March 31, 2019
The purpose of this press statement is to share the decision making process that led me to conclude that the interests of justice would not be served by the prosecution of an 86 year old individual alleged to have shoplifted. First, when a case is brought to the Prosecutor’s Office and a decision is made to not file a criminal charge, we generally do not speak about it any further. A recent notable exception to that rule was the fatal bus crash about which a grand jury issued a ”No Bill” against the truck driver, the admitted cause of the crash. We spoke extensively on that case and publicly shared what we could, including the driver’s name and address. I will not be doing that in thiscase.
Second, before I distributed this statement, I allowed attorney Ken Lukenbill to review it and sought, if not his consent, at least his acquiescence on behalf of his client and the client’s family that I could share these ruminations with the public. Third, I am mindful that once the story of this individual’s arrest was published by local media, a significant number of postings on social media occurred. I note some of the postings contained elements of accuracy, while others contained some serious misinformation. My objective here is to address the misinformation and avoid as much misunderstanding as possible about how the process works at this juncture of our local criminal justice system.
As previously reported, it is alleged that on the morning of March 19, an 86 year old individual was detained by store personnel for suspicion of theft from a retail establishment. Numerous items valued at $33.51 were found in the individual’s effects. There is also a security video from numerous angles, and several eye witness accounts. The Plymouth Police Department was notified and an officer took the individual into custody. Both the store and the officer followed established protocol. The person was processed into the Marshall County Jail until bond was posted approximately five hours later.
On March 20, attorney Ken Lukenbill contacted me and we discussed the case in detail, including the background of the individual. I interviewed a few additional individuals and learned of other instances of aberrant behavior. On March 25, Mr. Lukenbill shared with me in writing a recent medical diagnosis for the individual. It was that final piece of information that would convince any reasonable, objective and fair minded person that every element of the offense could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the only proper response from this office is to not file the charge in the first place.
Many of the social media comments insinuate that decisions on this case will be affected by the identity of the individual, and their acquaintanceship with decision makers in the criminal justice system—– past and present. That could not be further from the truth. The only affect the individual’s identity had was the initial and pervasive acknowledgement that the behavior in the store was so greatly out of character. Additional objective evidence, such as age, viewed through the lens of life’s experiences, convinced me that justice would not be advanced by prosecution of the matter. Instead,it
is with profound hope that the family is able to marshal the support and resources necessary to effectively address these medical challenges so common to our elders. We should all be so lucky.