snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Crime

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06 September 2011, 11:43 PM
flightsuit's Avatar
flightsuit flightsuit is offline
 
 
Join Date: 19 January 2011
Location: Pacifica, CA
Posts: 20
Default Was a Canadian business sued by a burglar for not leaving their lights on?

I just found this gem in the following Yelp Talk conversation:

http://www.yelp.com/topic/san-rafael...siness-on-yelp


Quote:
Leslie "lotus petal" Y. says:
in canada, a business that got burglarized decided to set a little trap, turning off the lights....

well the burglar didn't have lighting and hurt himself, sued and won, that is why all businesses have lights on when closed, they are afraid of being sued......

Sounds like complete hogwash to me. I searched Snopes and could not find a matching story, however.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07 September 2011, 12:03 AM
ViolentMarshmallow ViolentMarshmallow is offline
 
Join Date: 20 January 2007
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 19
Default

I've heard this one before. If I had to guess it would make more sense for the company (I"m assuming this is supposed to be an office or something) to leave the lights on to make it easier for the janitors to see around when they're cleaning at night. Even though, I don't always see lights on in business when they're closed and when I do there's maybe one or two lit up at most.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07 September 2011, 04:11 AM
Not_Done_Living's Avatar
Not_Done_Living Not_Done_Living is offline
 
Join Date: 02 September 2006
Location: Markham, ON
Posts: 3,735
Default

They leave lights on so its easier for law enforcement to see inside and determine if there is a burglar inside -- because its not a pitch dark building.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07 September 2011, 07:49 AM
Troberg Troberg is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 November 2005
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 11,580
Default

Well, at least here, if they did it specifically as a trap and someone, burglar or not, got hurt, they might be in trouble. You are not allowed to set traps that hurt people. On the other hand, if they just turned off the lights, well, then it's OK.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07 September 2011, 09:56 AM
flightsuit's Avatar
flightsuit flightsuit is offline
 
 
Join Date: 19 January 2011
Location: Pacifica, CA
Posts: 20
Default

The story sounds quite bogus to me. It's the kind of thing Snopes debunks all the time; as story that plays on and reinforces a certain popular notion. In this case, it's the notion that society has become too litigious, and gives more rights to criminals than to their victims.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07 September 2011, 11:41 AM
damian's Avatar
damian damian is offline
 
Join Date: 14 April 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not_Done_Living View Post
They leave lights on so its easier for law enforcement to see inside and determine if there is a burglar inside -- because its not a pitch dark building.
Wouldn't it make more sense to leave the building in darkness, as a burglar's flashlight would attract more attention than a person walking around in a well lit building.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07 September 2011, 12:30 PM
DaGuyWitBluGlasses DaGuyWitBluGlasses is offline
 
Join Date: 06 June 2006
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,333
Default

Canadian duty-of-care laws don't distinguish between lawful and unlawful tresspassers.

So a burglar getting hurt on someone's property would have just as much grounds to sue as someone who had a reason for entering the property without being specifically invited (E.G utility workers, emergency workers, delivery)

Normally this would be more applicable to the grounds, rather than inside the building.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07 September 2011, 01:04 PM
Alarm's Avatar
Alarm Alarm is offline
 
Join Date: 26 May 2011
Location: Nepean, ON
Posts: 5,717
Default

I have never heard this UL applied to Canada and I find it hard to beleive in the first place since litigation is much harder here.

The amounts awarded tend to be much lower than they would be in the US.


ETA:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaGuyWitBluGlasses View Post
Canadian duty-of-care laws don't distinguish between lawful and unlawful tresspassers.
But the business could argue that a lawful "trespasser" could have just turned the ligths on.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07 September 2011, 05:03 PM
UEL's Avatar
UEL UEL is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2004
Location: Fredericton, Canada
Posts: 9,286
Baseball

Years ago when I was at university, I worked at a gas station. We would leave the lights on when we locked up at midnight. I once asked the boss why we did that and waste all that electricity.

His answer was plain and practical. If he had to go into the shop in the night, or the CSA opened the door the next morning, it would be more secure with the lights already on. In other words, if someone had messed with the shop (theft etc) it would be easier to see and any possible perpetrator would be less likely able to surprise me.

It made sense and in the night the alarm went off, provided the police enough light to clear the building with maximum situational awareness.

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07 September 2011, 05:07 PM
damian's Avatar
damian damian is offline
 
Join Date: 14 April 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,504
Default

In what world would a jury ever side with a burglar?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07 September 2011, 05:23 PM
Alarm's Avatar
Alarm Alarm is offline
 
Join Date: 26 May 2011
Location: Nepean, ON
Posts: 5,717
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by damian View Post
In what world would a jury ever side with a burglar?
this one , perhaps?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07 September 2011, 05:32 PM
fitz1980 fitz1980 is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by damian View Post
In what world would a jury ever side with a burglar?
There have also been cases where a person booby trapped their house when they were not home. If you and yours are home than you are justified in using lethal force if you felt threatened. However if you were out catching a move and left a trip wire attached to a shot gun than you are culpable.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07 September 2011, 05:40 PM
damian's Avatar
damian damian is offline
 
Join Date: 14 April 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,504
Default

That doesn't mention if a jury was involved, but if it were, I'd leave that place and never return. I wouldn't be surprised if the country got invaded or something..

If someone breaks into my house, I claim ownership of them. They are mine to do with as I please.

I would probably tie them up and wait till Zed gets here.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Burglar and kidnapper codes Jenn Fauxtography 5 23 March 2011 07:21 AM
Pit Bull vs. Burglar (gruesome) Jenn Fauxtography 12 31 July 2009 11:25 PM
Burglar follows service people snopes Crime 2 19 February 2008 07:13 PM
Bad business is good business snopes Business 3 01 May 2007 02:22 PM
Leaving letter snopes Inboxer Rebellion 12 16 April 2007 11:03 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.