Cops: Pregnant Woman Armed With Hairspray Attacks Store Employee While Shoplifting

Police say a pregnant woman in South Carolina tried to shoplift from a beauty supply store, and when she was caught, she allegedly whacked the apprehending employee upside the head with a can of pilfered hairspray. Such an example to set for an unborn child!

WBTV in Rock Hill says the woman is facing assault charges for the alleged attack. They say they arrived on the scene and spoke with a man with blood dripping from his head from the hairspray-inflicted wound.

Others in the store say the 23-year-old woman was attempting to put several items in her purse, when the employee tried to stop her and grabbed the purse. Cops say she then smacked the man with the hairspray can, ran out of the store, dropped the purse and drove off.

The woman was later apprehended, at which time she claimed she was defending herself. She was taken to the hospital for abdominal pain, and was later arrested.

*Thanks for the tip, Harper!

Pregnant shoplifter attacks employee with can of hairspray, police say [WBTV]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    Somewhat similar to the content of the article itself, I expect a myriad of consumer-related comments.

  2. Coffee says:

    Funny how pregnant shoplifters always go into labor whenever they’re caught shoplifting. Also, if you drop your purse/wallet/child/license plate when you’re in the process of running out of the store, perhaps it’s time to sigh in resignation and take a seat in the timeout corner…you’re not doing yourself any favors.

  3. dolemite says:

    It’s always interesting that when caught, so many suspects have some kind of “pain” or problem that requires them to go to the hospital. News for you chief…you are still going to jail when the doctors find there is nothing wrong with you.

    • Bladerunner says:

      Too often, that’s not the case. A lot of times the cops don’t feel like bothering to follow up on minor things, I can speak from experience.

  4. crispyduck13 says:

    At least she was getting exercise?

  5. raydee wandered off on a tangent and got lost says:

    It wasn’t a baby, that was the turkey she picked up from the grocery store before hitting up the beauty supply shop!

  6. Princess Beech loves a warm cup of treason every morning says:

    I’m pretty sure this isn’t part of a scene in “Hairspray”.

    ** starts dancing stupidly a la Glee **

    • gman863 says:

      Penny Pringleton! Did you just boost six cans of Aqua-Net or are you just eating all the ice cream at the teen council meetings again?”

  7. TheMansfieldMauler says:

    I’m not familiar specifically with SC law, but assault during the commission of a theft usually results in felony robbery charges, not just assault charges.

    • Difdi says:

      This. The woman claimed she hit the man in self-defense, but self-defense is what a victim does to their attacker. Using violence against your victim while committing a crime is also a crime.

  8. Cat says:

    Alexis Sade Hayes:

    http://www.newnation.co/forums/showthread.php?s=b8bc321b6b9ff3496890d7aa9dfc225f&p=452151#post452151

    Hayes has several prior shoplifting charges, according to the report.

    • TheMansfieldMauler says:

      Is that a website you frequent?

      • Cat says:

        No, but there’s this thing called “Google”, and if you type “Alexis Sade Hayes” into it, it will magically take you there!

        • TheMansfieldMauler says:

          Ok, I was just wondering why you would link to a blatantly white supremacist website. I mean, there must be better sources of information to link to.

          But if you think it’s best to just click on whatever and take what comes, more power to you.

          • Bsamm09 says:

            I knew it was a white supremacist site as soon as saw the forum thread title. Racists are always good at alliteration.

            • Cat says:

              “Even with a sarcasm tag, people are taken far too seriously on the internet….”

              I apologize humbly and deeply.

          • little stripes says:

            Ugh, I’m glad you warned me, because I have no desire to click on such a link while at work. O_o

          • Cat says:

            It’s the only one I found with a picture.

            So perhaps this isn’t really her?

            • TheMansfieldMauler says:

              I wouldn’t know, and I don’t think that’s the issue.

              • Cat says:

                So what exactly IS the issue?

                • TheMansfieldMauler says:

                  The issue is that you linked to a white supremacist site (for what purpose I still don’t know). And that site, as pointed out by “little stripes” below, is probably NSFW for many people who are at work right now and having their browsing history logged by their IT department, possibly with alerts for attempts at accessing filtered sites.

                  • Cat says:

                    Purpose: I wanted a picture.

                  • TheMansfieldMauler says:

                    Actually, now that I think about it, the link to that site could even cause Consumerist to be filtered out by some corporate firewalls. It would be logged as a site that links to a known racist site, and Consumerist would be blocked from then on.

                    Nice jorb.

                  • Cat says:

                    When I followed the search results, what popped up looked ok. What I failed to see was the header – it’s not visible unless you scroll up, and neither is the crappy title “Pilfering Pregnant Primate Hits Hired Hand with Hairspray”.

                    I can’t honestly know the name of every racist website on the internet.
                    I really just wanted a picture to see if it was some crazy meth head lady.

                • little stripes says:

                  The issue is that you linked to a blatantly racist site. If nothing else, we shouldn’t be giving them more page views, but I’m sure also that a lot of people really don’t want to be tricked into going to such a hateful site. It was just unnecessary.

                  • Cat says:

                    As if I did that on purpose? You think?

                    • little stripes says:

                      Either you are really clueless, or you did it on purpose. Neither of which is something to be proud of. But sure, go ahead and not see the issue with linking that, if it makes you feel superior.

                    • Cat says:

                      You see, I really just don’t have time to be a web filter for you. I found the content I was seeking, and I didn’t notice the package it was wrapped in. It was the only photo I could find, and I just don’t have the time to research every site’s total content.

                      This is the internet, you take the good with the bad. There’s much more disturbing things out there.

                      If these things are a problem, there’s this: http://www.netnanny.com/

    • Earl Butz says:

      Nice site, explains a lot of your past postings here.

      • Cat says:

        Really? It was the only photo I could find. Perhaps I could have just put a link to the image, but as I said below, I posted the link without researching the entire site. I don’t have time to be your internet nanny.

        So, what do you mean by “explains a lot of your past postings here”? We’re all equal on this planet, and nobody is better than anyone. Yea, I put out some sarcasm and snark, but none of it is ever serious.

        If you’re seeing any racism here, I believe it’s all in your head – not mine.

  9. Extended-Warranty says:

    This story won’t have a happy ending until she sues the store for some reason

    • Coffee says:

      After seeing blood gout from the dude’s head wound, the woman got sick and now can’t stop thinking about head wounds. She has nightmares about them constantly and can no longer even leave the house or shoplift hard objects without having horrible flashbacks. The poor, emotionally distressed thing.

  10. TheMansfieldMauler says:

    Is that a website you frequent?

  11. the Persistent Sound of Sensationalism says:

    Great. Now they’ll start banning hairspray in IL to prevent copycat attacks…

    • MwMike says:

      We’ll still be able to buy it, but now they have to form a dept for hairspray registration and tracking.

  12. AllanG54 says:

    I guess not all the weird stuff happens in Florida.

  13. abruke says:

    All she did was create a sticky situation for herself. I’m sure law enforcement will stay firm in their pursuit of stiff justice.

  14. Kaleey says:

    Wow, I think the headline alone has enough in it for a BINGO!

  15. Cor Aquilonis says:

    So, anyone want to start a pool on how long it will be until the victim is fired? Because that sort of thing seems to be the corporate response to any altercation that involves an employee, right or wrong.

    • Earl Butz says:

      Look, you’re not allowed to get into physical combat with a shoplifter, and that’s a rule for your own benefit. I understand what he did, but he’s probably going to lose his job over this and I can’t see any reason he shouldn’t. He easily could have ended up with a bullet through his head instead of a spray can to the side.

  16. Paul in SF says:

    What a dummy. Everyone knows that you are supposed to spray it at your intended victim while holding a lit lighter in front of the nozzle.

  17. Earl Butz says:

    Oh, let me guess…

    On another related tangent, laying hands on the shoplifter was stupid. Big no no there.