What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
19 yr old girl was arrested.
She was outside a store when the other girls shoplifted late at night.
Video shows that this 19 yr old was not in the store and was just waiting outside with a cigarette and a soda in each hand
Video shows that she was the first to be grabbed by undercover cops. After the other girls ran out first.
The group of girls were all caught as there were cops in the parking lot.
At first the court appointed attorney made a deal that only required the girl to attend AA meeting and to obtain a GED. So she pled guilty and accepted the requirements.
When the girl went back for a second hearing there was a different judge and they claimed that the prosecutor changed their mind because they claimed that the girl could have been acting as a lookout.
This 19 yr old girl was not friends with the other girls and only had one friend that she was with. This friend is seen on video going to the bathroom of the store and also not mingling with the ones that were shoplifting.
So they added a $250 fine or go to jail until it is paid.
This girl is not bright and grew up as a foster child.
So the question is:
1 if the video shows the girl never entering the store (can she be found guilty of shoplifting?)
2 then if it is true that she was acting as lookout, then wouldn’t she start running ahead of the group and not be the last one to start running from the scene and first one nabbed by the UC?
3 if she was a lookout , wouldnt she not stick around since the cops were in the parking lot?
4 Would the result be better to get a paid attorney instead of the public defender?
5 Can her plea change since they are changing the original agreement by adding the $250 fine on top of the obligation to attend AA meeting and to obtain a GED?
She said that she will have a misdemeanor record.
19 yr old girl was arrested.
She was outside a store when the other girls shoplifted late at night.
Video shows that this 19 yr old was not in the store and was just waiting outside with a cigarette and a soda in each hand
Video shows that she was the first to be grabbed by undercover cops. After the other girls ran out first.
The group of girls were all caught as there were cops in the parking lot.
At first the court appointed attorney made a deal that only required the girl to attend AA meeting and to obtain a GED. So she pled guilty and accepted the requirements.
When the girl went back for a second hearing there was a different judge and they claimed that the prosecutor changed their mind because they claimed that the girl could have been acting as a lookout.
This 19 yr old girl was not friends with the other girls and only had one friend that she was with. This friend is seen on video going to the bathroom of the store and also not mingling with the ones that were shoplifting.
So they added a $250 fine or go to jail until it is paid.
This girl is not bright and grew up as a foster child.
So the question is:
1 if the video shows the girl never entering the store (can she be found guilty of shoplifting?)
2 then if it is true that she was acting as lookout, then wouldn’t she start running ahead of the group and not be the last one to start running from the scene and first one nabbed by the UC?
3 if she was a lookout , wouldnt she not stick around since the cops were in the parking lot?
4 Would the result be better to get a paid attorney instead of the public defender?
5 Can her plea change since they are changing the original agreement by adding the $250 fine on top of the obligation to attend AA meeting and to obtain a GED?
She said that she will have a misdemeanor record.