Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Isn't jailing some one for this a bit over the top. I don't even think it would be a Criminal Case in the UK, more of a Civil Matter between the Video Store and the Woman in question.
Once they saw the warrant, i guess the cops had no choice. But whoever issued the warrant in the first place should understand the criminal justice system has better things to do. This should have been handled through the civil system or through a collection agency.
What a waste of time and energy. Does this poor woman now have a criminal arrest record?
Not is South Carolina. South Carolina and Wyoming are the 2 US states that do not have statute of limitations on criminal prosecutions. Can I have my law license back now?
The law you quoted does not deal with video rentals. This women was charged under South Carolina's petit larceny statute: §16-13-30.
Which still doesnt apply since the items werent stolen.
SECTION 16-13-30. Petit larceny; grand larceny.
(A) Simple larceny of any article of goods, choses in action, bank bills, bills receivable, chattels, or other article of personalty of which by law larceny may be committed, or of any fixture, part, or product of the soil severed from the soil by an unlawful act, or has a value of two thousand dollars or less, is petit larceny, a misdemeanor, triable in the magistrates court or municipal court, notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 22-3-540, 22-3-545, 22-3-550, and 14-25-65. Upon conviction, the person must be fined not more than one thousand dollars, or imprisoned not more than thirty days.
(B) Larceny of goods, chattels, instruments, or other personalty valued in excess of two thousand dollars is grand larceny. Upon conviction, the person is guilty of a felony and must be fined in the discretion of the court or imprisoned not more than:
(1) five years if the value of the personalty is more than two thousand dollars but less than ten thousand dollars;
(2) ten years if the value of the personalty is ten thousand dollars or more.
HISTORY: 1962 Code Section 16-353; 1952 Code Section 16-353; 1942 Code Section 1160; 1932 Code Section 1160; Cr. C. '22 Section 53; Cr. C. '12 Section 203; Cr. C. '02 Section 164; G. S. 2498; R. S. 160; 1866 (13) 407; 1887 (19) 820; 1964 (53) 1725; 1981 Act No. 76, Section 4; 1993 Act No. 171, Section 5; 1993 Act No. 184, Section 107; 2010 Act No. 273, Section 16.E, eff June 2, 2010.
This should have been handled through the civil system
What probably happened here is she was issued a summons to appear before the magistrate for the civil case. I don't know how they handle it in Florida but in PA you can mail in a guilty plea and the check if you don't want to go through the hassle of appearing if I recall correctly. What probably happened here is she never responded to the summons or appeared in court, that's when the warrant would be issued. This probably has nothing to do with the video tape itself but instead a failure to obey a court order.
Once they saw the warrant, i guess the cops had no choice. But whoever issued the warrant in the first place should understand the criminal justice system has better things to do. This should have been handled through the civil system or through a collection agency.
What a waste of time and energy. Does this poor woman now have a criminal arrest record?
She was arrested on a failure to appear bench warrant issued by the local Judge/Magistrate. It's always a failure to appear bench warrant on issues like this one.
I used to make my living arresting people for crimes. When they didnt show, bam bench warrant. Five years after leaving those professions I was still getting called back into testify by the DA because of people getting picked up on outstanding FTA warrants.
Can't blame the video store owner, small margin of profit. can't afford to let people get away from stealing movies. the officers were following the procedures and executed the warrant.
No, that website does not say that I'm wrong. I'm not wrong. South Carolina and Wyoming are the 2 US state without criminal statutes of limitation. This theft (or larceny as SC calls it) occurred 9 years ago. She can still be prosecuted in SC - she could be prosecuted 20 years from now if SC were so inclined.
Quote:
Which still doesnt apply since the items werent stolen.
Well, the South Carolina legal system agrees with me that her act qualifies as stealing (larceny) under the statute.
Last edited by hammertime33; 02-17-2014 at 06:46 PM..
I could see this being somewhat OK if she had more than just 1 overdue movie... But even then she shouldn't of been arrested, but probably sued in small claims court.
Those south carlonians can sure be stupid at times. They think they are still a free people, and they vote for people like lindsay graham... So you shouldn't expect much from them.
Keep in mind who runs the voting machines. I wouldn't necessarily blame the voters, but yeah Graham is extra special.
She keep the video which makes it theft. Do people think they can rent then keep items of value?
Sure, why not? I've been thinking of renting a Maserati.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
