Stupid Kids . . . I know they stole our bikes but . . .

[Crankin]

You are over thinking this.
They stole your bikes; it's a felony. Enough said.
It doesn't matter how much they were worth. Stealing is wrong.

[Owlie]

You are over thinking this.
They stole your bikes; it's a felony. Enough said.
It doesn't matter how much they were worth. Stealing is wrong.

Agreed. It doesn't matter how much the bikes were worth, how much they thought they were worth, or what they were planning to do with them. They chose to commit a crime. They should face the consequences.

[OakLeaf]

Take some time to think about it, and if you still feel the same way, let the prosecutor know.

Understand that it's a structural problem why the state considers the crime these people committed more serious than if they'd punched you in the face and knocked out a few teeth, or if they'd hit you with a car while you were riding and both killed you and destroyed your bike.

Those decisions, about what our penal system considers serious, aren't personal to you. But if you refuse to participate in that system, let the prosecutor know. They may or may not take your feelings into account and offer a misdemeanor plea, but in a case like this, they likely will.

[nuliajuk]

Just how old are they? I bet they did know they were stealing something expensive. They can walk into a bike store and look at prices the same as anyone else.

[Catrin]

There is also another perspective that says if they wind up getting off on a misdemeanor, then they may not learn anything from the experience. Of course that depends on the individuals, but they likely knew exactly what they were stealing - and if I remember your OP properly this was not a crime of opportunity. I've been reading that bike thieves have/are becoming more selective in what they steal.

[OakLeaf]

There is also another perspective that says if they wind up getting off on a misdemeanor, then they may not learn anything from the experience.

The other half of it though, is that while a felony conviction will have way more long term consequences, they're also way more likely to serve jail time for a misdemeanor. That's assuming this is their first conviction.

Processing felons is such an expensive proposition that most first-time non-violent offenders get probation. But they'll be saddled with such a stigma, probably won't be able to get a job, can't vote until they're off paper (or in some states, for the rest of their lives), may be kicked out of their residence, etc., etc., that the only thing they're likely to "learn" is (greater) contempt for authority. Someone convicted of misdemeanor theft is likely to serve a short time in the county lockup, usually with more suspended on condition they stay out of trouble ... more likely to be a learning experience IMO.



I don't think the OP was talking about "forgiveness" or letting anyone walk. Her hesitation has to do with a felony charge for a property crime, which is a sentiment I share (provided these people aren't career thieves).

[Crankin]

I generally like the idea of community service, but I don't think it should be the only thing used as a consequence in this case. And while I agree with Oak that things like killing someone on a bike with a car needs to be a felony, the sad truth is, in most of the juvenile cases I've dealt with, there are too many "chances" given, and then we are on a third or fourth offense, for which there have been very little meaningful consequences. And, we don't get the kids and their families the other help they may need.

[goldfinch]

The other half of it though, is that while a felony conviction will have way more long term consequences, they're also way more likely to serve jail time for a misdemeanor. That's assuming this is their first conviction.

Processing felons is such an expensive proposition that most first-time non-violent offenders get probation. But they'll be saddled with such a stigma, probably won't be able to get a job, can't vote until they're off paper (or in some states, for the rest of their lives), may be kicked out of their residence, etc., etc., that the only thing they're likely to "learn" is (greater) contempt for authority. Someone convicted of misdemeanor theft is likely to serve a short time in the county lockup, usually with more suspended on condition they stay out of trouble ... more likely to be a learning experience IMO.



I don't think the OP was talking about "forgiveness" or letting anyone walk. Her hesitation has to do with a felony charge for a property crime, which is a sentiment I share (provided these people aren't career thieves).

I so agree with this. We over punish felonies. People's lives end up ruined forever, with no way to rehabilitate themselves.

[pinsonp2]

You need to do what you think is best for you and your DH. However, you need to keep in mind how devastated you were when you discovered the bikes missing, how you felt sort of violated. That needs to be considered as well as the actual value of the bikes. Will the punishment actually serve to teach the thieves a lesson so they will never do that again? We seem to have evolved into a society that some people think that it's OK to take something from someone else because they figure they won't get caught or will get a light sentence. We as victims need to support the justice system to implement punishment that will truly deter these 'boys' from future criminal endeavors. I don't know exactly what that should be, but supporting a lesser charge may not be the answer. YMMV

Glad you are getting the bikes back,
P2

[shootingstar]

Let the charge be on the record. The kids have to learn. They also trespassd on your property to get at the bikes.