Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: KittenClaws

It was paid for, thus it was a 1 day loan, not a theft. Besides that she knew that the parents would settle up the next day which they did, because she had known the parents for years.. So no one was cheated out of anything.


14 posted on 05/17/2019 8:40:02 PM PDT by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Robert DeLong

You are correct.

Theft is often defined as the unauthorized taking of property from another with the intent to permanently deprive them of it.
...
The offense of larceny is:

The unlawful taking and carrying away of.
Someone else’s property.
Without the consent of the owner and with.
The intent to deprive the owner of the property permanently.

You can find this definition anywhere. It is correct.

The fact that he paid the money the next day is sufficient evidence of lack of intent.

So it wasn’t theft.

Now we may hear some idiot with delusions of cleverness chirping up “Oh, he certainly didn’t mean to return the food, so he did intend to permanently deprive”. But in fact the kid had no intent to permanently deprive the cafeteria of the economic value the cafeteria placed on the food that the cafeteria wanted in exchange for the food, and he did NOT permanently deprive the cafeteria of it.


88 posted on 05/18/2019 6:14:45 AM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson