theft
Can stupid action that looks like theft be criminal?
<p>On another site, a third hand story was told: In an office supply store, expensive printers go missing without payment. They find out that an employee is so obsessed with selling extended warranties that when she sells a printer and manages to sell extended warranty as well, she fills out all the forms, charges for the warranty - and forgets charging for the printer.</p>
<p>It seems that this is indeed due to stupidity and not intentional. Can she still be guilty of theft? And if a customer walks away, having paid exactly the amount the cashier asked them for, but without having paid for the printer, could that be theft? If not, do they owe the money for the printer?</p>

<p>No. Theft is, in most jurisdiction, an action by which the offender takes another person's property with the intent to permanently deprive them of it.</p>
<p>The clerk isn't taking any property from the store, and she doesn't have any intent to deprive the store of anything. She is therefore not guilty of theft. If she were doing this intentionally -- either in league with the customer or even without the customer knowing -- she could likely be held liable for the theft, either on a conspiracy theory or perhaps an innocent-agency theory.</p>
<p>The lack of criminal liability of course does not mean that there can be no accountability. The employer is free to terminate the employee, and it will have different options -- depending on jurisdiction -- to recover the value of the uncharged printers, perhaps by docking her paycheck or through a negligence action.</p>
