Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption

[Alexander Terekhov]

Uh retard dak. You wrote:

"But the point is: until I pass the cash register, there is no way of
knowing whether I had merely been employing my pocket because I was
running out of space in my hands or because I intended to steal
something."

That's not an evidence to rebutt presumption of intent to consummate a
theft, stupid.

In terms of German law, according to BGH:

http://www.gutefrage.net/frage/ist-das-ladendiebstahl

"Sobald ein Täter eine Ware in seine Kleidung oder in eine mitgeführte
Tasche gesteckt hat, ist sein Gewahrsam begründet und damit der
Diebstahl vollendet."

Got it now?

And, BTW, "Gewahrsam" above isn't confinement but rather

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gewahrsam

as in

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Besitz

stupid dak.

"And the particular sentence makes little enough sense:

"As soon as a perpetrator puts an item into his clothes or a carried
bag, his confinement is justified, and thus the theft is completed."

That's shaking the order and dependencies of the acts up rather
absurdly."

LMAO!!!

regards,
alexander.

P.S. "I'm insufficiently motivated to go set up a GNU/Linux system 
so that I can do the builds."

Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> The Silliest GPL 'Advocate'

P.P.S. "Of course correlation implies causation! Without this 
fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress."

Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> The Silliest GPL 'Advocate'

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)