SHOPLIFTING.

Hokitika Guardian, 10 September 1926, Page 2

SHOPLIFTING.

INGENIOUS METHODS OF OFFENDERS.

AUCKLAND, September 8.

Shoplifting is responsible for-an annual loss of many thousands of pounds to Auckland drapers, according to statements made by retailers. Recent prosecutions in the courts 'have drawn attention to the trouble, but it is stated'that these cases are no indication of the prevalence of thefts. Ninety per cent ot such thefts, said, one draper, are not detected, and while he believes that in the interests of F e public, who must pay for the loss in the long run. every ease undetected should be placed in the hands of the police. It is not customary to lay a charge unless there is good reason for believing that the person had been, operating more or less systematically. Where the offender is obviously a person of weak intellect, wbo lias succumbed to sudden , temptation, he does not institute criminal proceedings, and in other cases often extends leniency where the circumstances inspire it.” “It is a most difficult problem,” lie said, “ and why there should be a tendency to regard this kind of dishonesty as less reprehensible than, ordinary stealing is difficult to understand. If a shopkeeper has reason for believing that a person has been systematically robbing him can it he fair to the public or to his staff to refrain from prosecuting? Consider the staff. By the end

of the' year it usually is found that all 1 departments have suffered at the hands of shoplifters. If. ns sometimes hanpens, expensive articles such as frocks and lints have disappeared, the head ol the department cannot show the return she ought to have. She may not bo able to account for the leakage and runs the risking of losing her job. Punishment and publicity are the only deterrents for the dishonest portion of Dio community, and in prosecuting shopkeepers are not only defending themselves hut are also fulfilling a duty to the public and their staffs.” The methods of shoplifters were outlined to show how difficult detection often is. The theft of a valuabl’e. frock, which can bo crumpled up into .1 small space, is sometimes the work of three women. They will stand close together, apparently examining a line of hanging frocks, and the one in the centre is thus given a chance to secrete a garment in her clothing. Apparently the action of the raiders is quite innocent. The same thing might be done scores of times daily by people who are incapable of theft, and for that reason the assistant (Cinnot always bo on her guard. The appearance and demeanour of typical shoplifters are such that the assistants have no cause for suspicion, and only when they are caught redbanded is it possible to associate dishonesty with them. One supposes they have remarkable nerve. The stories they concoct when questioned are often highly ingenious, and ninny of them can act a part well. No wonder that the victim is often in a quandary as to what course be should take. Some years ago the dm pel's of Auckland proposed a scheme by which people caught shoplifting would be let off provided they submitted to tlieir photograph being taken for circulation among the houses. This idea was not practicable, however, and cneh establishment has its own system of defence. Floor walkers usually have a good deal of information to guide them. It is no uncommon tiling for customers to report cases of theft they have seen, and lilt-hough it is not always possible for the house to expose the offenders, faces and descriptions are noted, and on future occasions these people are suspects and are carefully watched. The sending of recent offenders to prison, instead of giving them the ad- : vantHge of the First Offenders Act, is said to have bad a salutary effect, but shopfifting continues to be a daily occurrence. As the city grows the number 1 of people who will steal if they imagine ! they can do so without much risk increases, and it is therefore evident tlnr.t ■ shopkeepers will have to take a firm stand tq check depredations,