Mum branded a criminal.. because underage daughter handed her booze from high supermarket shelf

[Hopeless Romantic]

A mum was arrested and charged with supplying booze to a minor after her teenage daughter helped her shop for a cocktail party.

Pint-sized Sue Savage, 47, asked 6ft 3in Tara, 15, to reach up and fetch £10 of vodka and rum mixers from a high shelf at their local Co-Op store.

But as she placed the bottles on the checkout, a supervisor swooped.

Mother-of-two Sue, who was wearing an ankle brace after breaking her left leg, said: "I explained the booze was not for Tara - it was for a party that I was hosting, but they insisted that I leave the items."

Not wishing to cause a scene, Sue drove off and later returned alone to the store in Cranbrook, Kent. This time she was approached by a manager who told her: "I believe you are going to supply a minor."

In frustration, Sue finally thrust a tenner over the counter and walked out with the booze - despite being warned she was breaking the law.

She eventually rang police, who arrived at her home two hours later and advised her to return the bottles.

And she was stunned when they also arrested her and issued her with an £80 fixed penalty.

Now Sue plans to contest the fine in court. "It's ridiculous," she stormed. "Does this mean anyone with children cannot go shopping with them and buy alcohol?"

A spokesman for the Co-Op said yesterday: "We are a respectable retailer and have a legal responsibility to ensure that alcohol is not sold to children."


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/11/05/mum-branded-a-criminal-because-underage-daughter-handed-her-booze-from-high-supermarket-shelf-exclusive-115875-21798918/

[Jeneral2885]

1. er

A 6ft 3 girl looks underage? Did they ask for proof of her age?

[Hopeless Romantic]

8. it was the white socks and pigtails that gave her away

[non sociopath skin]

2. I'm always a little suspicious of these red-top "political correctness" stories ...

I've had a lot of people in my professional life who swore blue blazes that something was true when it subsequently turned out not to be.

Often, they weren't being wilfully dishonest but simply believed their own spin.

BTW I wonder how many of the Mirror readers who tut-tutted at this also blame irresponsible parents for teenage binge drinking. It's a funny old world.

The Skin

[LeftishBrit]

3. Ridiculous if reported accurately

My suspicions re accuracy are slightly raised by the statement that 'In frustration, Sue finally thrust a tenner over the counter and walked out with the booze - despite being warned she was breaking the law.' I do wonder whether the mum was confrontational, and maybe even looked drunk; and whether she'd been aggressive in the shop before - and all this is being omitted. After all, she could have simply gone alone to another shop. And calling the Mirror about it (if she did) also makes me wonder if she is looking for a fight.

However, it's true that officialdom can be pretty stupid and arrogant - remember Esther Rantzen's 'Jobsworth' awards? If the story is as reported, then these shopkeepers and/or the police in the area are pretty ridiculous.

[Hopeless Romantic]

4. Agreed on accuracy, have to question the Mirror, but the BBC have the story now

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/8347360.stm

and they are usually more reliable.

[fedsron2us]

6. If they had suspected her of being drunk

then that ground alone would have been sufficient top refuse a sale. It would also have been picked up by the police who would have had duty to ensure that the woman was not driving when intoxicated. The fact that this is not mentioned and that the basis of the case was the suspicions that the mother was going to supply drink to her daughter means that she was probably sober. The whole case appears to hang upon the fact that the daughter reached up to the shelf where the vodka was kept and then placed in the mothers basket. This apparently was enough to suggest that she was going to be the end consumer of the product. The farcical nature of the law in this case can be highlighted by the fact that if the daughter had picked up a bottle of methylated spirits and put it on the trolley it would have been entirely legal. It would be quite a good idea if this case does get taken through the courts because the whole notion that 'suspected intent' based on such flimsy evidence is sufficient to constitute an offence is a matter that needs to be examined by the judiciary. People should be worried about such notions being applied to other areas of public behaviour.

My personal view is that if alcohol is so dangerous then in should not be on sale in areas of shops where minors can get access to it but sealed off in special sections where they are not permitted to enter. I doubt supermarkets would be in a rush to embrace this idea since it would reduce the likelihood of impulse purchases and force them to redesign their stores. Needless to say none of this would prevent kids from purloining their parents booze once they got home.

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. And remember parents are allowed to serve their children with drinks at home

though it's possible they may not be allowed to hand over a bottle of alcohol for the child to do as they like with (eg take elsewhere).

[Hopeless Romantic]

9. Exactly! It's the police making the law up as they go along

which is the real issue here.

[fedsron2us]

5. Oh the hypocrisy of British licensing laws

Retailers want the fat profits that derive from selling booze and the government are ever eager to pocket the excise duty but at the same time they feel that they have a moral as well as legal right to hector consumers and moralize over their behaviour. The whole fiasco is not helped by bizarre legislation (typical of the fuckwits who now seem permanently inhabit government and Parliament) which places the onus on the shop keeper to second guess where, how and by whom the booze might be consumed. Back in the 1970s most alcohol was purchased in pubs or from off licenses where minors were largely excluded. Maybe we should go back to that arrangement and just ban the supermarkets and other general grocers from selling it. Of course, I am sure that Tescos, Morrisons (the UK leader in flogging cheap cider), the Coop etc would probably have the vapours at that suggestion since it would knock a nasty hole in their balance sheet. It might also lead to less drink being consumed at home which would obviously upset the governments budget arithmetic although it might actually do wonders for peoples health.

It is interesting to note that these very same supermarkets have no qualms about targetting food at kids and their parents with so much sugar in it that your teeth would rot just from looking at it. In this respect the recent documentary on BBC 4 about who and what is making Britain fat was quite an eye opener. I particularly liked the fact that Addenbrooks hospital feel that having a Burger King on the premises is setting the right example to patients, vistors and staff, and that Morrisons was the place to visit if you wanted to e find the cheapest way to send little Johnny to an early grave via diabetes and heart disease using cheap crisps and biscuits as your weapon of choice.