I think that the defendant has learned his lesson because the issue has been brought up. He didn't get away with it this time so now he suffers the consequences. Second case, not present.
For the first question I believe that since the jury tried to humiliate him, he has learned his lesson and will not do the crime again. For the second question I believe that the girl stole for personal reasons due to the fact that when her father was mentioned, emotion was triggered in her
Case 1: I believe that the defendant will most likely not commit the offense again. He seemed to have noticed the effect he left on his family and daily life.
Case 2: I feel the defendant committed the crime to obtain items she wanted to posses not out of personal matters or attention.
Case 1: I feel the defendant will most likely not commit the offense another time, he seemed pretty sincere about his answers and tried to provide as much information as he could, leading me to believe he has learned his lesson
Case 2: I believe the defendant stole purposely for personal gain, feeling that her family couldn't afford many luxuries this was her way to obtain what she could never have, and she even admitted that she enjoyed it as well.
Case 1: I believe he will not commit it again. He is a good student academically and knows if he attempts it again, he will be risking his future.
Case2: I believe her personal reason to steal was the fact that she wanted material things she couldn't have. There seemed to be no other reason than her saying she did it out of boredom.
1) I don't believe the defendant will commit the crime again. Having to endure a trial in front of his parents should be enough motivation to stop him from committing the crime again.
2) I believe she committed the crime for personal gain. There was no prime reason for stealing. She did it because she wanted something and didn't want to burden her mother with it.
Case 1: I believe that the defendant won't commit the offence again because he was very sincere in his answers and it seemed like if he learned his lesson.
Case 2: I believe that the defendant stole for personal gain because she wanted things that her family couldn't provide for her. Also she said that she did it out of boredom and that she enjoyed it.
First case: The defendant has learned his lesson, he got caught and now he has to pay the consequences. Second case: I think the defendant stole for the joy and luxuries she got out of it, she admired she enjoyed it .
Case 1: He knew it was wrong, he seemed intelligent enough to realize it, and being caught most likely means he will not be charged with the offense again, or any offense for that matter.
Case 2: She seemed very unresponsive, not showing regret for what she did. Her mother obviously was filled with shame and remorse but the child would need further help to seek out the real issue behind this matter.
Case 1: The defendant will not commit the offence again for he is subjected to a punishment as opposed to the his first time committing the crime where there were no manifestations of punishments in any way.
Case 2: The defendant should not have the excuse of personal issues as a gateway into crime as should no one in this regard.
Case 1: I believe that the defendant will not commit the crime again because he was humiliated in front of his parents.
Case 2: I feel that the defendant committed the crime out of her personal wants but not needs . I although there might be deeper personal issues within her and her family ,i say she only did it out the need for attention.
Case 1: I believe the defendant will not do his crime again because during the trail he looked remorse.
Case 2: I think the defendant dose have no excuse for shoplifting but I can see were her dad came in as a factor that led her on the path to shoplifting. Many people would disagree with me but when you are abandoned by a family member who looked over you most of your life it messes with your head in bad ways, It makes you choose to do things for attention maybe even to get you lost one back.I think the defendants personal problem was her dad
Case 1: I don't believe the defendant will commit the crime again because he seemed to have learn a valuable lesson.
Case 2: I think that she stole for personal reasons because she didn't have enough money to buy the items that she wanted.
Case 1: If the defendant hadn't gotten caught, he most likely would've committed the crime again, but since he has now seen the consequences, it doesn't seem like he would commit the crime anymore.
Case 2: I do think that the defendant stole for personal reasons. For example, she only had her mom and two sisters, so the mom has to work two jobs in order to support her children. Also, in the case it was brought up that the dad had had past criminal problems, so perhaps the father was influencing the defendant.
Case 1: The defendant has committed the same offense before, but did not get caught until the second offense. The defendant has learned their lesson due to the punishment given.
Case 2: The defendant did steal due to personal issues, most likely issues in her family because when her father was mentioned, she showed emotion and began to cry.
Case #1: In my opinion, I don't think the defendant will be committing the same mistake again. Although he got away with it once, the second time he was caught, and he learned the consequences that go along for the crime.
Case #2: I think the defendant stole the items because her family doesn't have the financial support to afford them, for personal gain.
Case #1: I only think the defendant will not commit the same crime again because he had been caught his SECOND time. I suppose he only learned his lesson because he was caught-- if he hadn't been humiliated, he most likely wouldn't have felt he'd done wrong.
Case #2: I feel that the defendant stole for her personal use, as her family was not in a decent financial position to support her furthered needs.
Case#1 In my opinion I do think she stole for personal issues. She felt the need to steal for her friend because she didn't want to lose her because of the fact she only had a few friends. She will not commit the crime anymore she has learned her lesson.
Case#2 In the second case the defendant did do it for personal reasons. She felt the need to steal for her family because of financial issues. I do not think she will steal again she has learned her lesson.
1. I don't think the defendant will commit that crime again because she actually got a punishment this time. Her getting this punishment will probably make her realize that it's not right to commit any crimes and there are punishments for the wrong things she does.
2.The defendant should not have to use her personal issues in life to try and get herself out of the mistake she made but since she did, her family probably wasn't financially stable so she went out and stole things for them.
case 1: I believe that the defendant will not commit this crime again. She admitted that she did it and said she will never do this again.
case 2: Yes,I believe the defendant stole for personal reasons.I feel that she was seeking attention from her father.
case 1: I believe the defendant learned his lesson and won't commit it again , he seemed embarrassed and ashamed and he knows what he did wrong
case 2: I feel things with her family caused her to steal she probably wanted attention and felt by stealing her parents or dad would be concern
Defendant 1 I believe he will never commit the crime he seemed caring that this matters.
Defendant 2 she could care less about what she did she really never understood her crime and might do this again her punishment should be more sevior
Case #1: I do believe that since the defendant has been caught, he will not do it again. He probably feels guilt since he was caught and would not want to go through that again.
Case #2:I don't believe that the defendant stole for personal issues but for personal use. She knew that her family wouldn't be able to afford the items she wanted and she decided to get them for herself. She focused more on the material things than on her own well being.
Case One: Even though the defendant had already committed the crime once, before he was caught, I don't think he would do it again, since it seemed as though he had learned his lesson.
Case Two: Yes, I do think that the defendant stole due to personal issues; she said she didn't have enough money. Also, she seemed to steal just for the fun of it.
In case1 I think the defendant learned his lesson because he and his parents felt embarrassed
In Case 2- I believe the defendant did it for personal reasons for attention from her parents
Case 1: I believe that the defendant won't commit a cringe again because you can see he was ashamed
Case 2: she stole just to get attention from her father she thought if doing stuff for her father's brother her father will notice her. She just had father issues
Case 1: The defendant has commuted this crime twice already, but has only been caught once. I feel that the defendant has learned his lesson and this will not happen again.
Case2: I believe the defendant stole due to personal issues. I believe the problems with her family influenced why she stole.
Case 1: The defendant wasn't caught the first which is why he did it again. Now that he was caught he will learn the consequences to his actions and wont do it again.
Case 2: In my opinion the defendant stole not because of personal issues but, simply because she wanted those items.
Case #1: i do strongly believe that due to the punishment given to the defendant they learned their lesson acknowledging that this time wasn't a major offense but next time the damage will be more serious and they were more than capable of making that connection.
Case #2: I do not think that this specific defendant stole in regards to personal issues more over in craving of a materialistic desire of objects they didn't obtain.
Case #1:The defendant was seen committing his crime for the second time already.As far as this experience,he seemed very apologetic upon his actions and will most like move on from his mistakes.
Case #2. I believe that the defendant stole for her own self rather than personal issues.Along with that,she probably did it with the intention of receiving both of her parents' awareness.
Case #1 The fact that the defendant had her cell phone with her when both her parents claimed she didn't, very much affected the credibility , this is because the parents stated the phone had been completely suspended. Therefore the fact that she had it completely disregard her credibility. The defendant in the first case considered herself the victim this shows that she might not have truly understand what she did to be wrong.
Case 2 The defendants mothers attitude did not affect the case I believe this was because she had allready spoken to her daughter and came to the conclusion that she had to go through the court process and think over what she had done. I don't think It had to do with her dad because as she said she had no way of reaching him that she has bonded with her mother and sees a father figure in her brother .