🚀 go-pugleaf

John A. Weeks III <john@johnweeks.com> wrote:
> In article <slrndrr7n0.t5r.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>,
>  Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>> Fred <cskeeguy@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Look, as a practical matter, if you don't want to show me your receipt, 
>> > you don't get a refund. Company policy, same as at Best Buy. And our 
>> > company reserves the right to refuse *any* refund, same as at Best Buy.
>> 
>> Thought you were done posting in this thread?
>> 
>> Nevertheless, the OP was fine with this.  What he wasn't fine with was
>> the clerk STEALING HIS SHIT.
>
> There is no proof beyond a shadow of a doubt, or even beyond
> a reasonable doubt needed in this kind of case--all that is needed
> is a preponderance of the evidence.  In this case, a person is
> holding a new item of merchandise still in its package while inside
> the store, and the person sneaked past the inventory control point
> and didn't get a needed marking on the merchandise that it was
> brought in from the outside, and the person has no indication that
> the item was purchased (such as a register tape or credit card
> slip).

Sneaked past?  Have you been to a Best Buy lately?  Sometimes the door
guy is friendly and helpful, other times napping, other times not even
there.  "inventory control point"?  If they had a *sign* saying "get
your returns marked here", sure, but they don't.

> Therefore, the preponderance of the evidence is that the
> item was picked off the shelf and the person then attempted to 
> return said item for a refund.  The weight of facts in favor of
> the store owning the item is far greater than the weight of the
> facts of the perpetrator owning the item.  As a result, the store
> should keep their item unless the perpetrator can prove otherwise.

Uh, no.