Leaf owner arrested for plugging in at school

[NomisR]

http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/nissan-leaf-owner-arrested-taking-5-cents-energy-170034388.html

Warning should've been sufficient, seems like the police department is overstaffed if they were to take time to actually arrest someone for this.

[bing_oh]

If the victim wants charges, then the amount of the theft is immaterial and the officer did his job.

[GoCougs]

Extremely disturbing esp. considering the arrest came 11 days after the "crime." Hope the "criminal" takes it to court. Not only can't I imagine a jury ever convicting seems it will be impossible to prove theft unless the LEO had a current clamp meter or the like and actually verified real-time that the car was "stealing" electricity. My hunch is the school, or whoever is in charge, won't press charges.

[Catman]

Unless there's more to the story I find this to be a very poor arrest.  This could have simply been handled right there and then without further issue. Stupid.

[Soup DeVille]

Extremely disturbing esp. considering the arrest came 11 days after the "crime." Hope the "criminal" takes it to court. Not only can't I imagine a jury ever convicting seems it will be impossible to prove theft unless the LEO had a current clamp meter or the like and actually verified real-time that the car was "stealing" electricity. My hunch is the school, or whoever is in charge, won't press charges.

That's what I was wondering; how can he even be sure the car was charging?

Being plugged in means nothing unless there's actually a current draw, and if there is, how's he going to measure it.

Even a regular ammeter is just going to give you draw at the moment; to proof theft, you have to prove he's stealing energy, and you can't really do that without measuring the watt-hours that he took.

[hounddog]

Extremely disturbing esp. considering the arrest came 11 days after the "crime." Hope the "criminal" takes it to court. Not only can't I imagine a jury ever convicting seems it will be impossible to prove theft unless the LEO had a current clamp meter or the like and actually verified real-time that the car was "stealing" electricity. My hunch is the school, or whoever is in charge, won't press charges.

. Have you ever heard of Due Process?   Most likely, just going by what was written, if it took that long someone called to report the "crime.".   Many departments have limited officer discretion when it comes to seeking charges on complaints filed by citizens.  The officer probably had to write a report and forward it to the prosecutor for review, happens all the time.

And, the law doesn't always have to prove an actual larceny occured, merely that there was a crime in progress and that the suspect had "intent" to commit a crime, in this case; larceny.

[NomisR]

Well, the City Manager and Police Chief issued this statement

We received a 911 call advising that someone was plugged into the power outlet behind the middle school. The responding officer located the vehicle in the rear of the building at the kitchen loading dock up against the wall with a cord run to an outlet. The officer spent some time trying to determine whose vehicle it was. It was unlocked and he eventually began looking through the interior after verifying it did not belong to the school system.

The officer, his marked patrol vehicle and the electric vehicle were all in clear view of the tennis courts. Eventually, a man on the courts told the officer that the man playing tennis with him owned the vehicle. The officer went to the courts and interviewed the vehicle owner. The officer's initial incident report gives a good indication of how difficult and argumentative the individual was to deal with. He made no attempt to apologize or simply say oops and he wouldn't do it again. Instead he continued being argumentative, acknowledged he did not have permission and then accused the officer of having damaged his car door. The officer told him that was not true and that the vehicle and existing damage was already on his vehicles video camera from when he drove up.

Given the uncooperative attitude and accusations of damage to his vehicle, the officer chose to document the incident on an incident report. The report was listed as misdemeanor theft by taking. The officer had no way of knowing how much power had been consumed, how much it cost nor how long it had been charging.

The report made its way to Sgt Ford's desk for a follow up investigation. He contacted the middle school and inquired of several administrative personnel whether the individual had permission to use power. He was advised no. Sgt. Ford showed a photo to the school resource officer who recognized Mr. Kamooneh. Sgt Ford was further advised that Mr. Kamooneh had previously been advised he was not allowed on the school tennis courts without permission from the school . This was apparently due to his interfering with the use of the tennis courts previously during school hours.

Based upon the totality of these circumstances and without any expert advice on the amount of electricity that may have been used, Sgt Ford signed a theft warrant. The warrant was turned over to the DeKalb Sheriffs Dept for service because the individual lived in Decatur, not Chamblee. This is why he was arrested at a later time.

I am sure that Sgt. Ford was feeling defensive when he said a theft is a theft and he would do it again. Ultimately, Sgt. Ford did make the decision to pursue the theft charges, but the decision was based on Mr. Kamooneh having been advised that he was not allowed on the property without permission. Had he complied with that notice none of this would have occurred. Mr. Kamooneh's son is not a student at the middle school and he was not the one playing tennis. Mr. Kamooneh was taking lessons himself.

Looks like the guy will be getting off the hook then since they issued a warrant for theft even though the problem was trespassing and not theft. 

But since the guy was taking a lesson, I wonder if the instructor has permission to give tennis lessons to the facility.  And if so, does that also give some sort of implied consent for limited use of the resources at the facility, similar to using a water fountain.. or would drinking from an water fountain be considered theft as well? 

[GoCougs]

. Have you ever heard of Due Process?   Most likely, just going by what was written, if it took that long someone called to report the "crime.".   Many departments have limited officer discretion when it comes to seeking charges on complaints filed by citizens.  The officer probably had to write a report and forward it to the prosecutor for review, happens all the time.

And, the law doesn't always have to prove an actual larceny occured, merely that there was a crime in progress and that the suspect had "intent" to commit a crime, in this case; larceny.

According to the story it wasn't a complaint filed by a citizen; an LEO rolled upon the "thief" and began asking questions, and concluded theft occurred. 

The underpinning of intent, is, well, intent. Did the Leaf owner intend to or know he was "stealing" electricity? Tens of millions of people plug AC devices into wall outlets in the US every day without asking the property owner - airport, coffee shop, restaurant, library, etc., etc. - without ever getting accused for theft or larceny.

[Catman]

. Have you ever heard of Due Process?   Most likely, just going by what was written, if it took that long someone called to report the "crime.".   Many departments have limited officer discretion when it comes to seeking charges on complaints filed by citizens.  The officer probably had to write a report and forward it to the prosecutor for review, happens all the time.

And, the law doesn't always have to prove an actual larceny occured, merely that there was a crime in progress and that the suspect had "intent" to commit a crime, in this case; larceny.

Waste of time.

[GoCougs]

My good hunch is there is more to the story. The Leaf owner kinda looks like one of those militant whiny green liberal types. He probably gave the LEO a bunch of guff and otherwise forced the situation.

[NomisR]

According to the story it wasn't a complaint filed by a citizen; an LEO rolled upon the "thief" and began asking questions, and concluded theft occurred. 

The underpinning of intent, is, well, intent. Did the Leaf owner intend to or know he was "stealing" electricity? Tens of millions of people plug AC devices into wall outlets in the US every day without asking the property owner - airport, coffee shop, restaurant, library, etc., etc. - without ever getting accused for theft or larceny.

The thing is, people seem to think EVs draws a lot more power from your typical 120V outlet and probably equate to $20-$30 worth of power draw from that short period. 

[Catman]

My good hunch is there is more to the story. The Leaf owner kinda looks like one of those militant whiny green liberal types. He probably gave the LEO a bunch of guff and otherwise forced the situation.

That's my guess.  Most cops would be happy telling the guy to unplug the car and carrying on.  "Sir, you need to please unplug that car".  "What!" "Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!"

[NomisR]

That's my guess.  Most cops would be happy telling the guy to unplug the car and carrying on.  "Sir, you need to please unplug that car".  "What!" "Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!"

Yeah, it's likely poorly handled by the owner which lead to the response by the officer.  In the end, the charges for theft will be dropped but who knows what other additional problems this may lead...

[Soup DeVille]

One could argue that an outlet at a public school can reasonably be assumed to be put there for the use of the public, unless its secured somehow or labeled for "authorized use only."

[Soup DeVille]

My good hunch is there is more to the story. The Leaf owner kinda looks like one of those militant whiny green liberal types. He probably gave the LEO a bunch of guff and otherwise forced the situation.

Probably. Which is why I'm always glad to let the assholes go to court so these things can be figured out. 

[CALL_911]

One could argue that an outlet at a public school can reasonably be assumed to be put there for the use of the public, unless its secured somehow or labeled for "authorized use only."

Yeah, this guy's tax dollars probably pay for the electricity at said school.

[CALL_911]

My good hunch is there is more to the story. The Leaf owner kinda looks like one of those militant whiny green liberal types. He probably gave the LEO a bunch of guff and otherwise forced the situation.

That's a dangerous statement

[Catman]

Yeah, this guy's tax dollars probably pay for the electricity at said school.

He probably helps pay for the desks, computers and everything else in there but I don't think it's ok to take those.

[Soup DeVille]

He probably helps pay for the desks, computers and everything else in there but I don't think it's ok to take those.

Those are locked up, and behind closed doors.

This, as I understand it, was out in the open, in a publicly accessible spot near a publicly used tennis court.

It would be closer to comparing this to the use of a park bench or drinking fountain.

[NomisR]

Those are locked up, and behind closed doors.

This, as I understand it, was out in the open, in a publicly accessible spot near a publicly used tennis court.

It would be closer to comparing this to the use of a park bench or drinking fountain.

Using the drinking fountain would be considered stealing....

[Catman]

Those are locked up, and behind closed doors.

This, as I understand it, was out in the open, in a publicly accessible spot near a publicly used tennis court.

It would be closer to comparing this to the use of a park bench or drinking fountain.

Like I said, it's silly.  But I am not sure if an accessible outlet implies public use.

[Catman]

I've said this before but lets wait till many more people have electric cars and people start hanging power strips out their office windows.

[GoCougs]

Like I said, it's silly.  But I am not sure if an accessible outlet implies public use.

In common law terms I think it does. Everywhere I go - Starbucks, library, airport, tire shop (today), etc. - people (including me) use "public" outlets even if not explicitly marked or given explicit permission.

[Catman]

In common law terms I think it does. Everywhere I go - Starbucks, library, airport, tire shop (today), etc. - people (including me) use "public" outlets even if not explicitly marked or given explicit permission.

You're probably right.  As more people use other's power to charge cars, etc, this will become a larger issue.

[Soup DeVille]

You're probably right.  As more people use other's power to charge cars, etc, this will become a larger issue.

The practical solution would be 5 amp breakers built into the receptacles themselves.

THe legal answer may be a more specific understanding of what constitutes reasonable use.

[bing_oh]

Yeah, this guy's tax dollars probably pay for the electricity at said school.

They probably pay for the gas that goes in county vehicles but that doesn't give him the right to go out to the county fuel pumps and fill er up. That's essentially what he was doing here...fueling his vehicle on somebody else's dime. By your opinion, it would be ok for be to go out and fill my truck up at the county fuel pump as long as it wasn't locked up or otherwise marked that it wasn't open for public use, even though pretty much all of us would know that's stealing. Doesn't make alot of sense, does it? Just because it's bought with tax dollars doesn't make it open to public use.

[Morris Minor]

My good hunch is there is more to the story. The Leaf owner kinda looks like one of those militant whiny green liberal types. He probably gave the LEO a bunch of guff and otherwise forced the situation.

Saw him him interviewed on the local news, and your hunch exactly matches my hunch. He oozed self-righteous entitleded douchery.  I got the old "more to this than mets the eye" alarm bell. Candidate for a night stick to the solar plexus

[Soup DeVille]

They probably pay for the gas that goes in county vehicles but that doesn't give him the right to go out to the county fuel pumps and fill er up. That's essentially what he was doing here...fueling his vehicle on somebody else's dime. By your opinion, it would be ok for be to go out and fill my truck up at the county fuel pump as long as it wasn't locked up or otherwise marked that it wasn't open for public use, even though pretty much all of us would know that's stealing. Doesn't make alot of sense, does it? Just because it's bought with tax dollars doesn't make it open to public use.

Is an open receptacle in a public park not reasonably assumed to be for public use? Would a guy who plugged his phone charger into that same plug, or his radio, or his electric wheelchair be thought to be stealing as well?

[GoCougs]

Saw him him interviewed on the local news, and your hunch exactly matches my hunch. He oozed self-righteous entitleded douchery.  I got the old "more to this than mets the eye" alarm bell. Candidate for a night stick to the solar plexus

I knew there had to be something else that brought on the situation...

[S204STi]

Like I said, it's silly.  But I am not sure if an accessible outlet implies public use.

I have accessible outlets at my house.  If someone plugged into mine, I would find a problem with it.

And the whole, "my taxes pay for blah blah blah" argument is as dumb as the day is long when it comes to excusing ass-hattery.