Picture this: It’s a chilly winter’s evening in Chicago, and Michigan Ave. is aglow with Christmas lights and bright storefront windows. Snowflakes melt on the ruddy cheeks of shoppers as they bustle down the street with their arms full of bags, laughing as they make their way to the CTA station.

Everything’s peaceful and serene until suddenly—a siren goes off, and someone darts out of a high-end store holding an expensive necklace. Unfortunately for this person—let’s call him “Frank”—there’s heightened security around Michigan Ave this time of year, and a couple of cops are able to stop him immediately.

“Yes, I took the necklace from the store,” Frank admits when the cops question him.

Sounds like that’s it for Frank—he’ll be found guilty of shoplifting in a court of law. Right?

Not necessarily. Even though Frank admitted to taking the necklace, there are many ways an experienced lawyer could argue his innocence. For instance, Frank could have intended to return the necklace immediately. Frank could have misunderstood an employee and thought they wanted him to have the necklace. Frank could have been distracted by other things and walked out of the store with the necklace, thereby shoplifting accidently. Frank could have been threatened with harm by someone else if he didn’t take the necklace. Frank could be mentally handicapped to a point that he should not be held accountable for taking the necklace. These are just some of the many ways a lawyer could protect Frank after he confessed his guilt.

The goal of any good criminal attorney is to get their defendant’s charges reduced or dropped. Even if evidence and your own admission indicates your guilt, you have many options for creating a strong defense with the help of an experienced lawyer. Here are some criminal defense strategies a lawyer may use:

Beyond reasonable doubt. In order to be convicted, the prosecutor must show there is absolutely no reasonable doubt that you committed the crime. By raising even the smallest amount of reasonable doubt, a lawyer might be able to have your charges dropped.

Self-Defense. People have a right to protect themselves and their families from physical harm. If you are charged with a violent crime, a lawyer can argue that you were acting in self-defense. To prove this, the attorney must demonstrate reasonable belief of physical harm that necessitated self-defense, and that your response to the threat was reasonable.

Entrapment. This defense can work if you successfully prove that a police officer or other government authority forced you to commit a crime—such as buying drugs or hiring a prostitute. The government isn’t allowed to punish you for an illegal action they made you perform.

Insanity. To be convicted of a crime, you have to have intended to perform the illegal deed. If a mental illness kept you from fully understanding what you were doing, you can plead insanity—though this is often very difficult to prove. In most cases, a successful insanity plea will land you in a psychiatric institution rather than prison.

Under the Influence. If you were under the influence of drugs, you might be able to argue that you did not have the mental power to control your actions. While this is only a partial defense, it could have your charges reduced to a slightly less serious crime.

The truth. A skilled lawyer can help you tell the truth in such a way that it reflects better on your case. An effective story should be accurate, but include elements that will gain sympathy from the court and explain or justify your behavior.

Preparation. Being well-prepared for your case is an essential defense strategy that a knowledgeable lawyer can assist you with. By informing you of the facts, coaching you, and helping you practice for your trial, an attorney can help you prepare and present the best possible defense. Your lawyer can walk you through complex laws, so you are able to better understand the prosecution’s case and what kind of evidence you need to combat it. An attorney can prepare you with practice interviews, special assignments, and advice that will help you strengthen your case.

The bottom line? Even if you’ve already admitted guilt and the evidence points against you, you can have your charges reduced or dropped—but you need an expert criminal defense lawyer. Whether you have been charged with public indecency, burglary, criminal trespass, or any other crime, an experienced lawyer can help you ensure the best outcome of your case. Don’t put the future well-being, freedom, and reputation of you and your family at risk by attempting to navigate the complex judicial system alone. A smart attorney is a powerful and necessary ally as you fight to defend your rights and civil liberties.

About the Author: Andrew M. Weisberg is a former felony prosecutor who now serves as a defense attorney in the greater Chicago area. He has extensive experience in handling all types of criminal cases, from sex offenses and domestic violence to retail theft-related crimes, Murder, and drug crimes.

Despite decades of law enforcement intervention, domestic violence is still major public concern. To prevent police inaction in response to domestic abuse and ultimately to attempt to lower domestic violence rates, nearly half of the U.S. states have implemented mandatory arrest provisions. While the preferred arrest law instructs the responding officer to consider arrest as the preferred course of action, in the case of mandatory arrest laws, the responding officer is obligated to make a more aggressive intervention and make an arrest (he is, however, required to find probable cause that an offense has been committed).

For the last three decades, the warrantless arrest powers of law enforcement have grown exponentially, and they keep growing: just last month, the legislature in Madison County, Alabama, passed a bill that would further increase authorities’ freedom to make arrests. But ongoing research examining the outcome – for both the victim and the aggressor – of mandatory arrest laws raises various questions about the efficiency of this approach in cases of domestic violence.

Mandatory Arrests Increase Domestic Violence Rates

A paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research published in June, 2007, attempted to analyze to what extent does the certainty of arrest lower domestic violence rates, and the results were surprising: “The results presented in this study suggest that this (implementing mandatory arrest laws to decrease intimate partner violence rates) may, in fact,be counterproductive. Using data from the FBI Supplementary Homicide Reports from 1976-2003, I find that the level of intimate partner homicide increased in states with these mandatory arrest laws. This may be because abuse victims may be less likely to contact the police in the face of a mandatory arrest law.”

What the author of the paper found out is that, instead of seeing a decrease in domestic violence due to the aggressive intervention of law enforcement, an opposite effect is visible: homicide rates have actually increased due to decreased reporting of domestic crimes. Regardless of the good intentions of state policy makers, mandatory arrest laws are shown to harm the very people they try to help.

The solution? A change of tactics: “Given the dangerous and pervasive nature of domestic violence, there is little doubt that state intervention, in some form, is required. Determining what shape that intervention takes is of vital importance. The results from this study suggest that the threat of arrest is insufficient to deter abusers from killing their victims. Finding arrests deter victim reporting rather than perpetrator abuse provides valuable insight into the intricacies facing governmental attempts to decrease intimate partner violence.”

Mandatory Arrests Cause Early Death in Victims

Arresting a domestic abuser may not only lead to more violence (as pointed by the aforementioned study), but it can also have significant negative effects on the victims’ long-term health.

A recent follow-up of the study conducted more than two decades ago called The Milwaukee Domestic Violence Experiment found that victims of domestic violence whose partners have been arrested on misdemeanor charges were more likely to have died, compared to victims whose aggressors haven’t been arrested by the police. The cause of death was not violence inflicted by the aggressor, but rather health-related reasons such as heart attacks, cancer, and other internal diseases. The main takeaway: having a partner arrested – regardless of his abusive behavior – takes an emotional toll that will impact victims’ health years after the incident.

The numbers were particularly discouraging for African-American victims, which made up the majority of victims in the initial study. It was revealed that black women who had partners arrested on domestic violence charges were two times more likely to have died of disease by 2013, compared to women whose partners were only warned, but not arrested, in cases of domestic violence. Furthermore, another interesting point made by the study was that black victims who were working at the times their partners were arrested were four times more likely to have died than those whose partners got off with just a warning.

Lawrence Sherman, the Director of the Institute of Criminology of the University of Cambridge, said “We are now sure that the difference in death was not due to homicide, which was our original research question. […] The racial difference suggests that the best explanation must be bio-social. There must be something about witnessing a partner’s arrest that triggers a physiological response leading to higher rates of death from heart disease and other internal maladies, but far more so for victims who are African-American than for whites.”

It still isn’t very clear what mechanisms triggered such a response in victims who died earlier. The study goes on to explain that defendants who were, in fact,arrested were most often incarcerated for short periods, so it wasn’t the suffering or toil of the arrested partner that led to a decrease of the victims’ overall health. (Most were misdemeanor arrests as well, meaning that there were no physical injuries.)

Previous studies have revealed the increased likelihood of post-traumatic stress symptoms in victims who witnessed the arrest of their partners, symptoms linked in the long run with premature death caused by heart complications and other health disorders. However, the reasons why victims in concentrated black poverty areas suffer more trauma than those in white working-class communities are yet to be understood: “Because all the victims had an equal chance of having their partners arrested by random assignment, there is no other likely explanation for this difference except that it was caused by seeing their partners arrested.”

The findings are, of course, subject of debate. But if one conclusion can be drawn from all this data is that domestic violence should be a subject of constant research, and the focus should be on the results of current policies, not on the good intentions of policymakers. Hopefully, the ongoing analysis will lead to the development of effective methods of identification and prevention, rather than simply assuming that locking away abusers will solve the problem in the long run.

About the Author Andrew M. Weisberg is a criminal defense attorney in Chicago, Illinois. A former prosecutor in Cook County, Mr. Weisberg,is a member of the Capital Litigation Trial Bar, an elite group of criminal attorneys who are certified by the Illinois Supreme Court to try death penalty cases. He is also a member of the Federal Trial Bar. Mr. Weisberg is a sole practitioner at the Law Offices of Andrew M. Weisberg.

Source URL : http://dailym.ai/1ituW18

While most shoplifting in U.S. stores is carried out by college-educated individuals who simply act on impulse and steal low-value items, it can very well be turned into a lucrative business that can pay for a luxurious lifestyle.

This is exactly the case of a family from a Chicago posh suburb, who stole $7 million in merchandise from stores all over the country during a 10-year shoplifting spree. Their main targets included toys, dolls, cosmetics, jewelry, and other valuables. They had a preference for certain items, particularly American Girl dolls, Lego, baby monitors, Furby dolls, and steak knives they obtained from renowned brands: Barnes & Noble, Toys”R”Us, Dillard’s, and several others.

Branko Bogdanov, 58 and Lela Bogdanov, 52, together with their grown-up daughter of 34 years old Julia, were arrested last week at their Northbrook home, a residence valued at $1.3 million, immediately after they arrived home from a 3-day shoplifting trip through stores in Texas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma. Thefts by the three were also reported in other states, including Tennessee, Maryland, and Florida.

Regarding their M.O., it is believed that, on most shoplifting trips, the stolen items were hidden in a long black skirt worn by Lela Bogdanov, which appears notably fuller when she’s leaving the store than when she entered. Apparently, the skirt had a lining capable of holding several items at once and, while Lela was stuffing items up her skirt, Branko and Julia were creating diversions in order to gain time and allow her to leave the store before the police signaled the theft. All items were then sold on eBay, through merchant accounts they’ve set up with the help of a fence.

The three have been charged with interstate transportation of stolen property, but have not yet entered pleas. They will remain in detention until next hearing.

Different Classifications of Shoplifter

According to a comprehensive review titled “Shoplifting: A Review of the Literature” by authors Therese Krasnovsky and Robert C. Lane from the Nova Southeastern University,shoplifting is one of the most prevalent crimes of our age, rapidly becoming a problem not just for the business sector and the legal system, but also for the general population – who often ends up paying extra to cover the losses of stolen goods. Here’s how scientists over the last century have classified the culprits:

1. Cameron’s Classification (1964)

Upon analyzing information from a large apprehension in a Chicago department store, Cameron differentiated between two types of shoplifters:

a) Boosters, or commercial shoplifters, made up about 10 percent of the sample, and were defined as those who steal to sell the items further. They know people (fences) who can help them pass on the stolen goods, and they usually have a history of criminal activities.

b) Snitches, or the pilferers, made up the remaining 90 percent of Cameron’s sample. Respectable American citizens, college-educated in most part, these shoplifters did not have any contacts with the criminal world and didn’t plan to sell the items for their value. Often, they engaged in criminal activities due to their neurotic, impulsive personalities.

2. Moore’s Classification (1984)

Based on his colleague’s work, Moore defined his own typology of shoplifters using the following criteria: frequency, use of stolen goods, attitude towards the criminal act,primary factor, and reaction to consequences, especially of legal nature. He described the following types of shoplifters:

a) Impulseshoplifter – 15.4% – limited shoplifting activity, not planned, inexpensive items.

b) Occasional shoplifter – 15% – 3-10 times per year, engaged in criminal activity due to a desire for doing something challenging. They often minimized the consequences of their actions.

c) Episodic shoplifter – 1.7% – periodic episodes of shoplifting, stealing goods as a way to punish themselves. The criminal actions were mainly triggered by psychosocial factors.

d) Amateur shoplifter – 56.4% – largest category of shoplifters, who engaged in regular, almost weekly theft and had financial motivations. They stole small items that could be easily concealed, and when caught, claimed only minor involvement in the act.

e) Semi-professional shoplifter – 11.7% – the act of stealing had become part of their lifestyle. They were skilled at it and sold some of the stolen goods for profit. Through their actions, they were seeking “justified” revenge on society.

Regardless of the frequency, causes, and other factors useful in the classification of thieves, shoplifting is a serious crime, affecting countries from all over the globe. If you’ve been accused of stealing in a store, the best method to deal with such charges is to cooperate and make sure your rights have not been violated. Otherwise, it’s time to take out the heavy artillery – expert legal representation – and sue the store for false arrest or false imprisonment.

About the Author Andrew M. Weisberg is a criminal defense attorney in Chicago, Illinois. A former prosecutor in Cook County, Mr. Weisberg,is a member of the Capital Litigation Trial Bar, an elite group of criminal attorneys who are certified by the Illinois Supreme Court to try death penalty cases. He is also a member of the Federal Trial Bar. Mr. Weisberg is a sole practitioner at the Law Offices of Andrew M. Weisberg.

If you are facing a DUI charge either on its own or in conjunction with other offenses, a criminal lawyer in Chicago can investigate your case to determine if there may have been inaccuracies in the chemical tests that were used or if field sobriety tests were correctly administered and observed. Your criminal lawyer in Chicago will also want to know if you have any medical conditions that may have affected the results of those tests. Your defense lawyer will then be able to use all of that information to build the best defense possible for your case.

When you need a criminal lawyer in Chicago due to DUI or related charges, the Law Offices of Andrew M. Weisberg can serve you. Because Andrew Weisberg is a former prosecutor, he understands and anticipates the arguments and tactics that will be used against you in court and will already be prepared to counter such strategies ahead of time. When you need an experienced, knowledgeable criminal lawyer in Chicago, Andrew M. Weisberg is one you can depend upon.

Criminal Lawyer Chicago – If you’ve been charged with a crime, no matter how straightforward or complex the charge, Andrew M. Weisberg is a criminal lawyer in Chicago known for tough, aggressive defense. A former felony prosecutor, Attorney Weisberg has extensive experience in handling all types of criminal cases, from sex offenses and violent crimes to theft-related crimes and traffic violations. To contact Mr. Weisberg, visit /, call the office at 312.854.7004 or call his cell phone 24/7 at 773.908.9811 or Text LAWYER to 25827 for a prompt call back. The initial consultation is free.

For a criminal charge to be classified as a felony, it is a serious enough offense to warrant time in a state penitentiary if convicted. Consequently, much is at stake if you have been arrested for a felony. However, innocent people are accused of felony offenses no less than other crimes, and your Chicago criminal lawyer will thoroughly evaluate every aspect of your case to unearth weaknesses in the prosecution’s evidence and strategies so that the most stringent defense can be constructed for you.

When a felony charge threatens your very freedom, Chicago criminal lawyer Andrew M. Weisberg can be your biggest ally. With years of experience and a strong, aggressive approach, Andrew M. Weisberg has both the knowledge and the expertise to formulate the best defense for your case. Your future and your freedom will be affected by the outcome of your case, so take no chances— contact the Law Offices of Andrew M. Weisberg without delay.

If you have been arrested in Chicago, no matter how straightforward or complex the charge, Chicago criminal lawyer Andrew M. Weisberg is known for tough, aggressive defense. A former felony prosecutor, Attorney Weisberg has extensive experience in handling all types of criminal cases, from sex offenses and violent crimes to theft-related crimes and traffic violations. To contact Mr. Weisberg, visit /, call the office at 312.854.7004 or call his cell phone 24/7 at 773.908.9811 or Text LAWYER to 25827 for a prompt call back. The initial consultation is free.

The reality is, however, that Cook County resembles every other area of the country. We have law abiding citizens and those who break the law. We have had excellent leaders at every level of municipal and county government, and we have had those whose integrity was called into question. Some folks in Cook County have had occasion to develop an almost constant relationship with their defense lawyer, while others have never spoken to a lawyer nor entered a Cook County Criminal Court in their lives, nor is it likely they ever will.

Regardless of reputation, anyone accused of criminal charges has the right to the expert legal representation that a good defense lawyer can provide. It doesn’t matter whether someone is a politician accused of bribery or a South Side ex-con charged with theft, the fact that some in Cook County have been found guilty of similar crimes cannot negate the fact that every suspect has the right to a lawyer and must be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

If you have been charged in Cook County, you have the same right to a criminal lawyer. Andrew M Weisberg understands your rights and will work assiduously to protect them, your reputation, and your freedom. Contact Cook County criminal lawyer Andrew Weisberg at his Chicago office today to get the help you need and the representation to which you are entitled.

If you have been arrested in Cook County, no matter how straightforward or complex your charges, Andrew M. Weisberg is a Cook County criminal lawyer in Chicago known for tough, aggressive defense. A former felony prosecutor, Attorney Weisberg has extensive experience in handling all types of criminal cases, from sex offenses and violent crimes to theft-related crimes and traffic violations. To contact Mr. Weisberg, visit / or call his cell phone 24/7 at (773) 908-9811 or Text LAWYER to 25827 for prompt call back. The consultation is free.