Suche
Liquor thief in Brandenburg: Police are looking for witnesses!
The Brandenburg police are looking for a suspected liquor thief from a supermarket. Advice requested!
Liquor thief in Brandenburg: Police are looking for witnesses!
It's once again about a brazen theft in a supermarket that keeps the police on their toes. On October 24, 2024 at 9:50 p.m., a suspected thief stole spirits worth around 240 euros. The criminal police have now released a surveillance video to clarify the identity of the approximately 35 to 45 year old man. At the time of the crime, the wanted man was wearing a black Puma hoodie, gray sweatpants and a black backpack. The footage shows the very slim man and could be crucial in catching him. Information can be given to the Oberhavel police station on 03301-8510 or via the Brandenburg police information portal (https://polizei.brandenburg.de/fahndung/spirituosendieb-gesucht/5610612).
But what does the use of video recordings mean in the event of theft? And what about the rights of employees? In a professional environment, valuable utensils and money often disappear from the coffee cup. Many employers are unsettled and resort to video surveillance to catch suspects. But as the Deutsche Handwerkzeitung reports, the legal situation can be complicated. A lawyer warns that using cameras without prior action can be problematic. It is important to seek legal expertise before using the camera - especially when it comes to employees' personal rights. This leads us to a practical example: An employer terminated an employee on suspicion of theft of spirits. However, the video recordings that were supposed to support this suspicion were rejected as unusable
.
Legal framework
In a recent ruling, the Federal Labor Court in Erfurt ruled that employers may use video material as evidence, but under certain conditions. Video surveillance must be based on suspicion and limited in time so as not to violate the fundamental right to informational self-determination. Particularly in the context of theft in the workplace, it is crucial that other educational means are exhausted before the camera speaks. In a case in which a saleswoman was terminated without notice, video evidence was rejected by a court because the data should have been deleted. This demonstrates the close balance between employer interests and employee rights – an area that must be carefully navigated to avoid legal problems.
In the current discussion about video surveillance in the workplace, it is important to maintain transparency and fairness. While employers obviously want to do everything they can to protect their businesses, employees' rights are also a priority. Good communication and education can help avoid misunderstandings and unnecessary escalations. If you suspect theft, you should always try to have a conversation before resorting to more drastic measures that may not be legally tenable.
In summary, theft in the supermarket is a wake-up call for everyone: a good hand is needed both when it comes to professional protection against misconduct and when dealing respectfully with the rights of employees. If there is further information about the case, we look forward to further developments!