There is an interesting criminal case out of Florida in which FedEx driver Latavion Lewis was charged with grand theft, illegal dumping, and an organized scheme to defraud. Yet, in this case, the grand theft was to throw out packages rather than deliver them. It is a type of Grinch Grand Theft charge that only raises questions about the handling of a certain case in 1966.
FedEx received reports of packages strewn along roads and in the woods around Bonifay, Florida. Police recounted that”during the interview, Lewis admitted to deputies that, due to the late hour, he chose to discard the undelivered packages at several locations rather than return them to the FedEx warehouse.”
Roughly 44 packages were recovered as of December 21.
Under the Florida statute, grand theft is applied even if the crime is meant to deprive someone of property without a desire to actually use or retain the property for oneself:
“812.014 Theft.—
(1) A person commits theft if he or she knowingly obtains or uses, or endeavors to obtain or to use, the property of another with intent to, either temporarily or permanently:
(a) Deprive the other person of a right to the property or a benefit from the property.
(b) Appropriate the property to his or her own use or to the use of any person not entitled to the use of the property.”
The dumping charge is more straightforward. However, it raises new questions about this holiday felon who first stole presents and clearly committed grand theft but then tossed them back in a haphazard way into the town square of Whoville:
The record is clear as to the intent of the Gringe when “he got an idea. An awful idea. The Grinch got a wonderful, awful idea.” He wanted to denied the Whos of Whoville their presents. As in the Florida case, the Grinch wanted only to deprive Whoville families of the gifts and would meet the definition under subsection (a).
However, when his heart grew and he returned the gifts, he did not return them to individual victims but threw them into the town square. It seems clear that, despite being a redemptive sinner, the Grinch should still have been prosecuted for grand theft under this standard. This rehabilitation would seem a matter for sentencing. It is true that “he brought everything back, all the food for the feast. And he, he himself, the Grinch – carved the roast beast.” However, that was only after his plan failed, Christmas came and he had a literal change of heart.
Nevertheless, his counsel can claim that his soul is no longer ” an appalling dump-heap, overflowing with the most disgraceful assortment of rubbish imaginable, mangled up in tangled up knots.” I would argue for probation and possible cave confinement.