Shoplifter Forgets Baby

A note to shoplifters: When doing your thing, don’t leave behind any item that could incriminate you, such as, say, your 10-month-old infant.

According to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, a hurried thief and an accomplice broke the rule of thumb when she escaped a JCPenney with $256 of purloined merchandise.

When a JCPenney employee spotted the suspect outside the store, she freaked out and fled, leaving her purse, the stolen clothes and the baby all together on the sidewalk.

The 23-year-old suspect added charges of child abuse without great harm, child neglect without causing great harm and contributing the to delinquency of a dependent to whatever fallout she faces for her shoplifting indiscretion.

Shoplifter runs out of JCPenney but forgets baby, police say [South Florida Sun-Sentinel]
(Thank, David!)

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. perfectly_cromulent says:

    This is my laugh for the day!

  2. danmac says:

    Why do Florida stories always make Benny Hill them music run through my head?

  3. B says:

    Or, you know, just leave the baby at home. Although I guess anybody stealing clothes from J.C Penny probably can’t afford a sitter.

    • anarkie says:

      WTF does where they steal from warrant what they can afford? You are an idiot.

      • pecan 3.14159265 says:

        Or, uh, maybe B was just stating the facts? She stole clothes from JC Penney. You’re the one making assumptions.

      • Rectilinear Propagation says:

        If she was stealing the clothing because she couldn’t afford to buy it that would imply that she couldn’t afford a sitter. Sitters are expensive.

        It’s the general assumption that people steal stuff like clothing because they can’t afford it but if retail workers are right and it’s usually middle income females who shoplift then the general assumption is wrong.

        • RadarOReally has got the Post-Vacation Blues says:

          When I worked retail, nearly all of the shoplifters were women with strollers. They’d stuff things all around and under the kid, or, since we now as a society needs strollers for kids up to 7, make the kid get out and walk so they could steal more. I think it was the assumption that nobody would dare to ask to search a stroller or accuse a glowing madonna of a mother of stealing. They were usually right, but it was fun to follow them and watch it.

      • Marshmelly says:

        um…pretty sure they were just stating the fact that she “stole clothes from JC Penney”…there was no emphasis on the place as opposed to somewhere else. You should chill and refrain from calling people names when you clearly fail at reading comprehension.

    • pecan 3.14159265 says:

      That’s the weird irony with these kinds of people. It’s okay to steal, but it’s not okay to leave the baby at home.

  4. smo0 says:

    That picture is accurate – people that age with kids generally treat them like baby dolls.

    • myCatCracksMeUp says:

      I know you used the word generally, but your statement is a broad generalization, and I think it’s quite inaccurate. While we do hear about the young mothers who do a poor job, they are still in a minority.

      Not very long ago most women married young and had their first children while still quite young, and I’ve seen no evidence that they didn’t do a good job. These days it’s become rare for women who aren’t in the lower economic brackets to have children young, but that doesn’t mean that most young women aren’t as capable of being good, young mothers as their grandmothers were.

      • smo0 says:

        There’s always one…

        My mother was 27 when she had me, I think her mother was around the same age…

        and that “not that long ago” you mentioned – society was very different back then. Women “generally” didn’t work, family support structure was different.. and women MARRIED.

        I’m not saying that unmarried women shouldn’ t have children, just unmarried YOUNG women. I speak from a “financially secure” perspective on the issue…

        • myCatCracksMeUp says:

          I was unmarried and 20 when I had my first child, and married and 23 when I had my second. I wouldn’t suggest it as the optimal course for anyone, but everything turned out fine for my family. Hubby and I put each other through college, got good jobs, raised our children well. They’re both well adjusted, self-supporting adults now, and our daughter (my first child) is married with two children. They live close by and we’re all very close. It wasn’t easy but I wouldn’t change a single thing.

          My mom married at 16 and had my older brother at 18, me at 20, then had several more. She was a fantastic mom – still is, for that matter.

          HER mom was 17 when she married and started having kids. My aunts were all married before 23.

          My family is from a very poor, rural area, and we were poor, but very much loved, and very well taken care of. I see nothing wrong with those choices, but I wouldn’t push any particular course of action for others.

      • pantheonoutcast says:

        I doubt those women also had their baby daddy’s name tattooed on their necks and shoplifted with 16 year olds.

    • armchair lactivist says:

      I think your statement is a huge generalization. By the time I was 23, I was married and expecting my first child. We were also homeowners and financially secure. Most of my friends also started having kids at 23-27, after getting married, graduating from college, and buying homes. Not all of us are irresponsible twits before 30.

    • Conformist138 says:

      My mom had me at 24. She was single and had to move back to her mom’s house. It took her an extra year, but she got a BS from a respected private college and wound up going from restocking shelves at Fred Meyer to being in their corporate offices as a buyer.

      She always told me she didn’t know how to reconcile the warnings of being a single mother with the reality of how well she managed. The way I saw it (and still see it) is that I came from a woman that made the most difficult situation look like a breeze, so whatever I wanna do, I can do.

  5. lawgirl502 says:

    What a dumbass. Please take that baby away from her forever.

  6. GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

    THIS is why you never bring babies, or ducks, to thefts.

  7. rahntwo says:

    What an idiot! She could have sold the baby in the parking lot and then used the money to legally purchase all those clothes. Some people shouldn’t be crooks OR parents.

    • segfault, registered cat offender says:

      Ten months is pretty old. You can get $10,000 for a newborn but the price goes down pretty sharply after a month or two.

      • smo0 says:

        Really? I’m curious as to why the price drops….

        • Rectilinear Propagation says:

          Probably the same reason why older kids can’t get adopted.

          • smo0 says:

            But yeah, this is a month – not psycho abbrasive baggage of growing up in a broken home or foster home.

            • aloria says:

              Ten months. The type of people who would buy a kid want a brand spanking new little baby, not one that is nearly a year old.

              • smo0 says:

                Ah… so a baby is like an iPhone….

                clears up a lot of unanswered questions I’ve had about this topic…

                THANKS!

      • Dutchess says:

        Reminds me of a line from Reno911 when they do the PSAs.

        “You can get up to $25k on the black market for a baby, even asian ones.”

        It’s horrible and a little racist but funny as hell.

      • ChuckECheese says:

        You can get twice that if the eyes stay blue.

  8. segfault, registered cat offender says:

    Sounds like a question for Yahoo Answers: “How is babby forgotten? How girl leave babby in cart?”

  9. Yoko Broke Up The Beatles says:

    Hey, how did they figure out who the theif was? Did the 10-month-old infant rat her out?

    OH, the story says a 16-year-old was also questioned. That makes sense – I figured if the lady fled leaving the baby at the scene, then why would she retreive the baby from the authorities later? It’s pretty clear that parenting is not a priority for her.

  10. ExtraCelestial says:

    This reminds me of the old Loveline Florida or Germany game.

  11. Nighthawke says:

    Only in Florida…. Has their Child welfare and support services ever got straightened out yet?

  12. LawyerontheDL says:

    “Contributing the to delinquency of a dependent”? What was the baby guilty of possession of stolen goods? Or was he loitering?

    • Tevokkia says:

      I love you. Really.

      Except for the part where you made me spit my drink out on my keyboard.

    • RStormgull says:

      Possession of an unregistered firearm, grand theft auto, and cattle rustling. You know, the usual charges that babies get up to when the folks aren’t around.

    • Dunkelzahn says:

      While the line was funny, the reason for that charge was the fact that she had a 16-year-old with her.

      • omg says:

        The fact that a 16-year-old was with the 23-year-old suspect hardly justifies a charge of contributing to the delinquency of a dependent…unless somehow the 16-year-old is a dependent of the 23-year-old.

        Which would make this truly an epic fail.

  13. HogwartsProfessor says:

    …contributing the to delinquency of a dependent…
    Are they SURE that’s a baby???

    The first thing I thought of was Finster, aka Ant Hill Harry, notorious bank robber believed to have perpetrated the daring Last National Bank holdup this morning.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Buggy_Bunny

  14. Mackinstyle1 says:

    Drugs are so clearly involved.

    • Dunkelzahn says:

      Your reasoning?

      I say she deserves a break. We already let a ‘frazzled mom’ get away with shoplifting at Whole Foods: http://con.st/10008815

      Disclaimer: If you’re taking me seriously, you need to re-evaluate yourself.

  15. mvillafana says:

    That is one of the funniest pictures I’ve ever seen!

  16. kajillion123 says:

    Picture of the perpetrators within:
    link