On May 20, 2016, at around six o’clock in the evening, three suspects, Suspect (1) Bubba Hurt Suspect (2) Skeeter Redrum, and suspect three Summer Breeze entered the Socks for Feet Outlet situated at 222 Citation Way engaged in a criminal shoplifting activity. According to witness statements, the first suspect, Bubba Hurt, stole merchandise of three dozen pairs of the Big Guy brand socks worth $432.00. Likewise, Suspect (2) Skeeter Redrum and his female accomplice suspect (3) Summer Breeze stole two dozen pairs of the Hang Nail Free brand of socks worth $240.00 as reported by the store owner. That said, in Georgia, shoplifting is considered as theft by taking or a larceny offense. Code Section O.C.G.A. 16-8-2 (2010) Theft by taking states that “a person commits the offense of theft by taking when he unlawfully takes or, being in lawful possession thereof, unlawfully appropriates any property of another with the intention of depriving him of the property, regardless of the manner in which the property is taken or appropriated” ( 2010 Georgia Code :: TITLE 16 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES :: CHAPTER 8 - OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT :: ARTICLE 1 - THEFT :: § 16-8-2 - Theft by taking , n.d.).
In this case, the suspects were engaging in a shoplifting crime by permanently depriving the owner of the store his merchandise. That said, in Georgia, theft by taking can either be a felony or a misdemeanor; that is, if the stolen merchandise does not surpass the maximum threshold of $500, the offense is treated as a misdemeanor as defined under 16-8-12. Penalties for violation of Code Sections 16-8-2 through 16-8-9. On the other hand, if the offense exceeds this threshold, it is considered a felony. In that sense, suspect one stole merchandise that does not surpass the maximum threshold for a felony ($432.00). Likewise, suspect two and suspect three jointly stole merchandise that also does not surpass the maximum threshold to be a felony ($240.00). Therefore, the three suspects should be charged with a misdemeanor offense.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Therefore, under 16-8-12. Penalties for violation of Code Sections 16-8-2 through 16-8-9, the three suspects should be slapped with a jail term that is not less than one year. However, this jail term should not exceed fifteen years. Likewise, the defendant cannot pay a fine of more than $1000 in a misdemeanor case. Moreover, the trial judge has the power to use discretion while ruling in such a case.
I believe that suspect one is a profession while suspects two and three are amateurs. The following characteristics can be used to differentiate between the three suspects. Firstly, Bubba Hurt, the first suspect, stole the merchandise with the highest values as compared to suspect two and three. Secondly, unlike the second and third suspects who had to steal the merchandise in pairs, one acted as the watchdog while the other put the merchandise in the purse. The first suspect performed the shoplifting crime alone and hid the merchandise under his pants. Likewise, after being spotted by Security Officer Foot, they started running away, but Bubba Hurt bumped on the officer, making him lose his balance and fall. Moreover, Security Officer Foot described Bubba Hurt as the ‘’big white guy” in his witness statement; thus, probably, Skeeter Redrum and Summer Breeze, the other two suspects, are Bubba Hurt’s students. Typically, amateurs in shoplifting could not have such courage to bump on the officer.
Moreover, Bubba Hurt has had a long criminal record that makes him a professional shoplifter. For instance, in Charge Number 01, Bubba Hurt had been charged with one count of shoplifting; however, the case turned out to be a demeanor offense. Likewise, in Charge Number 02, Bubba Hurt was charged with one count of crime under the act of uniform controlled substances. The case turned out to be a felony offense. However, Bubba Hurt was never prosecuted as his two cases were dismissed. The other two suspects, Skeeter Redrum and Summer Breeze, have no records of criminal history, which makes me believe that they are amateurs in shoplifting.
Investigators of crimes encounter a variety of criminals and a variety of criminal actions in the societies. Thus, they try sorting these criminal activities and actions into homogeneous groups that can be used to form a theory for generalization; that is coming up with criminal typologies. That said, criminal typologies can be categorized into two; that is, crime-centered and person-centered (criminal-centered) typologies. A crime-centered typology sorts all criminal activities into groups, such as burglary and theft by taking. On the other hand, person-centered typologies “assign individuals to role careers, syndromes, criminal roles, and other social and behavioral categories based on similarities on their part in criminal involvement, attitudes, personality traits, and other presumably relevant characteristics” (Encyclopedia, n.d. p.1). These two forms of typologies help the investigators to identify the various crime forms as well as identify the types of offenders in the societies. That said, taxonomies can be used to identify the characteristics that help in classifying each of these two criminal typologies.
Among the several taxonomies in crime, typologies are the sociological typologies that can be used to describe the characteristics of the three suspects in this case. This typology defines the social background that individuals are brought up as the cause they engage in criminal activities. This theory dictates that criminal behavior is learned through interactions with the criminals; that is, interacting more with criminals leads an individual to become a criminal (differential association). Sociologist Edwin Sutherland asserts that all criminal behavior is learned. That is, individuals, start as unskilled criminals’ amateurs and continue building their reputation up the ladder to be professional criminals. This is the case with the three suspects in this case. The first suspect has a criminal record; that is, he has been engaged in both misdemeanor and felony criminal activities. On the other hand, the other two suspects have clean records; that is, they are amateurs.
Moreover, this theory is emphasized by Don Gibbons, who, in his typologies, claims that an offender can be identified on the criminal activity they are engaged in or criminal history. In this case, suspect one can be treated as a professional criminal who has been involved in several criminal activities; his criminal record proves so. On the other hand, suspect one and suspect two are amateurs in shoplifting; that is, they do not have a criminal history track. Furthermore, the three suspects could be judged to have worked as a team while at the store the professional could have been presumed to be training the other two suspects how to shoplift; that is teacher-student roles. More so, while escaping from the stores, the first suspect bumped on the security officer to help his accomplices getaway. Therefore, the sociological typologies effectively explain the suspects in this crime.
References
2010 Georgia Code :: TITLE 16 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES :: CHAPTER 8 - OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT :: ARTICLE 1 - THEFT :: § 16-8-2 - Theft by taking . (n.d.). Justia Law. Retrieved May 16, 2020, from https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-16/chapter-8/article-1/16-8-2
Encyclopedia.com . (n.d.). Typologies of Criminal Behavior. Www.Encyclopedia.Com. Retrieved May 16, 2020, from https://www.encyclopedia.com/law/legal-and-political-magazines/typologies-criminal-behavior
