Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 2, 2016, 5:18 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

PA clerk-found not guilty. But was she?

Topic closed. 13 replies. Last post 9 years ago by KY Floyd.

Page 1 of 1
PrintE-mailLink
TheGameGrl's avatar - character catafly.jpg
A long and winding road
United States
Member #17084
June 10, 2005
4522 Posts
Offline
Posted: February 19, 2008, 7:47 pm - IP Logged

The talk in our town is about a local clerk who was alledged with stealing scratch offs during her work shift . Seems our town believes in turning a blind eye, she was acquited. 

Ms. Casey Kerr was found not guilty by a jury of peers. She now gets to make claim to her 100,000$ a year winnings that she had *supposedly* scratched off during her shift. She often *suspended* her lottery purchase sales til morning and cashed out the difference from her winnings.

This verdict speaks volumes about the mindset of my hometown and I am the first to admit, PLay now, Pay later would be a great way for the lottery to keep all its active players, but for some silly reason, most places I go to BUY tickets before I play or claim, ask for money first. Must be nice to be on the opposite side of the counter and be given such luxury.  

Her defense was * gosh its common practice at my workplace*, and the jury bought it!  

~~Is it true, Is it kind,Is it necessary. ~~~

 Thanks be to the giving numbers: 1621,912,119 02014

    LuckyLilly's avatar - savy chick.png

    United States
    Member #50124
    February 26, 2007
    601 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: February 19, 2008, 8:02 pm - IP Logged

      United States
      Member #17555
      June 22, 2005
      5582 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: February 19, 2008, 8:06 pm - IP Logged

      It all depends on the specifics of the law in that state. Most states say that an employee cannot partcipate. I don't know.

      You say that she stole the tickets while she was on her shift. My question is what differnce does it make when she stole them?

      The story you represent leaves out a lot of specifics, and I couldn't possibly make a judgement based on what you presented. Obviously she did something wrong, but what I've read so far, I can't make heads or tails of it.

      There's something missing in the dteails.

        TheGameGrl's avatar - character catafly.jpg
        A long and winding road
        United States
        Member #17084
        June 10, 2005
        4522 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: February 19, 2008, 8:39 pm - IP Logged

        True, my commentary was not as detailed as the true nature of the allegations.

        The Link listed though had some further info. I just did the condensed version for sake of posting and the end result being she got her cake and ate it too.

        The clerk primarily played often with scratch offs that she didnt pay for at time of play. Instead she would build up from her winning tickets and cash them in to offset her overall plays that night. Not making a cash purchase but using the winning tickets to cover any losses she might have inccurred. Because she had to claim her BIG win, (the 100,000 per year for life ticket) the store got suspicious as they had a cash flow problem on her shift and noticed *more* tickets were supposedly claimed or generated during her shift as opposed to the norm of sales for a night shift clerk. Which brought about the case against her in court. End result though was she was found not guilty (acquited). I still say she didnt pay at the time of transaction but used the job position  to her advantage.  

        ~~Is it true, Is it kind,Is it necessary. ~~~

         Thanks be to the giving numbers: 1621,912,119 02014

          Raven62's avatar - binary
          New Jersey
          United States
          Member #17843
          June 28, 2005
          49615 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: February 19, 2008, 8:48 pm - IP Logged

          Seems like it's between her and her employer at this point.

          A mind once stretched by a new idea never returns to its original dimensions!

            TheGameGrl's avatar - character catafly.jpg
            A long and winding road
            United States
            Member #17084
            June 10, 2005
            4522 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: February 19, 2008, 9:16 pm - IP Logged

            Good observation Raven!

            Luckily the employer has brought further changes thru civil court which is a whole other arena. :)

            ~~Is it true, Is it kind,Is it necessary. ~~~

             Thanks be to the giving numbers: 1621,912,119 02014

              JackpotWanna's avatar - squiz

              United States
              Member #4121
              March 23, 2004
              817 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: February 19, 2008, 9:25 pm - IP Logged

              Wow!  Amazing story!  In this story crime does pay!!!!

              Party

                Avatar
                NY
                United States
                Member #23835
                October 16, 2005
                3471 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: February 20, 2008, 2:24 am - IP Logged

                True, my commentary was not as detailed as the true nature of the allegations.

                The Link listed though had some further info. I just did the condensed version for sake of posting and the end result being she got her cake and ate it too.

                The clerk primarily played often with scratch offs that she didnt pay for at time of play. Instead she would build up from her winning tickets and cash them in to offset her overall plays that night. Not making a cash purchase but using the winning tickets to cover any losses she might have inccurred. Because she had to claim her BIG win, (the 100,000 per year for life ticket) the store got suspicious as they had a cash flow problem on her shift and noticed *more* tickets were supposedly claimed or generated during her shift as opposed to the norm of sales for a night shift clerk. Which brought about the case against her in court. End result though was she was found not guilty (acquited). I still say she didnt pay at the time of transaction but used the job position  to her advantage.  

                Are you suggesting that every time she worked she won more than the cost of the tickets she played?

                There are only two choices for every shift during which she playedlottery tickets. She paid for the tickets she played or she didn't payfor them. Neither you or the linked article suggest that she didn't payfor them. The only suggestion is that she didn't pay for them until theend of her shift. Since the news story doesn't indicate that she wascharged, or even accused, of stealing tickets on another occasion, andshe apparently paid the cost of the tickets on the night in question,she didn't steal them. That doesn't make her not guilty, it makes herinnocent.

                That she apparently violated company policy may give them a valid reason to fire her,but it appears that management knew that a number of employeesroutinely did the same thing, but took no action. It sounds to me likethe company's only real option is to improve their training  andstart enforcing their policies.

                  TheGameGrl's avatar - character catafly.jpg
                  A long and winding road
                  United States
                  Member #17084
                  June 10, 2005
                  4522 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: February 20, 2008, 10:46 pm - IP Logged

                  Ky, You are correct to a point. Yes the company can learn from this and improve upon its policy.

                  True that the newspaper didnt give all information that was divulged during the trial.

                  I disagree that just because other employees were equally behaving in a poor manner by playing first and cashing in later, it doesnt make it right. I consider any lottery player to be responsible and play by the same rules. BUy at the beginning of play and not several hours down the road. *suspending* a sale and waiting for the BIG hit to cover the losing tickets isnt how the lottery wants its players to perform. Unless your state allows you to walk into a store and be given $100 in tickets with your good word that you'll come back if you have some winners to cover the amount, I dont see how its any different. THe lottery would be bankrupt in a week. Thus why they expect the players to pay upfront. 

                  I welcome the difference of opinions as its important to the overall perspective of our legal system.

                  PS: I wasnt inferring or suggesting anything. I was emphasizing her scheme in which she worked the system to her advantage whilst being on company time. I dont recall any job description saying you must play lottery during your company work time. Bored or not, she was being payed for other duties and no where is playing lottery one of them. A wise ADULT would have the decency to buy at another store , then during break time scratch the instants. Two wrongs dont make it right.  

                  ~~Is it true, Is it kind,Is it necessary. ~~~

                   Thanks be to the giving numbers: 1621,912,119 02014

                    BobP's avatar - bobp avatar.png
                    Dump Water Florida
                    United States
                    Member #380
                    June 5, 2002
                    3102 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: February 21, 2008, 2:08 am - IP Logged

                    People have a hard time getting their head around the fact EVERYTHING on the property belongs to the company. 

                    The penny on the floor, the trash out back, the lottery tickets, they all belong to the company until they are paid for, then they belong to the purchaser. 

                    As the lottery tickets were not paid for at the time they were scratched, the prize belongs to the company.

                    BobP
                     

                      benmas's avatar - waveform
                      Rhode Island
                      United States
                      Member #56010
                      October 28, 2007
                      434 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: February 21, 2008, 3:05 am - IP Logged

                      Technically you should purchase something before you use it...however...

                      she used a special cash-register button to suspend the sales until the end of her shift because that's how employees' purchases were handled...

                      does anybody know why is there a suspend sales button???? is that button meant to cancel tickets issued in error or something else???

                      all judges go strictly by the rules book....it will all depend whether the use of that button is deemed appropriate in a case like this when she did balance the register at the end...

                      however it stands out to me that the defense case is based solely on "circumstances of not knowing" and "common practice" everybody did it..

                      Asking something like this: "If all the tickets had been losers ... there wouldn't be any charges filed?"

                      Hopple did not get to answer because Dubbs objected and presiding Common Pleas Judge Michael J. Brillhart sustained the objection.

                      The judge was right to sustain the objection because thats "coulda woulda shoulda" he is not asking a Q about what actually happened ..(I'll agree that they would never filed any charges if she didn't win but that doesn't make the argument for the defense here)...at the end of the day the judge decides about the facts in front of him and about what actually happend not on what ifs...

                      IT will all depend on useage of that button terms...there are some unusual circumstances since all the other employees are saying they did the same practice of using that button...

                      THE outcome is not so sure...it is still possible the jury can find her not guilty on all counts...

                      Personally, I would say she did not intend to do anything intentionally malicious but still she was in breach of rules and taking into account some circumstances I will clear her of any criminal charges but take away the prize that she won because it was done against the rules estabilished and ignorance of those rules is not excuse...this only if the use of that button depending on the written rules estabilished prior

                        benmas's avatar - waveform
                        Rhode Island
                        United States
                        Member #56010
                        October 28, 2007
                        434 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: February 21, 2008, 4:27 am - IP Logged

                        in relation to the story here i found this on the PA lotto website:

                        Can a player use a credit card to purchase lottery tickets?
                        The sale of Lottery tickets on "credit cards" is specifically prohibited by the Lottery Law; however, the use of debit cards is permitted. A retailer should accept a debit card since it is the same as cash, given that the money is immediately debited from your account.

                        They intend by this that the money to buy a ticket should be immediately available without warrant at the time of purchase...credit cards bring the time delay factor into the equation and also offer no assurance...you are borrowing money and some people don't pay their credit card bills...now if you win big you'll probably say that i'll pay now the credit card with the money i won..but that money didn't come out of your original pocket to buy the ticket...so i am pretty sure that somewhere in the law it should mention that tickets are to be paid in full at time of purchase...which this girl in the story clearly did not do...she is getting away with that button that suspends "TIME"??????? for how long...??

                          BobP's avatar - bobp avatar.png
                          Dump Water Florida
                          United States
                          Member #380
                          June 5, 2002
                          3102 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: February 22, 2008, 11:52 pm - IP Logged

                          Technically you should purchase something before you use it...however...

                          she used a special cash-register button to suspend the sales until the end of her shift because that's how employees' purchases were handled...

                          does anybody know why is there a suspend sales button???? is that button meant to cancel tickets issued in error or something else???

                          all judges go strictly by the rules book....it will all depend whether the use of that button is deemed appropriate in a case like this when she did balance the register at the end...

                          however it stands out to me that the defense case is based solely on "circumstances of not knowing" and "common practice" everybody did it..

                          Asking something like this: "If all the tickets had been losers ... there wouldn't be any charges filed?"

                          Hopple did not get to answer because Dubbs objected and presiding Common Pleas Judge Michael J. Brillhart sustained the objection.

                          The judge was right to sustain the objection because thats "coulda woulda shoulda" he is not asking a Q about what actually happened ..(I'll agree that they would never filed any charges if she didn't win but that doesn't make the argument for the defense here)...at the end of the day the judge decides about the facts in front of him and about what actually happend not on what ifs...

                          IT will all depend on useage of that button terms...there are some unusual circumstances since all the other employees are saying they did the same practice of using that button...

                          THE outcome is not so sure...it is still possible the jury can find her not guilty on all counts...

                          Personally, I would say she did not intend to do anything intentionally malicious but still she was in breach of rules and taking into account some circumstances I will clear her of any criminal charges but take away the prize that she won because it was done against the rules estabilished and ignorance of those rules is not excuse...this only if the use of that button depending on the written rules estabilished prior

                          I believe the suspend sale button allows you to suspend the current transaction, say the customer decided to go back and look for more items in the middle of your ringing them up.  You suspend that sale and can take other customers until the one you were ringing comes back.  BobP

                            Avatar
                            NY
                            United States
                            Member #23835
                            October 16, 2005
                            3471 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: February 23, 2008, 4:24 am - IP Logged

                            Having a feature like that would certainly be nice, but I've neverencountered it. I can't keep track of the number of times I've waited afew minutes while somebody checked a price or dealt with some otherproblem, while I had an order that could have been checked out beforethe problem was solved. With almost all "cash registers" actually beingcomputers there's really no excuse not to have the ability put an orderon hold, do something else, and pick up right where you left off.