Posted by Bob, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2012 at 8:32 am

It's good news that this person was caught so quickly, but now what? She will be processed "in the system", and end up costing the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars in direct, and indirect, costs.

In this case, Nordstrom's didn't lose any money--but the taxpayers end up losing bigtime.

Society can not afford to deal with petty theives in the future, as it has in the past. We (society) needs to consider other possible ways to deal with these sorts of indiscretions that does not involve a heavy involvement of the "legal system".

For instance, the $950 dollar threshold for calling theft "grand theft" could be lifted to a higher value--say $5,000. Stores, like Nordstroms, could tag all of their merchandise with RFID tags, so that merchandies would be able to "tell the store" if it has been moved very far from where it should be.

Shopping centers could use facial recgnition software to monitor shoppers, using databases of photographs of people known to have stolen in the past.

And of course, better surveillance technology that would provide useful pictures of people suspected of stealing for law enforcement use.

Shopping centers, and their wealthy clients, need to do more to make it harder for theives to steal. The recent theft at Victoria's Secret is an example of incredibly bad store management that has pushed their problem on the backs of the publicly-funded police. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to tell Victoria's that when they don't manage their own store properly, it's not the public's problem.

Posted by JA3+, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2012 at 9:14 am

"Stores, like Nordstroms, could tag all of their merchandise with RFID tags, so that merchandies would be able to "tell the store" if it has been moved very far from where it should be."

+1

Posted by Paul, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2012 at 11:28 am

@bob, that sounds like a good idea, but it would penalize small businesses that could not afford such elaborate systems. The thieves would just go to those small stores instead. And for even Nordstroms, it would be just yet another expense contributing to the problem of how brick and mortar business can't compete with Amazon.

Posted by Bob, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2012 at 12:37 pm

> but it would penalize small businesses that could not

> afford such elaborate systems

Surveillance cameras are cheap.

RFID tagging is cheap.

Facial recognition systems would be provided by the shopping center management--paid for from a very small increase in client rent.

This sort of technology generally is not that expensive.

Posted by Anymouse, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2012 at 9:44 pm

I thought Nordstrom did have RFID tags <?> It is well-known that Nordsrom has a strong loss prevention team. I do assume this particular theft, (as we, as readers, are only given a small amount of details), that they probably lifted the merchandise, and didn't take ALL the tags ?

As far as the OCT 29th theft, I read the earlier report on Palo Alto online, and recall that the office the woman entered DID have video of the female, (black female with long red braids). Did they actually have video evidence as was reported?

She probably took off her wig of red hair, then utilized the credit card at Nordstrom.

How very brazen these thieves are becoming -- I do think the PAPD can help PA residents on suggestions of surveillance for their homes. We keep hearing about 'lock it and don't leave it', why not provide residents, as most seem so tech savvy, yet there are many elderly, or simply 'it won't happen to me' residents, that don't realize how inexpensive it can be to protect their homes.

I'm just appalled at the brazenness of people outside this community, and the thefts seem to have jumped significantly after so much focus in the media on Facebook and Steve Jobs. It makes me wonder how much these thieves and burglars are laughing at the citizens here, with their unlocked doors and open nature. The 3 burglars that were recently taken into custody, and their mugshots shown on PA ONLINE, all seem to be smugly laughing.

Time to look at reality, Palo Alto residents, these people have nothing to lose, it seems, as they enter homes/offices/vehicles/stores...

Posted by danielle, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 5:06 am

the taxpayers don't lose big time, this thief will deservedly be in jail off the streets

catching/prosecuting criminals costs money and is obviously better than not doing it

Posted by Katie, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 10:55 am

Gee by the sounds of the comments above the Stanford Shopping Center should maybe put a chain link fence around it and put bars on the doors when they close. People could only enter with a ticket at one entrance. I did not know it had suddenly become the ghetto or the Gaza Strip. we have a mobile society, no one stays put. They can walk across and cross over bridges. That is life!!!

Posted by conga, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 7:27 pm

PA Online readers hace always wanted to turn Palo Alto into an Orwell theme park. Surely living in an isolated island of security forces like colombian warlords will solve society's problems.

Posted by Nora Charles, a resident of Stanford, on Nov 14, 2012 at 4:22 pm
Nora Charles is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

"Shopping centers, and their wealthy clients, need to do more to make it harder for theives to steal."

Bob, how is it the responsibility of shoppers to prevent crime? We can alert clerks if we see suspicious activity, but that's about it. And not all of us who shop at Nordstrom are wealthy, by the way. Now, Neiman Marcus. ;-)....