Stealing food from skip

MooMoo444 · 29 Jan 2014 at 15:09

jas72 said:
Sadly the "less fortunate" would the first to sue you if they had a tummy upset.

They aren't forcing you to eat it.

wazza300 · 29 Jan 2014 at 15:11

"that's why moms go to Iceland....skips"

deuse · 29 Jan 2014 at 15:14

Only in the UK.

dowie · 29 Jan 2014 at 15:37

I could understand it if the same people were going to the same supermarket and creating a mess each time... that would be a nuisance and would be quite reasonable for the authorities to take action and charge them with whatever they can - seemingly some random vagrancy act from the 1800s

Catching then charging people who happened to be doing it without anyone knowing about it (aside from being spotted by chance on this occasion) doesn't seem to be a constructive use of time... given that its just food in a bin surely a telling off or even a caution would be sufficient once they've established that they weren't there to try and break in/steal anything of value.

sports_brah · 29 Jan 2014 at 16:04

pitchfork said:
This old chestnut, christ, I know a guy who used to wait behind starbucks and bring all the cakes home for his family - nothing wrong with them!

And where I used to work, we changed the bin liner just before the vending machine was emptied then got the sandwiches out of the bin - Why pay £3 for a sandwich when there's a perfectly good one going free? The bloke start going mental when he found out because no one used to use the machine, we just waited for it to be emptied.

One mans trash is another mans treasure, I think it's completely insane to prosecute someone for taking food from a bin to feed themselves - it's not theft because it is food which have been discarded same way it's not theft for a tramp to pick up a dog end and smoke it.

This case highlights that we should be prosecuting the supermarkets for how much waste they have - so much food into landfill.

This is why they don't do it. It devalues their products.

Mr Badger · 29 Jan 2014 at 17:18

Case dropped:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25950761

thedoc46 · 29 Jan 2014 at 17:35

Never buying from Iceland again.

Caged · 29 Jan 2014 at 17:42

Iceland had nothing to do with it, apart from owning the bin in question.

Frightful Boar · 29 Jan 2014 at 17:55

thedoc46 said:
Never buying from Iceland again.

Is that because they asked the CPS not to prosecute?

andi · 29 Jan 2014 at 18:23

I think its more outrageous that a private company can pressurise the CPS in a case that, as they say, had nothing to do with them, for the sake of publicity.

TJM · 29 Jan 2014 at 19:06

Well, if the 'victim' doesn't care, why should anyone else? It is (or was) their food.

Energize · 29 Jan 2014 at 20:34

pitchfork said:
it's not theft because it is food which have been discarded same way it's not theft for a tramp to pick up a dog end and smoke it.

"Dog end"? I don't even want to know what that is, sounds like some weird fetish!

Caged · 29 Jan 2014 at 20:38

Depends what end you use

SexyGreyFox · 29 Jan 2014 at 20:45

thedoc46 said:
Never buying from Iceland again.

Why?

Energize · 29 Jan 2014 at 21:00

Burnsy2023 said:
Hanlon's Razor seems appropriate here:

I don't think so, something like that can't be attributed to stupidity, malice seems much more likely given that they purposely searched the law books for a very obscure act to charge the men under.

TJM · 29 Jan 2014 at 21:10

The Vagrancy Act is a well-worn tool in the police's arsenal and is only obscure to the general public. Homeless people know all about it.

Energize · 29 Jan 2014 at 21:33

TJM said:
The Vagrancy Act is a well-worn tool in the police's arsenal and is only obscure to the general public. Homeless people know all about it.

The point is, it was not an act of stupidity. There was a clear intent here.

Mr Badger · 29 Jan 2014 at 21:39

Energize said:
The point is, it was not an act of stupidity. There was a clear intent here.

Are you talking about the police or the guys that were "skipping" :confused:

Anox · 29 Jan 2014 at 21:44

That's the beauty of the English Law system here, "lets use a really old statute"

andi · 29 Jan 2014 at 23:07

Energize said:
I don't think so, something like that can't be attributed to stupidity, malice seems much more likely given that they purposely searched the law books for a very obscure act to charge the men under.

As above, it's not obscure, it's quite commonly used.

TJM said:
Well, if the 'victim' doesn't care, why should anyone else? It is (or was) their food.

They weren't charged with theft, and there's no victim for Found on Enclosed.

Stealing food from skip

Thug