Framed over shoplifting

[vix86]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I am posting this for a friend who can't really. It sort of falls into two possible areas. First is criminal (shoplifting) and the second is slander.

My friend was recently at a store and had some merchandise from the store planted on her by the friend of a friend that doesn't like her, so that when she walked out and set off the detector, they searched her and found it. They are pressing charges for shoplifting. When I first talked to her I pretty much told her that they caught her with the goods and as a result the case will fall on her to prove that she didn't steal it (through video surveillance I guess). Is this true and what other options might be available to her? (Additionally, would you suggest a hired lawyer or a state appointed lawyer? She doesn't have a lot of money so she could probably have one appointed, but I don't want to see her lose a case she might be able to win if one lawyer is better than the other.)

The other part of this is that the store said they would call her current employer and report she stole merchandise. Since Texas has practically zero laws protecting employees, they can pretty easily fire her over this since she works at a store that handles retail goods. She couldn't make a case against her employer over wrongful discharge, even though she hasn't been to court and proven to be guilty of actually shoplifting anything. My question is: Could she, if she is fired and found not guilty of shoplifting, sue the store that called her employer and informed them about her shoplifting; for slander?

Thanks
-Vix

 

[justalayman]

truth is an absolute defense to slander

what that means is, if whatever is said is true, it can't be slander. If the store states it as fact versus alleged fact, that would be slander IF she was never found guilty of the crime. If they simply state that she was arrested for shoplifting, they would not be lying, therefore, not slandering her.


Now, there are other things that may be applicable but much harder (expensive) to sue for and harder to win. Unless this store has some relationship with her employer, the relation of the situation could be seen as an attempt to intentionally injure her. That may be illegal, depending on way too many different things and is also very hard to prove.


as to the paid attorney v. the public defender:

most people I have spoken with felt they did better with a self paid attorney. A public defender is a real attorney and in some states, could actually be the person you would have hired anyway. I do not know how Texas deals with PD's though. In some states, the PDs are essentially their own law firm and that is all they do is PD work.

usually, if you believe you can afford a self pay attorney, you are not eligible for a PD so be cautious about claiming to be able to pay for an attorney. It may make her ineligible for a PD.

 

[vix86]

truth is an absolute defense to slander

what that means is, if whatever is said is true, it can't be slander. If the store states it as fact versus alleged fact, that would be slander IF she was never found guilty of the crime. If they simply state that she was arrested for shoplifting, they would not be lying, therefore, not slandering her.

Ah that's what I figured it would come down to.

Now, there are other things that may be applicable but much harder (expensive) to sue for and harder to win. Unless this store has some relationship with her employer, the relation of the situation could be seen as an attempt to intentionally injure her. That may be illegal, depending on way too many different things and is also very hard to prove.

Ya, this sounds like it would extremely hard to prove in this instance, and probably beyond what my friend can pay.

as to the paid attorney v. the public defender:

most people I have spoken with felt they did better with a self paid attorney. A public defender is a real attorney and in some states, could actually be the person you would have hired anyway. I do not know how Texas deals with PD's though. In some states, the PDs are essentially their own law firm and that is all they do is PD work.

usually, if you believe you can afford a self pay attorney, you are not eligible for a PD so be cautious about claiming to be able to pay for an attorney. It may make her ineligible for a PD.

Well, what I meant by "able to pay" was more that she could scrap together money for a lawyer, but then she'd be so broke that she might not be able to pay bills.

Anyway, thanks for the info, I'll pass it along.