Crunch time

An interesting report over at the Express about a recently apprehended criminal mastermind.

The "crime": eating some biscuits in the office.

The method of detection: workplace CCTV

The punishment: dismissal, criminal prosecution and conviction, £150 fine, £7 compensation.

Now apparently he should have realised that the biscuits weren't communal, but belonged to a colleague. So he shouldn't have eaten the biscuits. Naughty. And this felony would not have been solved but for the surveillance, so it must be justified! Right? Right..?

It's true. This culprit wouldn't have been nabbed, the wretched crime would have gone unsolved, but for the cameras. But in the end, it's a question of what sort of society we want to live in. One in which companies use CCTV to snoop on their own employees' biscuit consumption (and the police and courts take them seriously) is, I suggest, a society in which something is very wrong.

It's another demonstration of the fact that our Big Brother culture isn't driven solely by the state - we'd be running a campaign with one eye firmly closed if we thought that.

By Alex Deane

Comments

[Sandy]

Oh crumbs...what a shocking story, it really takes the biscuit...Just goes to show your cant TAKE your cake and eat it.

[Old Holborn]

don't eat the pissy biscuit

[Jon Kipping]

Im amazed. That story is Gob Stopping... I mean Gob Smacking.

Remind me not to take any food without asking when I next get into work!

[Redacted]

If workplace biscuit theft is now a matter for the police and courts, then we have indeed sunk pretty low. Most of us can still recall a time when people felt able to resolve such trivial problems without resort to officialdom.

The television programme Crimewatch was the green light for this mentality to flourish. While overtly concentrating its attentions on relatively serious criminals, who would not elicit sympathy, it also set up the unconscious train of thought that what was good for serious problems would surely be good for trivial ones as well. But this is proportionality as understood by Judge Jeffreys.

[Michelle Donelan]

As somebody who has suffered repeated theft of Biscuits, I would say this is a very serious matter, mocking victims of theft is always a bad idea. In my humble opinion you should be a shamed of yourself.

My Chocolate creams got stolen on 5 occasions in one work place, the worst thing was knowing the thief was looking you in the eye's everyday.

[Purlieu]

Surely the thief would have the sense to wear a hoodie and dark glasses.
Some people eh ...

[SadButMadLad]

So did the CCTV footage from inside the office get accepted. I would be surprised since I thought the requirements for CCTV footage to be legally acceptable are quite high.

And on the issue of criminality. Yes it was a crime of theft, but take into account seriousness of the crime and the whole thing becomes a farce. And the more the law is seen to be an arse the more the public change their attitude to the law and ignore it. Also, who actually decided it worthwhile to continue with the prosecution? The CPS who already have made many daft decisions? Or was it the company? Who probably did it because the biscuit owner has some authority/influence or personal issue with the thief. But was that a valid reason to prosecute so much to actually give the person a criminal record. Now this is all conjecture as all the facts aren't know, but on the face of it it comes across as a very dodgy case.

[alastair]

There are two sides to this, of course. I doubt very much that he genuinely didn't realise he shouldn't have been eating biscuits from a colleague's desk; that sounds like an excuse to me.

Obviously what happened to him is entirely disproportionate — he should have purchased a new box of biscuits rather than being dismissed and so on — though we are assuming that things happened exactly as detailed in the Express.

For instance, if his boss had confronted him over the biscuit theft and received an unrepentant, abusive reply, of the sort far too many people give these days when they've done something wrong and get caught, then it *might* have been appropriate to dismiss him after all. I can't think of a good reason for involving the courts and the police, however; not over a packet of biscuits.

[Alex Deane]

I am singularly surprised by you guys! 8 comments and not a single biscuits joke! When I put this on facebook everyone went crackers! Maybe you couldn't post such comments because you were afraid of our site's cookies...

[Su]

He didn't just eat a couple of biscuits - he was caught searching through the other desks and stole the entire tin of biscuits OUT of the desk drawer.

It was not the first time it had happened either, but this time he was caught.

I have no sympathy for him.

[Redacted]

Whether you have sympathy for the thief or not isn't in the end the point of the article.

It's more to express shock at the way this was handled and the fact that clearly there is nowadays general acceptance of using surveillance and prosecution as a normal and appropriate response for a matter of this kind. It is deeply troubling for those of us who see what this mindset implies for our country, and where it is leading us all.

Anyone want a biscuit?