WARNINGS AND DISCLAIMERS (please read): The sources used have been meticulously cited. Some topics may appear biased to other readers and may even offend them. Please do not hesitate to express concerns on this and we will duly apologize, but please do best to respect our opinions. Thank you...enjoy!xD

An Argumentative Essay by The JohhnyMckilt Productions

entitled

Tribulations of Kleptomaniacs

A convicted thief strongly protests that he is innocent, but no one believes the testimony of a lowly thief. To any reasonable person, it is appalling not to receive due justice. The victim would want the offender appropriately punished for the damages the thief has made. But what if, even though these kinds of circumstances are extremely rare, the thief is actually a kleptomaniac, being thus, s/he cannot control the impulse to steal. Given the case, the law will still not overlook the fact that a crime was committed. The kleptomaniac cannot escape punishment, regardless of the fact, in actuality, the person is innocent. This is injustice, since it is not the kleptomaniac’s fault for possessing a thief-like behavior. That is why kleptomaniacs should not be charged with theft punishable by law.

The objective of this paper is to defend kleptomaniacs against unfair charges. We shall be differentiating a kleptomaniac from a thief. We would be listing down the charges for theft and stating that they should not include kleptomaniacs. Our references are reliable internet-based articles covering kleptomaniac cases from abroad because of the lack of studies made about kleptomaniacs here in the Philippines.

Let us define terms. What is kleptomania? It is a rare condition wherein one of its symptoms is impulsive stealing, whether it may be conspicuous or deliberate. Patients may feel tense or anxious prior to stealing and will feel immense satisfaction later on after having stolen, though they may know that the deed is wrong. S/he may feel guilt for stealing and will sometimes return the object he stole. The stolen items, most often than not, have little monetary value but have great significance to the patient. Kleptomaniacs are of the middle-class and have enough money to purchase the things they steal, and along with this disorder, patients may have other disorders as well like eating disorders or neurological disorders (Kleptomania, June 22, 2004). As kleptomania emphasizes on impulsive stealing and that these kinds of urges cannot be controlled, it shouldn’t be the person’s fault that s/he steals items since kleptomania is a neurological disorder and is difficult to treat. Treatments given to kleptomaniacs of the past vary in effectiveness. Therapy may be a good treatment for kleptomania, though no treatment is known to be the best. Innocence, for this argumentative paper, is defined as the clear conscience of a kleptomaniac even though s/he has stolen because the deed is not a real act of thieving. Stealing done by kleptomaniacs lack a couple of elements needed to define an act of thieving which shall be discussed later.

Thieves—shoplifters and robbers—on the other hand, steal items of great monetary value when they are not able to afford these sorts of items. The items they steal are also to benefit the thief. Also, these thieves have the intent of stealing these items, and have no intention of returning the stolen items. They may also attempt to threaten the victim and inflict harm upon the person in order to take away the item they are trying to steal.

In this paper, we present two kinds of thefts, robbery and larceny. The elements of larceny are wrongful taking, carrying away personal property of others, property in possession of another person, has intent to permanently convert or deprive victim of property. The elements of robbery include taking, carrying away personal property of others in view of or simply from the victim’s person or in their presence, by immediate or threatened force to the victim and with intent to permanently deprive victim of property (Theft Law, October 6, 2005). Thieving, such as larceny and robbery, requires intent and desire to permanently deprive the victim of the stolen property, as it is clearly stated in these two kinds or theft. What then are the charges for theft? As stated in Theft, one of our internet articles: “Although many U.S. states have retained larceny as the primary offense, some have now adopted theft provisions. For example, California consolidated a variety of common law crimes into theft in 1927, and now distinguishes between two types of theft, grand theft and petty theft. Grand theft generally consists of the theft of something of value over $400 (it can be money, labor or property), while petty theft is the default category for all other thefts. Both are felonies, but grand theft is punishable by a year in jail or prison, while petty theft is punishable by a fine or six months in jail. As for the older crimes of larceny, embezzling, and stealing, any references to them now mean theft instead. In many states, grand theft of a vehicle is charged as "grand theft auto"… Repeat offenders who continue to steal may become subject to life imprisonment in certain states.” (Theft, February 28 ,2007).

There are a lot of distinct differences between kleptomaniacs and thieves. Kleptomaniacs have irresistible urges of stealing and will steal items, regardless of the fact that they don’t have the intention of stealing and that they may know that stealing is wrong. These people also experience mental disorders, such as anorexia, nervosa, bulimia and anxiety, and many other psychological and social disorders. The items they steal are of low monetary worth, and are usually useless to the kleptomaniacs. The kleptomaniacs also take pleasure in stealing itself, and after the actual theft, they will immediately feel tensions, regret and guilt for having done the theft. They are also capable of returning the stolen item. Kleptomaniacs do not harbor intention to steal because they cannot help stealing. (Morgan, September 1997).

Thieves, in contrast, do not have psychological or neurological disorders, and will steal items because they have intent on stealing, even when they know it is very wrong. The items they steal are also profitable to them, and so the item proves to be helpful to the thief; therefore, they have no plans of returning the stolen item to the owner. They can also use weapons to threaten their victims into giving up their items. Obviously, the thieves are much more deserving to receive punishment for the theft that they have done.

Kleptomaniacs have more excusable issues when it comes to theft; thus, they shouldn’t be charged with theft punishable by law. Another difference is that kleptomaniacs have a behavioral pattern before they attempt to steal items. They have a wide range of psychiatric symptoms and can be affiliated with mood and mental disorders. They may possess eating disorders, high rates of depression and a general anti-social behavior. They are also capable of paying for the items they steal. Although when it comes to thieves, they have motives for stealing items, such trying to support oneself, to feed one’s family, to have vengeance or to simply gain profit; thus, the thieves have displayed their desire of stealing items because it benefits them. (Pujalte, 1997).

When the law can come up with enough evidence to prove that a person is indeed a kleptomaniac, surely they must give due consideration, since he/she isn’t really at fault, unlike that of a common thief. After all, the thieves have qualified the necessary requirements to be punished like a thief, while the kleptomaniacs have filled in some of those requirements, although with very understandable reasons. The charges for theft by genuine thieves seem fair enough to be their punishments, but if these punishments would be applied to kleptomaniacs, it would appear to be greatly unjust. The kleptomaniac’s theft is not that grave an offense to receive such harsh punishments meant for those who really deserve it.

Between thieves and kleptomaniacs, what does the American law say about the latter? Despite the fact that kleptomania is a neurological disorder and that kleptomaniacs cannot control their impulsive stealing, laws in America do not judge the kleptomaniacs medically. They are judged like any other common criminal and given their appropriate punishments if convicted, regardless of their disorder. (Kleptomania, March 13, 2007). Though it is not the kleptomaniac’s fault for having stolen an item, he/she is still charged with theft like any other shoplifter or robber! It’s clearly unreasonable that they are given the same treatment as that of a real thief who steals for profit, while they only steal because it is their disorder. It reeks of unfairness towards the unfortunate person who happened to have kleptomania.

We shall present three cases. The first case shows a kleptomaniac being unfairly charged with theft. The next two cases show real thieves using kleptomania as an excuse to get away.

Kleptomania Case 1: A French textbook introduced the official diagnosis in 1838. St. Augustine, who wrote in A.D. 397 about how he "lusted to thieve," and Jane Austen's aunt, hauled into court for theft in 1799, both appeared to be kleptomaniacs, said Aboujaoude (Seligman, November 7, 2002).

Actual Thieving Case 1: Actress Winona Ryder, convicted Wednesday of stealing more than $5,000 worth of clothes and accessories from Saks Fifth Avenue. She reportedly told a Saks security guard that she was "getting in character for a role as a kleptomaniac." The term alone was enough to make television talk shows buzz (Seligman, November 7, 2002).

Actual Thieving Case 2: Bandar Seri Begawan – A local man with a substantial stealing habit was sent to four months in jail, after his fed up father-in-law lodged a report against him for stealing his chainsaw as well as some cash. The accused, Mohd Yusri bin Hj Mohd Yussof, aged 32, was sentenced in the Tutong Magistrate’s Court before Magistrate Radin Safiee Radin Mas Basiuni, of two charges of stealing a chainsaw as well as $60, belonging to his father-in-law (Mohamad, n.d.).

While real thieves may pretend to be kleptomaniacs, they are still charged with theft since the items they stole are of substantial value and that they didn’t experience symptoms as that of kleptomaniacs. This presents two things. One: People are aware that kleptomania cases have provisions. Two: Despites these provisions, the law still charges theft whatever disorder or not the individual may have.

For feasibility, what should we do if kleptomaniacs aren’t charged of theft punishable by law when caught red-handed? Kleptomaniacs should be sent into rehabilitation centers to receive their respective therapies, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, medication with SRIs (serotonin reuptake inhibitors) or family therapies, as the disruptive behavior of the kleptomaniacs may greatly affect the family. They can also be given anti-depressant medication, as kleptomania can be affiliated with moods of depression (Pujalte, 1997). When the kleptomaniacs are acquitted of the charges made against them, they can be given proper medical treatment for their neurological disorder, so as to avoid impulsive stealing and getting charged with theft again. That way, kleptomaniacs are saved from having unfair charges made against them and that they are given a second chance to better themselves.

Kleptomaniacs truly shouldn’t be considered as thieves. They are merely average Joes who suffer from a neurological disorder that makes stealing irresistible to them. Kleptomaniacs should not be charged with theft because their deed cannot be considered actual stealing. To lessen thieving impulses, they may undergo therapy which could combat their thieving ways. As we said, it’s possible for kleptomaniacs not to be charged with theft punishable by law if the law judges these people properly. This would also encourage people to make a stand if these unfortunate victims of kleptomania are wrongly judged; thus, we are able to achieve justice for the kleptomaniacs.

Just think about how many genuine kleptomaniacs we would be able to save from being punished unfairly. After all, wouldn’t you say it’s better to have a notorious criminal out on the streets, than having an innocent man put behind bars?

END

A/N: will be posting Reference List as next chapter...tell me what you think! ...enjoy!xD and ciAo...