Child taken into care - Mother forgets to pay for $5 worth of sandwiches... reasonable?

Soldato
Joined
31 May 2005
Posts
15,640
Location
Nottingham
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...vaF4YQ?docId=aac634b09617474392f0857bada0638c

Associated Press said:
Pregnant mom says sandwich arrest was 'horrifying'
By JENNIFER SINCO KELLEHER, Associated Press


HONOLULU (AP)

Nicole Leszczynski couldn't imagine that two chicken salad sandwiches would land her and her husband in jail and her 2-year-old daughter in state custody. But it happened five days ago, when the 30-weeks-pregnant woman forgot to pay for her snack while grocery shopping.

"It was the most ridiculous chain of events that happened," she said while sobbing Monday. "It's still hard to believe what happened."

Leszczynski, 28, and her husband Marcin, 33, were handcuffed, searched then released on $50 bail each. Their ordeal at the police station lasted a few hours, but their daughter Zofia spent the night away from her parents in a case that has sparked nationwide outrage and forced the Safeway supermarket chain to review the incident.

The family had moved to an apartment near downtown Honolulu from California two weeks ago. Still settling in, they ventured out Wednesday to stock up on groceries, took the bus, got lost, and ended up at a Safeway supermarket.

Famished, the former Air Force staff sergeant picked up the two sandwiches that together cost $5. She openly munched on one while they shopped, saving the wrapper to be scanned at the register later.

But they forgot to pay for the sandwiches as they checked out with about $50 worth of groceries.

"When the security guard questioned us, I was really embarrassed, I was horrified," she said. They were led upstairs, where the couple expected to get a lecture, pay for the sandwiches, and be allowed on their way.

But store managers wouldn't allow them to pay for the sandwiches, she said.
"I asked to talk to a manager and he said it was against their policy to pay for items that left the store," she said. "The security guard said we were being charged with shoplifting."

Four hours later, a police officer arrived and read them their rights. A woman from the state Child Welfare Services arrived to take Zofia away.

The pregnant mother said she tried to keep her composure until Zofia, who turns 3 in December, left the store. "I didn't want Zofia to be scared because she's never spent a night away from us. She didn't have her stuffed animal. She didn't have her toothbrush."

But as soon as her daughter left, "I got completely hysterical. I went to the bathroom and I threw up," she recalled.

A Honolulu police spokeswoman said it was procedure to call Child Welfare Services if a child is present when both parents are arrested. The store's management did not know the girl would be taken away, said Susan Houghton, a spokeswoman for California-based Safeway.

The national supermarket chain said it was looking into the incident. "It was never our intent to separate a mother from her child. That was a very unfortunate consequence to this situation," Houghton said. "We understand the outrage. We are concerned about how this was handled."

Leszczynski called the incident "so horrifying, it seemed to escalate and no one could say, 'this is too much.'"

The couple was handcuffed and driven separately to police headquarters a few blocks away, where they were searched, had their mug shots taken and then released after paying bail. A police officer escorted them back to the store — which banned them for a year, Leszczynski said — where they picked up their groceries and walked home just before midnight.

"We basically stared at each other all night. We woke up at the crack of dawn and called (the state child welfare office)," Leszczynski said. While they waited, Leszczynski vented about the experience on babycenter.com and contacted a lawyer for help with being reunited with Zofia. At the lawyer's suggestion, they took their story to the media.

Zofia was returned after an 18-hour separation from her parents.

The couple is charged with fourth-degree theft, a petty misdemeanor, and has a court date on Nov. 28, according to the city prosecutor's office. The family hasn't decided whether it will pursue legal action against Safeway.
Houghton said the company will review the police report and store security footage before deciding whether to press charges.

What do we think, reasonable?

Seeing as they spent $50 on groceries, why steal $5 worth of sandwiches?

Yes, many will argue about eating food in a shop BEFORE you have paid for it (I personally disagree with it) BUT... I do not think the actions taken in this instance were appropiate.
 
yes shocking but as it happened in another country are we in any position to debate their laws? in some countries they would have been stoned to death or had their hands chopped off. its a strange world we live in.
 
The family hasn't decided whether it will pursue legal action against Safeway.

^ What for? Safeway called the police because the people stole from the store, its all their own fault. The child is just a footnote that the is being used to make the store look like the guilty party.

At the lawyer's suggestion, they took their story to the media.

Sigh ....
 
In all likelyhod they simply forgot to pay for the sarnies. As much as it boils my blood when people eat stuff while walking round a supermarket I do think that being arrested and having your child taken into custody is a little strong.

Policy gone bonkers!

/Salsa
 
So Safeway keep them for four hours before a cop turned up and charged them. I suppose they might have ground for some action against Safeway.

This of course would be a non-story if she wasn’t pregnant and didn’t have a child with her. They got treated just like anyone else would be. Ain’t life a bitch!

In future eat your sandwiches after you’ve paid for them. ;)
 
Bad manners imo to be eating items before paying in a grocery shop.

Don't actually care about the hysterical story they flogged to the tabloid.
 
In all likelyhod they simply forgot to pay for the sarnies. As much as it boils my blood when people eat stuff while walking round a supermarket I do think that being arrested and having your child taken into custody is a little strong.

Policy gone bonkers!

/Salsa

How?

If the following is true:
She openly munched on one while they shopped, saving the wrapper to be scanned at the register later.

How could she possible forget to pay for them?

The wrappers will have been in her shopping cart / trolley if she was saving them, surely...

If she pocketted them / put them in a bag... then that certainly appears to me to be an attempt to conceal...



Also... two sandwiches and both the parents were arrested... that seems as though they are the two who consumed them... no food for the child? (ok, this is of course an assumption that the child hadn't been fed beforehand etc... still a little odd).


Something doesn't add up about this story.
 
it boils my blood when people eat stuff while walking round a supermarket

+1 - it's so chavvy. Fortunately don't have to deal with supermarket scum anymore after being liberated by online shopping.
 
The family hasn't decided whether it will pursue legal action against Safeway.

Excuse my ignorance, but exactly how can they pursue legal action against Safeway? They can say they just forgot all they want but it's still technically shoplifting. I don't agree with what happened to them but this baffles me.
 
Excuse my ignorance, but exactly how can they pursue legal action against Safeway? They can say they just forgot all they want but it's still technically shoplifting. I don't agree with what happened to them but this baffles me.

Need to bulk out the story in the rag they sold it to.

Words with apparent weight but little substance are their stock in trade.
 
Wow, all you people saying "they got what they deserved" etc really have to cop the **** on. It sounds like they made a mistake, they were willing to rectify it. The store manager could easily have had it sorted without issue in 5 minutes by letting them pay and giving them a warning. That's what would have happened in any sane environment. What the hell is wrong with you all for thinking it's okay to lock people up for hours over something so petty and have their child taken away?

I'm frankly disgusted at the attitude of most of the replies, humanity at it's worst.
 
that a child is taken into temporary care when both parents/guardians are arrested seems reasonable to me.

what else do you do with it, just pass it to the checkout girl and say look after this till tomorrow love?
 
Wow, all you people saying "they got what they deserved" etc really have to cop the **** on. It sounds like they made a mistake, they were willing to rectify it. The store manager could easily have had it sorted without issue in 5 minutes by letting them pay and giving them a warning. That's what would have happened in any sane environment. What the hell is wrong with you all for thinking it's okay to lock people up for hours over something so petty and have their child taken away?

I'm frankly disgusted at the attitude of most of the replies, humanity at it's worst.

problem is for all the"sane environment" stuff is supermarkets get so much stolen by some many different types of people (including people with children) that it becomes much easier and less hassle to say "right anyone shoplifting we report to the police and let them deal with it."

because otherwise you have all sorts of "oh I forgot" issues when criminals get caught and the manager then gets personally blamed for deciding to call the police whereas if it's policy it excuses him of responsibility and prevents any possible coercion or collusion.


But more importantly darg if it's you job as just above minimum wage supermarket security guard to call the police when you catch someone who has "stolen" regardless of excuse are you going to lose your job not reporting it no matter what their story is?
 
It's lots of policies combining to make a ridiculous situation.

The trouble is people don't think of the potential practicalities when they decide to use the term 'zero tolerance'.

Like when they were talking about 'zero tolerance' drink driving rules in the UK, until some guy said .. 'er, that would mean for example having an 'alchohol sterilised' swab of your cheek at hospital then driving home, or eating a single chocolate liqueur (spelling) could result in a driving ban'! And the idea was rapidly dropped!
 
[TW]Fox;20457609 said:
So loads of fuss about nothing. Not quite the impression the sensationalist topic gives you..

I disagree. Whilst I dislike the connotations there is plenty of scope for the child having experienced trauma that may well affect her later in life. Not to mention the trauma the parents went through.

I would go absolutely mental and need to be physically restrained if someone tried to arrest me and then take my child away from me had I intentionally committed a 'petty misdemeanor', never mind had I simply made a very plausible mistake.

I'm very surprised the parents aren't being done for GBH/ABH or their equivalent.
 
I disagree. Whilst I dislike the connotations there is plenty of scope for the child having experienced trauma that may well affect her later in life. Not to mention the trauma the parents went through.

I would go absolutely mental and need to be physically restrained if someone tried to arrest me and then take my child away from me had I intentionally committed a 'petty misdemeanor', never mind had I simply made a very plausible mistake.

I'm very surprised the parents aren't being done for GBH/ABH or their equivalent.

Fantastic, turn an 18 hour separation into months/years of separation and get yourself locked up for the birth of your second child.
 
Back
Top Bottom