Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Showing Original Post only (View all)

FrodosPet

(5,169 posts)
Tue May 3, 2016, 11:19 AM May 2016

Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry [View all]

Source: BBC

Stealing small amounts of food to stave off hunger is not a crime, Italy's highest court of appeal has ruled.

Judges overturned a theft conviction against Roman Ostriakov after he stole cheese and sausages worth €4.07 (£3; $4.50) from a supermarket.

Mr Ostriakov, a homeless man of Ukrainian background, had taken the food "in the face of the immediate and essential need for nourishment", the court of cassation decided.

Therefore it was not a crime, it said.

~ snip ~

Read more: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36190557?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link



In a humane world, no one would need to take any food without permission. The able bodied would have a job that paid enough that people could survive on their earnings. With enough surplus to take care of the children, the frail, and the elderly.
76 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jean Valjean PSPS May 2016 #1
When the play Les Miserable was on Broadway, there was some housing for people with jtuck004 May 2016 #5
This info reminds of of something Kevin Phillips wrote in "Wealth and Democracy": bjo59 May 2016 #8
I saw where one of our health oriented actresses had a more affordable recipe for her braddy May 2016 #9
This is a historic decision Baobab May 2016 #42
I must know.. .what the fuck is in that smoothie? Scootaloo May 2016 #51
There is "moon dust" for one thing (ground up pearls to you peons). here are a couple of links. braddy May 2016 #52
Gwynneth Paltrow? No wonder. Scootaloo May 2016 #54
It's funny, I could probably never get her to eat a chili dog, yet look at what she will eat. braddy May 2016 #55
I KNEW it had to be the GOOP! JustAnotherGen May 2016 #76
I wonder if this was something that was misreported? colorado_ufo May 2016 #12
Whyyyyyyyy... ReRe May 2016 #16
A strainer? Me too, but that is why we don't get "conspicuous consumption" heck if I became truly braddy May 2016 #53
good for them. MariaThinks May 2016 #2
Meanwhile, the US is trying to make giving poor people food or healthcare or education WTO-illegal Baobab May 2016 #43
Finally. jwirr May 2016 #3
Bravisimo! fred v May 2016 #4
Is he required to compensate the store owner at any point? Gomez163 May 2016 #6
Why? philosslayer May 2016 #24
Why don't I walk into your house and take something????? Gomez163 May 2016 #25
Clearly you disagree with this decision philosslayer May 2016 #27
Compassion is fine. He doesnt go to jail. However the store needs to be made whole. Gomez163 May 2016 #29
Then what is your solution? philosslayer May 2016 #34
He needs to get a job and pay it back somehow. I know that may be a Gomez163 May 2016 #35
It's not a "radical" idea - it's a LiberalElite May 2016 #50
The store owner didn't consent to this person taking the food The2ndWheel May 2016 #67
Not the store owner's problem Reter May 2016 #65
Exactly scscholar May 2016 #26
Well put philosslayer May 2016 #28
Most small businesses are not part of the ruling class. Gomez163 May 2016 #30
the cashless economy is all about that, so that bypassing the system and giving the poor food Baobab May 2016 #44
Oh please. Drahthaardogs May 2016 #62
Really? If you own a small corner store you are part of the "ruling class"? EX500rider May 2016 #33
Merchants have always been the middle class Gomez163 May 2016 #47
Not quite the same thing as the "ruling class" EX500rider May 2016 #56
What about a responsibility to turn a profit to pay your employees? Travis_0004 May 2016 #36
Shouldn't everyone... scscholar May 2016 #37
Sure, if somebody steals food from my store I'll just deduct it from everybody's paycheck. Travis_0004 May 2016 #38
I've had shrinkage deducted from my bonus... scscholar May 2016 #39
No obviouly its not right if there are a lot of hungry people roaming around taking food(sarcasm Baobab May 2016 #45
yeah, because small businesses never go under. olddad56 May 2016 #41
You're nuts. Codeine May 2016 #63
That was my thought too Yupster May 2016 #61
The opposite of affluenza defense is Baitball Blogger May 2016 #7
This makes an interesting precedent. JustABozoOnThisBus May 2016 #10
I don't think that will happen because not far into the future people will need to have good credit Baobab May 2016 #46
If the alternative is that people can steal christx30 May 2016 #57
it will all be computerized Baobab May 2016 #59
Convenience store clerks have been christx30 May 2016 #60
Had this been America he would have gotten the proper punishment, twenty to life. Katashi_itto May 2016 #11
What does this mean for shop owners? Democat May 2016 #13
Yeah, I don't understand how this can hold up LiberalLovinLug May 2016 #18
No one is requiring anyone to feed the homeless d_legendary1 May 2016 #19
face recognition is extremely good now and everybodys wallet has multiple RFID devices, plus people Baobab May 2016 #48
I don't imagine it would change much of anything. pugetres May 2016 #32
Well, so much for the Italian version of Les Miz. KamaAina May 2016 #14
Stand your Ground Round houston16revival May 2016 #15
you probably mean 'adverse possession' ? Baobab May 2016 #49
So instead of government taking care of the people, individual shop owners have to? CrispyQ May 2016 #17
Neither is jailing somebody for being poor d_legendary1 May 2016 #21
Sigh. . . CrispyQ May 2016 #22
You didn't. I did. d_legendary1 May 2016 #23
The court is wrong because it is theft and therefore a crime but its one in general cstanleytech May 2016 #20
People forget that under Roman Law, theft was NOT a crime. happyslug May 2016 #31
The Italian Food Court Blue Owl May 2016 #40
Don't forget the mentally ill, the addicted and the 'lazy'. ronnie624 May 2016 #58
+1. Food should be a public utility, well run farms with well paid farmers producing what is needed. bemildred May 2016 #64
No Democrat would defend this Reter May 2016 #66
Stealing is wrong, but a system that provides no recourse to the hungry is even worse. ronnie624 May 2016 #68
Civilization is the status quo The2ndWheel May 2016 #69
Therefore change to the system isn't possible? ronnie624 May 2016 #70
We live on a finite planet, but we have what is basically an unlimited imagination The2ndWheel May 2016 #71
Reality is defined by the known laws of physics, ronnie624 May 2016 #73
Defined by who? The2ndWheel May 2016 #74
A regard for human rights and fairness, ronnie624 May 2016 #75
Does Italy have food stamps or an equivalent? NobodyHere May 2016 #72
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Italian court rules food ...