A Synopsis of Bauer Almeida Arrest

Bauer Almeida, a 15-year-old boy was caught stealing in Wal-Mart supermarket contrary to the provisions of Section 322 (1) (a) of the Criminal Code of Conduct that states:

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Every one commits theft who fraudulently and without color of right takes, or fraudulently and without color of right converts to his use or to the use of another person, anything, whether animate or inanimate, with intent to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the thing or of his property or interest in it (An Act respecting the criminal law, 1867).

Bauer Almeida had also violated the Criminal Code of Conduct under section 322 (2) that provides that;

"A person commits theft when, with intent to steal anything, he moves it or causes it to move or to be moved, or begins to cause it to become movable" (An Act respecting the criminal law, 1867).

The offender Bauer Almeida was caught stealing in Wal-Mart supermarket at around 5.30 p.m. on the 8th of April, 2019 by the security guards and I was called upon to arrest him. Several witnesses had seen the Bauer Almeida stealing the pair of headphones such as the supermarket attendants, the security guards and the closed-circuit television (CCTV) that are in place for security reasons. All the witnesses gave me their versions, and upon careful consideration, I found that their stories matched with the closed-circuit evidence in their information technology (IT) room. I searched the boy and found him with a pair of headphones hidden in his jacket, and he did not even deny stealing because he was too embarrassed. Bauer Almeida had no intentions of paying for the headphones because he had hidden them in his jackets. Almeida's acts depict intention or thought and action which are the basic requirements of a crime (Robinson, 2017). He intended to steal the headphones and get out of the Supermarket without being spotted. I decided to handcuff him and provided him with the reasons for arrest and informed him of his rights. He did not, however, resist the arrest. The following is a script of the arrest:

I am arresting you for stealing contrary to section 322 (1) (a) of the Criminal Code of Conduct. You have the right to retain and instruct counsel, and this includes making a call to any lawyer you may prefer. You may also apply to the Legal Aid plan for any assistance. If you wish to call a lawyer, please do so. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or you do as from now may be used against you as evidence. I inquired if he understood the instructions and his rights to which he said yes.

After ensuring that the offender understood his rights, I notified his parents and after that issued him with a Youth Referral Form. Considering it was the first for the offender to commit a crime, I proposed an extrajudicial measure to solve the case outside the court (Boyce et al., 2014). However, considering the severity of the offense such as stealing, I referred the matter to a crown prosecutor who is responsible for offering a crown caution. This measure would give the offender the appropriate time needed to acknowledge his offense and apologize to the community in general and to learn from his bad behavior.

References

"An Act respecting the criminal law" (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, as amended). Section 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867

Boyce, J., Cotter, A., & Perreault, S. (2014). Police-reported crime statistics in Canada, 2013. Juristat: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 1.

Robinson, P. H. (2017). Should the Criminal Law Abandon the Actus Reus-Mens Rea Distinction?. In The Structure and Limits of Criminal Law (pp. 3-28). Routledge.