Property and Crime Assignment 2
Course: Crime and Criminal Behavior
Date:
Property and Crime Assignment 2
The three individuals were reported and arrested for stealing in the Socks for Feet Outlet. The items that were reported missing men’s socks, which included 36 pairs of the Big Guy brand socks of a total cost of $432.00 and 24 pairs of the Hang Nail Free brand of socks of a total cost of $240.00. The total cost of the items stolen by the three suspects was $672.00. Based on the witnesses’ accounts of the scenario, regarding the Criminal Code for the State of Georgia: Title 16 Crimes and Offenses involving theft, the three individuals will be charged with offenses of theft by taking (§ 16-8-2). Chapter 8, sub-article 2, of the title 16 of the State of Georgia criminal code provide that theft by taking involves offenses committed when a person unlawfully takes, or when is unlawfully in possession of another person property to deprive him of the property, irrespective of the way the property is taken (Goguen, 2020). Therefore, with the evidence provided in the scenario, the merits of charges withstand theft by taking. The possible penalties that the three suspects could face include imprisonment for not less than one year or more than ten years since the property which was subject to theft exceeds $500.00 under shoplifting. However, the first suspect Bubba Hurt, will who had been convicted for two offenses of a felony and misdemeanor before the offense, will be fined not less than $250.00, with the fine not being suspended or probated.
Based on the crime scene, the crime committed by the three suspects is considered to have been done by amateurs. The justification of the armature level theft of the three suspects is based on various approaches to their act of theft. Based on the scenario, the damage conducted by the suspects was much more limited, which indicates that they were not professionals since they did not have the diminished moral capacity and multiple victims (Strayer University, 2017). The scenario provides that the suspects started rung when they were approached by the security officer, which is a characteristic of armatures involving stopping when the station changes. The professional property offender always plans including an outlet, which was much more different in the scenario as the suspects did not have an outlet plan, resulting in one of them having to bump into the security officer to create a way to run out of the store. The outlet strategy applied by the suspects indicates their lack of preparation or plan, hence considered armatures.
The type of criminal typology that could be applied to the suspects is shoplifting. However, according to Cameron in Strayer University (2017), the shoplifting criminal typology is divided into two categories, the “boosters” who are professional shoplifters that carefully plan and skillfully execute their theft, with a concentration on expensive items, and the “snitches” who are armature shoplifters. Therefore, the suspects could be categorized under the “snitches” since based on the scenario are considered armatures who are individuals that only conduct shoplifting to supplement their legitimate incomes. Snitches tend to steal small and inexpensive items mostly for their personal use and those that cannot be converted easily into cash. Based on the scenario, the suspects steal items that they intend to use personally, considering that most shoplifting involving snitches occur in March during spring break. Therefore, the criminal typology that can be applied to the suspects is the shoplifting by snitches.
References
Goguen, D. (2020). Georgia Petty Theft and Other Theft Laws. Nolo. Retrieved from https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/crime-penalties/petty-theft-georgia-penalties-defense
Strayer University. (2017). Property Crime and Typologies: Performance Task
