1 in 11 Americans (approximately 27 million Americans) – no matter how poor or wealthy they are – takes goods from the store shelves and “forgets” to pay for them. Shoplifting is a national epidemic that’s costing the economy more than $100 million each day, with most criminals getting away: shoplifters say they are caught only once in every 48 times they steal. Meat, razors, baby formula, electronics, cosmetics, alcohol, over-the-counter drugs, and clothes are on the list of the most shoplifted items in the U.S.

And while one can understand the reasons why a person would steal an expensive laptop, it’s simply baffling for most why a college-educated and working individual would risk his or her freedom for a bottle of whiskey. And yet, psychologists have several theories why people engage in this kind of criminal activity without considering the long-term consequences, singling finances, emotional issues, peer pressure, and kleptomania. The typical shoplifter is not the beady-eyed criminal who has it all figured out and plans to make a huge profit off of the stolen items. It turns out, shoplifting is primarily an impulse.

The majority of shoplifters (excluding organized professionals who steal for a living) don’t plan their heists in advance. Getting something for nothing has a greater meaning for the average shoplifter than the value of the stolen item itself: for some it’s a substitute for loss experienced in a recent divorce or accident, for others it’s justified revenge against other people, the government, or big corporations. Many people steal as a relief mechanism for depression, anxiety, boredom, or just to spend their time differently.

Interviewed by Forbes, Dr. Read Hayes from the Loss Prevention Research Council talked about people’s tendency of stealing low-value items: “Most theft is greed, not need. They certainly don’t need the steak, but they talk themselves into self-justifying the behavior. It’s a big corporation; they charge too much; everyone does it.”

Barbara Staib from the National Association for Shoplifting Prevention confirms this theory: “There’s an acceptable level of dishonesty in society. Most shoppers think it’s okay to eat grapes. They think it’s a free sample. But do you see a sign saying you can eat grapes? No. It’s stealing.”

On a larger scale, shoplifting is a serious crime that negatively impacts small and large retailers alike. Losses of tens of billions of dollars – $35 billion per year only in the U.S. – are reported by retailers every year, the economy is constantly burdened by unnecessary costs, and the existence of many stores is continually endangered by shoplifters. In addition to all this, store owners and employees are constantly at risk of having legal action pursued against them, if they decide to adopt measures in order to protect their property rights.

False arrest, humiliation, and similar charges – most often the result of shoplifting prevention efforts – are the reasons why consumers decide to sue store owners. If you feel an injustice has been committed in your case, a criminal defense lawyer with experience in these cases can help clear your name and also receive compensation, if the damages you’ve suffered are notable. Call 773.908.9811 or visit / and fill out a short form with your personal details to schedule an initial consultation.

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 solo practitioner at the Law Offices of Andrew M. Weisberg.

Statistically, there’s a good chance that you didn’t buy the pen in your purse or jacket pocket, but took it from work. People take things from work all the time, either intentionally or not. Most don’t really think about such pilfering as theft, rationalizing that it’s one of the “benefits” that come with the job, but there is no ‘de minimis’ requirement for theft – if it’s company property, then it’s not yours to take, be it a pen, money, or anything else of value.

One survey produced by a security company discovered that a whopping 95% of people steal or have stolen from work at some point. An AOL Jobs survey reports, “43 percent of people admitted to taking things from work to keep for personal use.” Every year, theft committed by employeescosts businesses up to about $3.5 trillion dollars. In the long run,that translates into higher prices for consumers, and may be evidence that there are a lot of unhappy people in America’s companies.

From Paper Clips to Diamonds

Most people draw the line at the odd pen, notepad, or binder – they are not adept or committed thievestrying to make extra money from their crimes. However, the activities of some office thieves make common pen pilfering pale in comparison:

• Adrian Rodriguez, the New York law firm employee who was convicted in 2013 of stealing more than $376,000 worth of copy machine toner cartridges, which he then sold on what one prosecutor described as a robust “black market for office supplies” currently flourishing in the city.
• Michael Brooks and Javunte Wheeler were caught red-handed as they were trying to steal $7,500 worth of iPads from a Federal Express storage facility in Chicago by secreting them out under a sweatshirt and tossing them over the facility fence to a waiting car.
• Tiffany’s Vice-President Ingrid Lederhaas-Okun is now serving a year in prison for stealing jewelry worth over $1.3 million dollars from the high-end retailer, which she sold to re-sellers over a two year period.

Why do people steal from their employers?

This is the defense Lederhaas-Okun’s theft attorney presented, arguing that her actions were the result of depression caused by personal problems, such as being unable to bear children and not getting an expected promotion.

But in the eyes of the law, stealing is stealing, whether it’s a diamond necklace worth $10,000 or a box of paperclips. If you’re caught, the penalties can certainly include losing your job and the friendship and respect of your friends and co-workers. But you may also face a range of criminal charges:

• Petty theft: This is the charge if the stolen items are worth less than $500 – $1000. Penalties can range from a fine to jail time.
• Grand Theft: Items worth more than petty theft goods will garner grand theft charges, which can also be ranked as felonies that draw much more severe penalties, including prison time of up to 25 years.

But most people will never have to worry about this. It’s pretty unlikely that the police will follow you to your car when you leave work at 5:00 pm and conduct a body cavity search for a paperclip!

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.

What would you think if you heard someone who had stolen a car say, “It’s not my fault—my brain made me do it.” While it might sound absurd when phrased that way, that essential argument is one that is being used in more and more criminal defense cases across the country.

We’ve all heard of the insanity plea before—a defendant claims that they are not culpable for the crime they committed because they were legally insane at the time it took place. The insanity plea as we have traditionally understood it is actually only used in about 1% of all felony cases, and only succeeds about a quarter of the time it is used. However, some criminal defenders these days are taking a slightly different approach: they’re using brain scans and neuropsychological tests to argue that brain abnormalities have caused their clients to commit criminal acts.

This defense has become more and more commonplace as we continue to learn about the human brain. In 2005, neuroscience was used as evidence in 30 felony cases that did not involve homicide. In 2012,that number increased to over 100.

The Rise of Neurolaw

Psychology in criminal law is a relatively recent field of study. Recent studies have shown a link between psychopathy and structural brain abnormalities. Brain scans of true psychopaths have revealed that this small subset of people experiences abnormalities in “social” parts of their brains, creating deficits in empathy and potentially leading to criminal behavior.

The intriguing brain scans of psychopaths have led to psychological studies of other individuals who have committed criminal acts, and now some criminal defendants are using data from these studies to suggest that non-psychopaths may commit crimes due to brain abnormalities caused by genetics or trauma,as well. They argue that these brain abnormalities may cause impulsivity and inhibit the decision-making process, leading to criminal acts such as stealing.

A Case for Kleptomania and Other Mental Disorders

When it comes to stealing, there’s another potential psychological catalyst that has gotten a fair amount of coverage (and misrepresentation) in popular culture: kleptomania. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV, kleptomania is characterized by the repeated stealing of items not needed for personal use or monetary value, an increased sense of tension immediately before committing the theft, and pleasure or relief upon committing the theft. It often coexists with other mental disorders, such as depression,social phobia, anorexia, bulimia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or a chemical dependence. Having another mental illness or some kind of brain injury or head trauma is considered a risk factor for kleptomania.

Because people who truly have kleptomania are not motivated by financial gain, the items they steal are often not very expensive, and if they are caught they’ll likely face a misdemeanor rather than a felony. But what if someone with this disorder does steal something larger, like a car? Or steals so many little things over a period of time that the value of their thefts gets up into the thousands of dollars? If the monetary value of the stolen items earns them a felony charge, defendants could potentially face significant prison time, and even a misdemeanor carries the possibility of imprisonment. Does someone who is motivated to steal because of a compulsion or brain injury really deserve that kind of a sentence?

Courts Need to Look at the Big Picture

Ultimately, our courts need to look at a whole host of factors when evaluating criminal cases, not just brain scans or a psychological diagnosis. We need to consider other possible motivating factors, influences in the defendant’s life, and other social circumstances that may have played into the crime. Even if evidence from neuroscience is not sufficient to alleviate a defendant of all responsibility, there may be other important factors at play that should be considered when determining their sentence or treatment course.

In an interview with Psychology Today, Pathways Institute for Impulse Control co-founder Elizabeth Corsale argued that even when thefts are not caused by an impulse disorder, there is clearly some kind of problem that is causing the person to commit this divergent act. She suggests thatongoing treatment, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, as well as group and individual therapy, is the best way to treat people with a stealing problem.

Looking at the big picture in these types of nonviolent cases will help us discover treatment courses thatare much more effective than a prison sentence. We need to treat the whole person—not just the criminal act—and continuing to educate ourselves on the role of neuroscience in criminal behavior is one tool in determining how to do this.

About the Author: Kimberly Diego is a criminal defense attorney in Denver practicing at The Law Office of Kimberly Diego. She obtained her undergraduate degree from Georgetown University and her law degree at the University of Colorado. She was named one of Super Lawyers’ “Rising Stars of 2012” and “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in Colorado” for 2012 and 2013 by The National Trial Lawyers. Both honors are limited to a small percentage of practicing attorneys in each state. She has also been recognized for her work in domestic violence cases.