Accused of shoplifting, a charge that was dropped, a retired couple learn the hard way about state law on civil penalties

By Alex Paul

BROWNSVILLE — Charles Gastorf and his wife, Cheryl, thought their troubles were over after Lebanon City Attorney Tom McHill heard their side of the story about the 10 bags of steer manure they forgot to pay for during a shopping trip.

Then a letter demanding $175 in civil damages arrived from Wal-Mart, even though shoplifting charges against the couple had been dropped. That's when the Gastorfs learned about a little-known Oregon law that allows retailers to pursue civil penalties regardless of whether a person is found guilty or innocent of theft.

Gastorf, 65, has been retired for almost 10 years. His wife is 59. Nearly every day, Gastorf wanders the many rocked trails the two have built by hand on their steep, park-like five acres north of Brownsville.

For 28 years, the Gastorfs have carved away at the hillside, leveling it in places to plant hundreds, perhaps thousands, of flowers, shrubs and trees among the native Douglas fir that rise tall above their home. The Gastorfs know them each by name. A sugar maple here, a golden chain there.

To ensure those plants survive, especially through the critical first season, the Gastorfs have purchased tons of bagged manure, usually from the Lebanon Wal-Mart store.

But, around 11:30 a.m. on March 10, 2005, working off a shopping list that included 10 bags of steer manure valued at less than $10, the Gastorfs were marked as shoplifters and learned a painful lesson about the law.

q

In March, as they had many times before, the Gastorfs went shopping at the Lebanon Wal-Mart store (which recently was replaced by a Wal-Mart Supercenter.) A sales receipt shows they bought $104.15 worth of items, much of which was dog food,

intended for the pugs and boxers they breed.

The Gastorfs also planned to purchase steer manure, which costs less than $1 per bag.

Local Wal-Mart officials declined to comment for this story; what follows is the account given by the Gastorfs.

As they prepared to check out, Charles said, he asked Cheryl to pay for the manure at one of the inside counters. Because it was extremely noisy due to children yelling and playing in the area, she thought Charles said he would meet her outside and that he would pay there as well.

While Cheryl was checking out, Charles went outside and loaded the manure into the trunk of their 1991 Pontiac.

"People load their own stuff out there all the time," Charles said. "I was just doing the same thing I had always done."

Cheryl Gastorf wrote out a check, brought the rest of the items to the car and they began to drive off, but they soon realized that neither had paid for the manure. It was too late.

Even though they hadn't left Wal-Mart property, they had moved toward the exit and that's when, according to them, a security guard grabbed the car's steering wheel, demanding they get out of the car and "pop the trunk."

The Gastorfs admit they were dazed by the whole event that eventually led to Charles being handcuffed, taken into a store office and cited by a Lebanon police officer for Theft III.

Charles admits taking a swing at the security guard, but only after he felt the guard threatened his wife, repeatedly struck him on both arms and leaned heavily on him.

"I missed him by 3 feet," Gastorf said. "I kept telling him I was innocent. I had no intention of stealing."

Mrs. Gastorf said the security guard refused to listen to her explanation as well. Instead he kept yelling at her to "shut up, shut up," she recalls.

A diabetic, Gastorf said he fell into a wall at one point in the store's office after sitting a long time with his hands cuffed behind his back, awaiting arrival of a police officer. Another Wal-Mart employee came to his aid, offering him a cup of water, and the handcuffs were removed.

"I felt as though I was going to die. I couldn't get my breath," Gastorf said.

The Municipal Court in Lebanon verified that the city attorney dropped the shoplifting citation after getting a leter from the Gastorfs detailing what happened.

Within days after the incident, the Gastorfs received their first demand from Wal-Mart for payment of $175 in civil damages.

The civil notice came from the Wal-Mart Loss Prevention Recovery Team in Lowell, Ark. The notice included a single sheet of information about the Oregon Civil Recovery Statute. It pointed out that when shoplifting occurs, two laws are broken, a civil and a criminal law.

The letter stated that while local law enforcement handles the criminal law, the civil law is intended to compensate "retailers for expenses generated by the shoplifting and to act as a deterrent to further shoplifting. Even when the shoplifter is apprehended and the merchandise recovered, there are still significant expenses to the retailer."

According to ORS 30.875 —the Civil Recovery Statute enacted in 1979 — whether people are found guilty or innocent in a court of law, they can be charged up to $500 for the actual value of the property allegedly taken, plus $100 to $250 in additional penalties, by a retail store or cable television company that claims it has been wronged.

Charles and Cheryl Gastorf aren't rich. The roof of their manufactured home is covered with moss. There are a couple of old cars, camping trailers and laundry appliances tucked here and there among ferns and rhodies. For 28 years, Charles worked at Teledyne Wah Chang and Cheryl worked part-time jobs to feed their four children, now grown.

They find solitude in the acreage they've nurtured since 1977.

They talked to an attorney, who was sympathic about their claim of innocence but from a practical viewpoint advised that challenging the action in court could cost them several thousand dollars, much more than the $175 civil claim.

On May 2, Cheryl Gastorf bought a $175 money order and mailed it to Wal-Mart in Arkansas.

"We wouldn't want to embark on a life of crime at our ages and become manure thieves. I mean, if you were going to steal something, would you steal manure?" Gastorf said of the decision to pay Wal-Mart the penalty and move on with their previously quiet lives.

Perhaps, she said, the couple should have paid the penalty by using the Wal-Mart credit cards the company had sent them in late March.

"About a week or two after this whole thing occurred, we received the credit cards in the mail," Gastorf said. "They said we could charge up to $10,000. I thought that was pretty funny, considering they believed we had stolen less than $10 worth of manure."

The Democrat-Herald sought comments from Wal-Mart and from Claims Management Inc., a firm in Bentonville, Ark., that investigated the Gastorf incident, for this story.

Sharon Weber, communications manager for Wal-Mart public relations, responded by e-mail last Wednesday:

"I have heard back from the folks who are investigating the Gastorf incident and they have concluded their research. According to Oregon law, we do have the right to pursue civil recovery even without a criminal conviction. As a matter of fact, Mr. Gastorf has already paid $195 for the civil recovery. However, after researching the incident, we have decided to refund Mr. Gastorf the money that he has already paid. It simply seems like the right thing to do. Thanks for bringing this to our attention."

The reference to $195 appeared to have been a typo, because the Gastorfs had paid $175.

Despite being embarrassed, Charles Gastorf doesn't rule out returning to Wal-Mart as a customer.

"It's always been a good place for us to shop," Gastorf said, noting the store's low prices help the couple live within their tight budget. "We love people. We treat them like we would want to be treated."