A California couple who ill-advisedly appeared on TV's Dr Phil show to explain that they'd make a cool $100,000 flogging shoplifted toys on eBay were yesterday dispatched to federal prison. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Matthew Eaton, 34, and missus Laura Eaton, 27, were already under police scrutiny for shoplifting …
Dr. Phil . . . hahahaha
Dr. Phil should be prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to prison for being an accessory after the fact.... or whatever charges can be trumped up to get this POS off the air for good.
Yes Dr. Phil sucks arse.
Just goes to show
How stupid some people can be.
"Lets let them follow us around using the kids as a distraction while we shoplift."
"Brilliant idea, and everyone knows the cops/feds dont watch tv."
/PH because shes been filmed on camera before.
Are people REALLY that thick that they go onto a talkshow and don't know what they'll be getting in return?
What they get in return?
I'm shocked they didn't succeed in looting anything beyond the three self-help books. Seems low payoff for a wasted half-day.
Help with their financial situation?
What, like help in spending it? They were making $3,500 a week!! That should be enough to get by on!
I used to think I wasn't clever enough to earn lots of easy money. Turn's out I'm not stupid enough either.
If only other crooks were as dumb as them!
What we need then, is a Playmobil version with added Lego bricks.
Use the Lego bricks...
...for their heads.
Dr Phil - quack
Dr Phil is a publicity whore and a quack. His shows are nothing more than exploitation of someone's personal problems wrapped up in some cod psychology and simplistic epithets. Remember him trying to get Britney on his show and blabbing to the press about their private meeting? What a swell guy.
$3,500 a week for a total of $100,000 mens that they were at it for about 6.5 months before the broadcast.
If they stopped after the TV prog, they would have spent a combined 13 months stealing/fencing, and are due to spend a total of 39 months between them in "chokey".
52 months is 4 1/3 years, $100,000 for that is over 23 grand a year. Not bad.
"It took the police a further year to move against the couple"
...and if they carried on at the previous rate, that's a further $182,000, making $282,000 for 5 1/3 years. Annual wage: clear of 50 grand.
OK, the custodial sentence has very long "work days", but who said crime doesn't pay...?
"As much as"
The original stories about this said "as much as" $3,500 a week. i.e., the best week they had got them $3,500. There was a throwaway line about their total income over a period of time which made it clear the average was more like $1,000 a week. Which, hey, still beats working, I guess...
Pay it back?
"OK, the custodial sentence has very long "work days", but who said crime doesn't pay...?"
Wouldn't they have to give the money back?
That Would be This Show...
Reality TV: Honeypot of the Stupid.
Why is it that women always get a lesser sentence. What did _he_ do that justified a sentence more than twice the length of hers? Sounds to me like they were in it together.
Men always get the biggest sentence.
It's all part of the same Patriarchal Conspiracy that holds women back from achieving in other areas of life.
Or something like that. Maybe you should go ask a feminist. I'm sure they could explain it to you.
Hopefully you weren't trolling but the article did say that he did the stealing whilst she caused the distraction. That'd make him the thief and her the accomplice hence the difference in sentences. Sex got nothing to do with it buddy.
And certainly not an American lawyer, but the logic is crap anyway. When acting as a team to commit a crime, all parties are equally guilty. Otherwise, the people involved in bank robberies (planners, getaway drivers etc) who didn't actually stuff the money into bags would be held less culpable.
Was a license psychiatrist in the state of Texas. He was accuse of sexual misconduct of an employee. The state suspended his license . They told if he takes an ethic class he can get it back. He refused to take the class.
Hilarious to see people whining about Dr Phil's show given that it's daytime television fodder. People accuse "freetards", students, generally anyone not greasing the palms of The Man, of lounging around, but it'd be interesting to know more about the demographic that is so irritated by a show that's on while the rest of us are at work (writing Free Software, incidentally).
Anyway, given the propensity of Ameritards to inadvertently confide with millions of people - recalling some fairly egregious cases on Jerry Springer's show a while back - perhaps Dr Phil was in a good cop role here: pander to these people's vanity, extract a confession, and thereby secure a conviction. High-fives at the station (police, that is) later on, I'm sure.
It'd be interesting to know more
I've only ever seen him on Larry King and I feel that's enough to understand what all the whining is about. Another one that should be off completely is Nancy (nobody is innocent) Grace. Since she openly accused a mother of killing her own child and faking its disappearance I don't recall seeing her back on LK which is a start.
I am IN LOVE with the idea that all those people shuffling vaguely through my local CostCo with their unruly clouds of children clogging the aisles might now be arrested on suspicion of shoplifting.
It would be nice to somehow extend this to childless folks who park themselves in traffic-blocking ad-hoc coffee klatsches, but I'll take what I can get when I can get it.
Tweedle Dum and Tweedle dumber
I have to wonder which party is more stupid. The shop lifting couple for going on a national TV show and bragging about what they have done or the US Police force for taking a further year of investigation before they were able to arrest them, even though they already had Video evidence AND a confession to the crimes!
Chav scum breeds chav scum. Lock up the kids too.
i guess that mastermind
is not on US tv
I'm in the wrong line of work
I mean, seriously, $100k for selling Legos on eBay? Screw this fixing computers stuff.
Jerry springer, almost all talk shows and day time TV.
Stupid is as stupid does
In many places, "good behavior" cuts the jail time to 1/2 to 1/3 of the original sentence. So I expect the man to serve less than a year, and the woman to serve less than 6 months.
Since they were already suspects before the TV show, and it still took a year after the TV show before they were arrested, I'd expect the police spent at least $50K on them. Then the cost of the trial was probably several multiples of $10K. No wonder local governments are going bankrupt.
@ Mark 65
Read the article again. The whatsits weren't nailed for shoplifting, which is NOT a federal crime; they were nailed for "conspiracy to transport stolen property across state lines", which IS a federal crime, thanks to the operation of the interstate commerce provisions of the US constitution.
This may leave the door open to further charges of shoplifting, under state law.
Your understanding of the US legal system is imperfect. A key element of the US system is that it is a federation of independent states, and the states are not creatures of the federal government. Thus the legal system is double barreled: there is both civil and criminal law at both the state and federal levels,
States are not creature of the federal gov
So true if you listen to the whiney republicrats about health care.
Jerry springer is better than dickhead Phil.
Funny Dr Phil did not pay them anything.
There is a "Dr phil suck" facebook page at
Catching crooks (easy, or hard?)
Look, criminals aren't very smart (by definition). Most are caught by being stupid, or by being greedy (many both). In this case, they added the third aspect: need for 'fame'.
When you hit the trifecta, it becomes easy for the police.
Solution: If you ARE a crook:
1) Don't be greedy
2) Don't be stupid.
3) Don't go public about it!