on their premises, the police DO NOT NEED A WARRANT to arrest him. All they need is a complaint and probable cause. However, if they can not get your friend on their premises, the police will need to obtain a warrant to arrest him, which is not only a higher legal burden, but is more of a procedural head ache for the police. The police prefer not to have to go around town LOOKING for someone and generally don't have the time or manpower to do so for such a petty crime. But it Circuit City can get your friend to come in, the police will be glad to come pick him up.

Is that some kind of entrapment?

Regardless, we feel like CC has assumed my friend is guilty and was giving a last-ditch effort to get him to return to "the scene of the crime". Though, as it seems, nothing can really be done to him if he doesn't go into the store again... short of getting the police to hunt him down, based on a CC worker's report that an hour after the customer left the store, the worker found that the box had supposedly been opened on the bottom and ended up containing another TV.

(For the record, katka, I have no idea why they decided to open the box... I don't know if they told him or not. I'll ask him when I see him tomorrow).

Anyway, having heard all of these responses, he's decided to basically ignore CC if they call again. He said he may talk to them to tell them that, again, he had no idea what happened with the TV, but all he knows is he returned the one he bought, got his money back, and left the store a happy, normal customer.... if CC had checked the box and found the other TV at the time of the return, while Jay was there, at least they could have worked it out at that time, at that place. But they can't wait an hour after the customer leaves, then decide, hey, we'll check the box and call the customer and accuse him of swapping products, then telling him he has to come back to the store to "discuss" it with them.

As long as they don't follow up and try to drag this out, I think he's going to be okay and everyone involved can just move on.

No it not some kind of entrapment. LOL, so many people do not understand what entrapment is.

 

[WAZ]

Originally posted by: Millennium
This is totally dependent on the size of the department and the policies. I know departments that will respond to anything. Most GOOD departments respond to anything if there is a call made.

But while I see the point being made about the $200 car break-in, I think that's definitely different from having someone come into Circuit City to ask them to "find this guy who returned this... we gave him a $200 cash refund and voluntarily took the TV back, but have since noticed that the TV is not the same one and that the box was supposedly opened before, and we assume it's this guy."

At least I hope they're different...

 

[tcsenter]

Sigh... the one and only thing I don't like about you, tcsenter, is that you delude yourself with hate and the notion that anyone who is so much as even suspected MUST be guilty. In the lack of suspicion, you create it so that you can start pointing fingers and accusing.

What the hell does that have to do with anything? He may be innocent, he may not be. Although from a sheer probability or believability standpoint, it is far more likely he is trying to pull a scam, as hundreds of thousands of people attempt to do to retailers every year, in precisely this manner, by fraudulently returning items, including 'switched' items. But I have not personally judged him to be guilty or innocent nor have any of my statements implied his guilt or innocence.

The "fact" is entirely relevant. It is the responsibility of the merchant to check the condition of the items being returned before authorizing the refund. CC didn't do so. Their loss. Where I live, that's the law, iron-clad.

Oh really? Where do you live? Just the municipality or the county, obviously I'm not asking for your home address. Just a state, county, or city, please.

What you don't understand is that CC was in control of the returned item after it was returned, not WAZ's friend. As evidence against him, it is tainted and inadmissable.

As I've already said, that is an excellent point for his attorney to raise with the judge in his pre-trial motion to dismiss the complaint. As a principle of law, it is very credible and a judge would likely be receptive to it. However, as a matter of police procedure, it poses no barrier whatsoever to a complaint being filed and charges pursued.

Is that some kind of entrapment?

lol! No, it is not any kind of entrapment. They're not enticing your friend to commit a crime.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Corn
The cops will dust the TV for prints and match against your friends prints. Problem solved.

And how are they going to match them? To have them on file he has to have been arrested previously and without his consent or the order of a judge they won't get a copy of his prints to compare it with.

During an investigation of theft they could detain him. All they have to do is sweat him or arrest him and get his prints. Polce can arrest or investigate without a warrant.

Only if they have probable cause. That they do is debatable in this case. If arrested (and if innocent), the wise move in this case would be to simply tell the truth and no more. Cops do not keep their promises about being nice to people who tell them what they want to hear.

They could easily detain him without probable cause and then ask him to come to the station. From there they can continue to talk to him and then place him under arrest and get his prints. They can also get his prints from the outside of the box. More than likely who ever put that crappy TV in the box has prints on the outside and the inside. He would WANT to submit to a fingerprinting so that he could be excluded as one of the sources. If he did it, then he would not want to submit because that is foolish.

I could easily see CC pursuing this further or then again they might just drop it. If his friend is innocent then he should go down there and take care of the problem. There really is a problem when someone is so scared of Law Enforcement because they think they will be set up.

Of course cops do not keep their promises. They are entitled to lie and deceive all they want. No one with reasonable intelligence(if guilty) would ever say a word if arrested. You wait on your attorney and IGNORE the police. Attorneys stay in business because people cannot keep their mouths shut! That should be a course of study in itself. Why do people feel the need to confess?

 

[WAZ]

Originally posted by: Millennium
No it not some kind of entrapment. LOL, so many people do not understand what entrapment is.

You're right, I don't fully understand. I know what entrapment is (such as a police officer purposely luring a prostitute, then arresting her for prostitution)... I just also saw this in the same light: come on down to the store to talk, then boom, here's the cops. It's still falsely luring someone into an ambush -- which, I suppose, really isn't entrapment, per se. But the situations are similar.

They're not trying to lure him into doing something illegal... but they are trying to lure him onto their territory where they can ambush him.

Guess it's more like a mouse trap than entrapment.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: WAZ

Originally posted by: Millennium
This is totally dependent on the size of the department and the policies. I know departments that will respond to anything. Most GOOD departments respond to anything if there is a call made.

But while I see the point being made about the $200 car break-in, I think that's definitely different from having someone come into Circuit City to ask them to "find this guy who returned this... we gave him a $200 cash refund and voluntarily took the TV back, but have since noticed that the TV is not the same one and that the box was supposedly opened before, and we assume it's this guy."

At least I hope they're different...

Uou are confusing their duty to investigate when a crime occurs with actually making an arrest. Have no doubt that if someone is willing to sign an affadavit and swear to the theft of property from the store, the police will have no problem picking someone up for questioning to determine who to arrest. A 200 dollar theft case is a theft case. Sure muncipalities prefer to solve all the big cases, but in many departments they try to clear all open theft cases as quickly as possible.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: WAZ

Originally posted by: Millennium
No it not some kind of entrapment. LOL, so many people do not understand what entrapment is.

You're right, I don't fully understand. I know what entrapment is (such as a police officer purposely luring a prostitute, then arresting her for prostitution)... I just also saw this in the same light: come on down to the store to talk, then boom, here's the cops. It's still falsely luring someone into an ambush -- which, I suppose, really isn't entrapment, per se. But the situations are similar.

They're not trying to lure him into doing something illegal... but they are trying to lure him onto their territory where they can ambush him.

Guess it's more like a mouse trap than entrapment.

Entrapment is a justication defense when a defendant is deceived into wrongdoing. This only works if a defendant who is not predisposed to committ a crime is enticed or coerced into committing a crime that they normally would not do. Entrapment has NOTHING to do with your friend's case.

The police can lie to, deceive, and entice a prostitute to committ the act of solication and it would NOT be entrapment. Don't you think a prostitute is predisposed to commit a crime?

 

[Mill]

As I've already said, that is an excellent point for his attorney to raise with the judge in his pre-trial motion to dismiss the complaint. As a principle of law, it is very credible and a judge would likely be receptive to it. However, as a matter of police procedure, it poses no barrier whatsoever to a complaint being filed and charges pursued.

Thank you for explaing the difference between what police do and what the courts do. The police are only concerned with making a case that a DA will prosecute. They are not as concerned with a broken chain of custody on evidence. They could make the arrest but a good DA would not prosecute if the chain of evidence is so visibly broken(in this case it is). This is not to say that the stars and the moon doesn't align just right and the DA doesn't go ahead and prosecute.

Then again we are getting the story from a friend of friend and do not have all the details. His friend could have easily left out some of the more incriminating details or details that would help him exonerate himself. That is the problem with what we are hearing.

 

[NuclearFusi0n]

just never ever set foot in that store again

 

[tcsenter]

You're right, I don't fully understand. I know what entrapment is (such as a police officer purposely luring a prostitute, then arresting her for prostitution)...

That is not entrapment, or about 99% of soliciting prostitution charges would be dismissed, and they aren't, because that's how police bust prostitutes.

Entrapment is using coercion, "enticement", or encouragement to commit a crime that an individual would not have otherwise been likely to commit without the coercion, "enticement", or encouragement.

Giving a prostitute an opportunity to proposition you is not entrapment. Walking up to a women whom you have no reason to believe is a prostitute in the first place, and offering her money for sexual favors, and she refuses, so you offer additional incentive like more money without being induced to do so by her (i.e. she didn't say "that isn't enough money" or "you'll have to come up with more than that") and she refuses again, so you offer her even more money, and because of the additional enticement she finally agrees to commit a crime she was not inclined to commit simply by being presented with the opportunity, then arresting her for prostitution, is entrapment.

 

[brtspears2]

Its worse at frys, you can return anything as long as you have the box and the item that looks the same.

 

[aircooled]

If CC wants to prosecute him, they have his address on file, let them make the effort. Stay out of the store. (This is assuming he actually didn't do it )

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: brtspears2
Its worse at frys, you can return anything as long as you have the box and the item that looks the same.

Yet oddly enough Fry's has one of the lowest rates of employee theft among the large electronic retailers while CC has one of the highest.
You ever return anything, tcsenter or Millenium? I certainly hope not. If I were you, I'd keep the item even if it was DOA.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: brtspears2
Its worse at frys, you can return anything as long as you have the box and the item that looks the same.

Yet oddly enough Fry's has one of the lowest rates of employee theft among the large electronic retailers while CC has one of the highest.
You ever return anything, tcsenter or Millenium? I certainly hope not. If I were you, I'd keep the item even if it was DOA.

I do return things, but my nose is clean so I have no worries.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: brtspears2
Its worse at frys, you can return anything as long as you have the box and the item that looks the same.

Yet oddly enough Fry's has one of the lowest rates of employee theft among the large electronic retailers while CC has one of the highest.
You ever return anything, tcsenter or Millenium? I certainly hope not. If I were you, I'd keep the item even if it was DOA.

I do return things, but my nose is clean so I have no worries.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: brtspears2
Its worse at frys, you can return anything as long as you have the box and the item that looks the same.

Yet oddly enough Fry's has one of the lowest rates of employee theft among the large electronic retailers while CC has one of the highest.
You ever return anything, tcsenter or Millenium? I certainly hope not. If I were you, I'd keep the item even if it was DOA.

I do return things, but my nose is clean so I have no worries.

Why the eye rolling? I don't see why his friend was concerned unless he was trying to scam CC. Really why would you be concerned?

 

[tcsenter]

You ever return anything, tcsenter or Millenium? I certainly hope not. If I were you, I'd keep the item even if it was DOA

Nope, never. Been buying things for 17 years and I've never returned a single item.

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: brtspears2
Its worse at frys, you can return anything as long as you have the box and the item that looks the same.

Yet oddly enough Fry's has one of the lowest rates of employee theft among the large electronic retailers while CC has one of the highest.
You ever return anything, tcsenter or Millenium? I certainly hope not. If I were you, I'd keep the item even if it was DOA.

I do return things, but my nose is clean so I have no worries.

Why the eye rolling? I don't see why his friend was concerned unless he was trying to scam CC. Really why would you be concerned?

It must be nice to live in a world where your the only person who keeps his nose clean and everyone else is just out to scam the retail outlets.

i went to a Waffle House once w/ a friend. i placed and order and they didn't get it right, i asked them to do so and instead of redoing the food like i asked he just pulled off the items in front of me that i didn't want. so i told my friend, i'm out of here and we left w/o paying as i didn't consume any of the food and they didn't provide me w/ what i ordered.

that night my friend heres a police car in the neighborhood and he thinks their after HIM because we left w/o paying.

some people don't have a full understanding of the law and are easily fooled by the bluster of retail employees.

this guys friend might be the same way, it doesn't mean he is guilty of anything.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: brtspears2
Its worse at frys, you can return anything as long as you have the box and the item that looks the same.

Yet oddly enough Fry's has one of the lowest rates of employee theft among the large electronic retailers while CC has one of the highest.
You ever return anything, tcsenter or Millenium? I certainly hope not. If I were you, I'd keep the item even if it was DOA.

I do return things, but my nose is clean so I have no worries.

Why the eye rolling? I don't see why his friend was concerned unless he was trying to scam CC. Really why would you be concerned?

It must be nice to live in a world where your the only person who keeps his nose clean and everyone else is just out to scam the retail outlets.

i went to a Waffle House once w/ a friend. i placed and order and they didn't get it right, i asked them to do so and instead of redoing the food like i asked he just pulled off the items in front of me that i didn't want. so i told my friend, i'm out of here and we left w/o paying as i didn't consume any of the food and they didn't provide me w/ what i ordered.

that night my friend heres a police car in the neighborhood and he thinks their after HIM because we left w/o paying.

some people don't have a full understanding of the law and are easily fooled by the bluster of retail employees.

this guys friend might be the same way, it doesn't mean he is guilty of anything.

I don't live in a world like that. Why should I be sorry if this person is ignorant of the law like you say? It is my fault for knowing how to deal with a situation like this? I thought it was common sense. A lot of the time ignorance of the law leads people to be scared. If this guy wants to handle things he will listen to the advice of people in this thread. If he is trying to SCAM CC he will stay far far away from them. If he is not, he will go down there and try to take care of things.


If you commit a crime stay away from the police.
If you didn't and are accused then try to work things out!

 

[SirChadwick]

This is hillarious...happens all the time. There is nothing to worry about. They cannot do a thing about it. My buddy bought a Metallica cd from Sam Goody one time, opened it up and their was a Britney Spears cd inside. He was like WTF! Took it back and told them, but they didn't believe him and wouldn't accept it back. He kept going on about how this was ridiculous and eventually stood outside the store and told everyone not to shop there. Finally the manager gave in and accepted the return. And all that was for a $17 cd....lol!

 

[katka]

Nope, never. Been buying things for 17 years and I've never returned a single item.

:Q