Why has shoplifting, a seemingly minor crime, escalated in recent years? People are growing more desperate, more brazen - and the safety of store workers and bottom lines of businesses are at stake.
Dave Ross talks with Roger Goodman, who represents Kirkland and Redmond in the Washington state legislature, and Judge David Larson, a civil court judge in Federal Way.
Rep. Goodman chairs the House Public Safety Committee, and Judge Larson deals with shoplifting theft convictions in his court on a regular basis. Having seen how the system works firsthand, they have some ideas, and opinions, about what will really work to stop repeat offenders.
From the KIRO Radio Newsroom in Seattle. I'm Dave Ross, and these are the Ross Files.
Seattle merchants are at their wits end to do something about shoplifting. And so I thought we'd talk to a couple of people who have worked on this problem in the real world to see what works and what doesn't represent of Roger Goodman and Judge David Larson, who's with the federal way Civil Court and Roger, as a state represented. I want to ask you first of all, what? What? What's happening on the state level here
on shoplifting? Uh, I guess there's two categories of shoplifting. One is what we call organized retail theft, which is, you know, people with criminal intent stealing lots of stuff organized about it.
And then there's sort of your run of the mill shoplifting picking up an item here and there. And, needless to say, businesses lose billions of dollars. Nature one of that, But
think the real problem is
focusing on this sort of organized theft.
Now is it out of hand? Has it? Has it gotten worse in recent years? Because that's certainly the perception.
Well, we hear that from the retailers on and, um we've tried to amend the law, and I hope we can get it done this year
to take account of intent.
In other words, if you're if you put something in your pocket intending to leave the store, our current law doesn't allow law enforcement to interview until you leave this store until you're outside.
So if a security guard sees you pocket some makeup or lipstick, are, you know, cell phone card?
They can't do anything until you try to leave the store,
right, So right now they have to wait till they get outside. Then the car's waiting and running and can cause danger in the parking lot.
So the loss prevention officers in the stores want to be able to intervene in the store. And so we need to change the theft law to account for this concealment. Sort of, you know, the showing of intent to steal,
uh, that I hope we can get done in the upcoming session.
Judge Larson in Federal Wway. How do you handle shoplifting?
Well, one thing I want to point out first is there seems to be a all or nothing approach to this either treatment or incarceration and nothing between and the bottom line is we need both. You need to be able to address the underlying cause of the behavior,
and we don't do that. Then we're gonna continue on with the Babe. You're putting him in jail and then not dealing with it doesn't do anything. But what if the underlying cause the behavior is I want this and I don't want to pay for Exactly. And that's the X factor in all of this. Is the individual's desire to change, to not commit crime. If the person has that desire, we can work with him if they don't either because the drugs or the mental illnesses speaking louder and we do, then it's extremely difficult. We're not equipped for that.
The challenge for a judge is reaching that defendant to try to get figure out what's motivating them and then change that behavior. That is why we're pulling her hair out because the drugs in and the mental illness speak louder than we do. So is there something different about the shoplifting we see today as opposed to what it may have been like 20 or 30 years ago? The demographic is much different from what I hear, there's more violence associated with shoplifting. People are more desperate because they're Ah, lot of folks that are that are addicted are concerned about their withdrawal. So they are. They're doing everything they can to get that next dollar they can get so they can buy more drugs so they don't get to that point. And so the desperation
becomes greater. And so you're seeing a little bit more and you can't reason with someone like that so desperate for that hit, they'll do anything right. And some reticence by some of the retailers is now. They don't want their employees in in danger. My son's friend is this loss prevention. He got his head ran over by a car. Really? Yeah. And so it bottom line is that there's both the safety of the workers as well as the safety. The public that you're concerned about, too, is there. Has the justice system gone soft?
Um, the, uh I think when we take the approach of compassion over accountability,
then we go soft if we are compassion and balance with accountability than we're doing the right thing because I think what we're my experiences with you have to reach the person. You have to get them to decide for themselves to change. And they aren't necessarily going to do that if they think you're they're your enemy.
But if they think you're too much of their friend, then they take advantage and they continue on because it's easy. Yeah, Was David Horsey cartoon in the in the times of the weekend? Off you saw it, but it was a shoplifter. You know, looking at the store clerk clerk says, I'm gonna turn you in and the shop later saying, since we know you won't and just waltzes out the door, right? And I think right now we're reaping the kind of the
the punishment of not taking these more seriously when somebody first commits a crime. So the first time somebody commits a crime, there's any evidence of their
of mental illness or addiction and contributing to this. We should be ad dressing it then instead of the focus now. And the reason we're in this turmoil is because we're focusing thinks so much is out of control. But if you just consider it a minor crime, so you don't devote any resource is to try to identify early. We're gonna end up chasing chasing our tail when things are out of control. And that's where the state will have to step up, right? Roger. Because we we have sort of dropped the ball on mental illness. Emily,
we have and we are finally turning around. I mean, we're invested hundreds of millions of dollars. We need more. You know, brick and mortar. We need beds.
We need more professional workforce. So we're starting to make the investment, but yeah, this has been a generation of neglect of our behavioral health system. The state, the court's law enforcement need intervene. I think ultimately
it's the question of resource is again We have to have that those places to go. I can't tell you the number of times law enforcement say to me, If there was another place I could take them, I would write King County is actually doing a pretty good job, sort of a showcase for the nation. We have a long way to go in building out this new infrastructure for behavioral health.
But what about the remote areas of the state on DSO for so a lot of investment is needed there. But in the meanwhile sort of in my jurisdiction cause I chair the Public Safety Committee. What does the Colonel Justice system need to, as the judge was saying, acknowledged that the underlying causes behavioral health and intervene that way? So is not needlessly to punish, but not just to say, Well, here's a fine and don't come back again because they come back 72 times,
right? Exactly. So judge in federal way, when you find somebody who needs that kind of mental health treatment, is there a place you can send them now?
And that's where the rub is.
My job is to figure out how to separate the can'ts from the won'ts . The can'ts you work with. The won'ts well that they get the punishment so great.
But the problem with with the system we have now is I can order somebody go get treatment. But then they go out and say they're addicted. Say they got a co occurring disorder. It's addiction and mental illness. They can't get in for an evaluation for two or three weeks. They're all motivated. In the meantime, they relapse, and then and then they get another warrant. They don't show up for court and it's the cycle. It's almost predictable that you see once somebody is that first crime that it just snowballs from there because we aren't able to get in early with the resources and Federal Way is, is Ah is kind of Ah, suburb of Seattle, but it's a certainly the tax base is such that it's hard t help. Local resource is that would help what can be done now then I understand with the mental health part that's gonna take a lot more money. But they're I keep coming back to the people who
really are just flaunting the fact that they can do this and get away with it. Now. Is there a way that you could at least send a message to them that it's ah, no more Mr Nice Guy? I think I think what you have to have is you have to have this system that is based upon if you're if you're one of the can'ts, if you're somebody that just can't do it and you need help, we need to help. But if you're a won't, if you just flat out, don't want to cooperate. D on't want to participate in the punitive system needs to kick in. But the therapeutic system. I think the movement towards therapy to courts is excellent, because those people that are ready for change those people that want to change, we fail them if we are there to help. Ah, that that hand off we have a lot of resource is out there. But I used the jigsaw puzzle kind of analogy. We each see our little piece of the jigsaw puzzle is the answer
right. But what the people we serve, what they see is just a bunch of jigsaw puzzle pieces laying around. If we had a way of proposing that together in a cohesive way to take existing resources and coordinate it better ,o we didn't have these silos
than those people that are ready and able to change.
We can get that accomplished. The ones that won't than the punitive system is gonna have to kick in where jail is the So when s So when you get a bona fide won't in your courtroom? All right. What happens to that person? Well, the bonafide won'ts go to jail in Federal Way.
Yeah,
that worked as a function of the negotiations between the prosecutor and defense attorney. Most of the people that are in jail or thereby agreement by plea agreement, the judges rarely have to
be involved in a disagreement between the attorneys. And when we do, we impose whatever we think is fair under the circumstances. Does that work? Does that deter people?
E think to some people that does the others. It doesn't. I mean, I've had I've had just a kind comment made this one woman that it made all the difference in the world. I just did. You're gonna get through this and that made all the difference in the world. You got other people. I got a guy that's haven't seen in a while, but he has over 200 crimes, 102 100 crimes. I put him away for 400 days one time, and he was back within two weeks. And, you know, and he's a won't. This isn't just illnesses.
That is the thing. We have to make these distinctions. You say shoplifter and what comes into your mind? You know, someone who's intending to steal something?
Well, yeah, maybe it's one of those won'ts they're flouting the law and they intend to steal. But then another huge category huge, probably larger category. Because this is what we hear from retailers are people who are in crisis. They are don't don't want to go into withdrawal or they're not, you know, thinking right.
And so that's not the same a sort of criminal intent, right and then again is distinguished from this organized retail theft,
which I talked about before, which is a big dollar loss in terms of in comparison to the other types of shoplifting
so organized retail theft. That's absolute criminal activity that we need to crack down on, and we have in our statutes address the law in that area. But I think here we're focusing on again behavioral health trying to address the underlying causes of why they might be stealing from a store,
what it gets down to if if I'm somebody that's willing and able to change my life and I'm in court and I got a mental illness or an addiction,
and I can't be lined up with something that's gonna help me,
and I have to wait a month to get in somewhere and I relapse or I'm living in the woods and I relapse or I steal again.
That's that. That's still on me legally as that person. But the question is, are we contributing in some ways, in a lot of ways, we could just give you one example. Somebody goes to impatient. Nobody thinks of communicating with the courts, right?
And sometimes they do. But most the time they don't. And so the person doesn't show up because they're an inpatient treatment getting treatment. So we issue a warrant, they get out
and they move on with their life. They're getting stable and the warrant catches up with them. Now they're back in jail. They lose their housing, their insurance is suspended. So just coordination that's don't and communication and in the system itself sometimes will contribute to the failure of these individuals. And so how do we sure those things up? How do we make it so that so that we on our end and the system itself aren't contributing in some way to it? And resource availability is significant. That's way getting somebody the first defense. You know, you can spend less. Resource is on them, but they never come back. We're good to go. Second offense, it ramps up.
We're talking about misdemeanors here. Okay, so superior courts handle felonies, and there's all sorts of boutique or therapeutic in a specialty courts at the Superior Court level. But here we're talking about our local courts. We call our courts of local jurisdiction, municipal courts and district courts, and they handle misdemeanors. And that is the vast bulk of criminal activity out there. Most of its dui and domestic violence.
But a lot of this is this theft level. It's a misdemeanor level linked to behavioral health problems, and we don't have a handler, and the misdemeanor level courts don't coordinate with each other. There's not sort of a regional approach which we could create. I mean, we need to talk about that and a lot
of somebody working to fix that. Well, House Bill 2605 that was pending two years ago, would allow consolidation of probation. That's a big step. So so somebody has cases in four different jurisdictions. They can go to one jurisdiction for probation and then those that probation department to report all four courts. But you can imagine being homeless and you're thinking five seconds in front of your face and you have to go to four different courts and report it's not gonna make you varmints are gonna fail.
That's a bill that I hope I'm on the Judiciary Committee in the house. I hope we can get that through this year.
Yeah, is unless something happens, It seems to me that most merchants are gonna have to become, ah, Amazon Go stores, which, which is where you don't even get in unless you have the cell phone app that has your credit card number and you go in and basically you shoplift from the store, right? But the phone is keeping track of it, and you end up paying for it. Um, unless you can get this this thing under control, that's I think that's what's gonna have to happen. Well, there's there's a lot of foot. We've been focusing on shoplifting, but there's car, probably. And there's the things getting stolen, torches. There's mailboxes. My own neighborhood got hit on the mailbox has got hit.
Um, but the thing is, is that again individual behavior that's our job is to influence that to somebody that isn't addicted or mentally ill. The system works really well. You know, if you were in my court and you did something wrong. I tell you, don't do it again and be on probation, and I'd likely never see you again. But if that if that untreated mental illness or addiction is fueling your behavior, yeah, I'm just the Charlie Brown teacher going. Want, want, want. I'm not I'm not I'm not. I'm not. You're not hearing me. Yeah. What about a universal basic income? What about Andrew Yang's idea? I like if people are different people are that desperate for money that the resort to violence for? Why don't we just Wouldn't it just be cheaper to give everybody $1000 a month?
Yes. I have to say that maybe I'm putting myself out on a limb, but you be idea is very promising.
Yeah, well, some of the when it comes to that. Oh, I can't. That's a nonjudicial. Things like I know, But what is the one person you could? Yeah, but they even I'm no longer a person is a judge. Does that make Does that sound right? Anyway, you on that. But the point is, is that just a simple as getting medication assisted treatment for heroin addicts, right? away. Theoretically, you're gonna impact a lot of people because now they don't have to steal to satisfy that urge. And just that one simple thing early on, uh, can help go a long way and just but just figure it out
to build a therapeutic court. We did in fed away with chewing gum and baling wire. Right? And each court is left on its own to build a therapy to court. Wouldn't it be great if we had a regional approach to being able to have a handoff by courts to service is a warm hand off. Well, you gotta talk to your state legislator
way. Absolutely
are moving in that direction. I mean, I I convened a group in Olympian. I'm gonna convene the same group again next month
to talk about what legislative? Ah, other than funding. I mean, you know, we always battle over that, but structurally, what can we do about again? These local courts, the misdemeanor level courts to allow them to address this problem better. And let's see if there's a legislative solution in the upcoming session. But we're we are definitely moving in the right direction, and I mean, think about it. 15 years ago, we were locking people up who had addiction. It was the drug war was raging, right?
So we really are phasing out of that and looking at it as a health problem. So we have to build up the infrastructure now and then. Have the courts coordinate with that.
Yeah. So what's the What's the consensus here in the room between the state representative and the judge on the front lines? Does this get solved? When it comes to money. I agree with represented Goodman. I think we first got to get smarter about how we use our money before we start putting more money into it. I mean, they're already adding more money because of the mental health crisis, and that's good.
But if we can look at how that money is being spent on how we can better coordinate because like the fear I have with therapy to courts, which are absolutely essential, they have to be. The trend
is that we're creating just another silo. I mean, another example. Our local fire department. They have two social workers and three firefighters devoted just to dealing with responding to mental health crisis and that everything. Why is it why is that have to happen? Why don't we have two social workers at a fire department? Why can't they be done by an agency? That's that's that. Actually, it's doing
well, actually. Have to disagree with
that. Well, I
think the embedded social workers with fire and police first responders is a good model. Oh,
no. I agree with
that they could be dispatched to the scene,
the Escalade or whatever, you know, sort of whether it's fire or law enforcement. They said a step back. And the trained social worker or mental health worker deals with the person in crisis. So that's actually good. Good model that
in the Legislature we've provided millions of dollars of funding in the last couple of years to expand that model.
I agree with that model. My point is, why can't that person that's with the Fire Department be with a social service agency instead of the fire department? And again, maybe it's
It's six of 1/2 dozen another, but the question is, can we take existing resource is and have us work together closer. I think people love hearing all these ideas and what they would like to know is okay, can I? Will I see something changed next year. Two years, five years. What kind of a time horizon are
we talking about? This is Ah, we got a short legislative session coming up. So it's It's all already end of the year here. So
this is a pretty large topic, and I think in terms of structural change and more funding and more programs at the misdemeanor level, we'll see what happens in the upcoming session. But there's a lot of discussions that have to happen with prosecutors need to sign off.
We still have to wait for the infrastructure of therapy to care to continue to build out
on Ben. Judge Larson's association, the District Municipal Court Judges Association has to chew on it a while, you know, because they would be sort of an official transmission to us. It's okay to do it, but I really think we're moving in the right direction here. So
what do you think? How much time Judge Larson?
Well, um, we're just so you're aware the judiciary is moving towards what
was called trauma informed decision making where we're actually instead of talking at Pat. People were talking with people to try again, again identify what's the underlying cause and try to deal with that instead of just using, you know, a cookie cutter check a box kind of approach and, ah, that's that's already happening. And therapeutic courts were building them slowly but surely across the state. What I what I noticed about our community court is it didn't take any money. It was a change of attitude and approach.
You had to do a segment on therapy to court because the difference they making people's lives when they're ready and we're ready with him.
Significant changes. It's even change the lives of the attorneys in their outlook.
Uh, and so I really am a proponent of those types of approaches because now you're treating it's the magic of dignity and respect. If you're in my court and I treat you like you're subhuman, you're gonna end up. Maybe you'll be a self fulfilling prophecy. So the solution is not to be more hard nosed, is what you're saying. I think you have to be under the right circumstances. The idea is that you again as long as
it's it's a graduated approach. If somebody is going to be a won't, then there's no choice but to impose punishment. If somebody's that, can't you need to work with them until they can be a can. And that's and that's where we where we have to go is the therapeutic approach
is significant. We just think in your own life, if somebody approached you, do this or else how you're gonna react versus this is in your best interest to do this a little differently. Now what do you think?
And and again, But there's people that will persist and because they just want to steal or they just want to do whatever.
Then, at that point in time, that's that the justice system has been, uh, equipped to deal with that for for decades
in Seattle has really given birth to, uh, this harm reduction approach. People who are in crisis, uh, running afoul of the law contributing to public disorder. You can intervene and kind of,
you know, we were there lending a helping hand, establishing goal, small goals that they could meet.
Ah, expecting eventual relapse and working with them not giving up. Uh, And so this is the approach on the street. Now there's a program called Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion. Lead Lead model where you intervene on the street. Law enforcement intervene, but there's not an arrest. There's more of a case worker, you know, working with this person and say,
How is that not catch and release?
Well, uh,
they don't They don't release them because they never arrested them in the first place. It's more of an engagement of people who need help and maybe never had any help.
And the research is pretty clear that this works and this model is being replicated across the country. Law enforcement loves it. They used the thing. Well, wait a minute. Arresting people is what we do now. They've learned to divert pre arrests to therapeutic care, and it's pretty clear who these people are. These are not people with criminal intent to steal or whatever. They're in crisis.
So there's a lot of good stuff going on on the street. We kind of want to expand that now into the court system and ah,
but we are kind of a showcase for the nation on this. The whole country is suffering from this
mental health crisis.
Well, that's encouraging. I could just speak is somebody who's done a couple of forms on this and to tell you that the people who run the shops and the businesses are at their wits end and there's a lot. There's a lot of reasons to feel that way. The citizens are, too. And the thing is, is that
convened a forum back in December 2017 where I brought everybody together, fire police, everybody because we're all affected by the same people. So why can't we figure out a way to address the folks in a kind of a unified way? A community coordinated response? Because a lot of ways were serving the same people.
Judge David Larson, Federal Way Civil Court and represented Roger Goodman State Legislature. Thank you both very much for coming. Thank you.
Remember that when there's a longer version of the interviews on Seattle's morning news, you can usually find it right here in the original form, unconstrained by the limitations of a live broadcast. And you can subscribe so that when someone says, Did you hear what was on Seattle's morning news? You could say not only that I heard the part that wasn't on Seattle Morning News. So my advice is to subscribe. And then when we talked to an author, a politician, entrepreneur, artist, scientist, teacher, journalists, celebrity, you'll hear every word.
I'm Dave Ross. Thanks for tuning.