Regarding your last paragraph, I must disagree with the implication that the U.S. should not enforce crimes that cost more than the damages that were done. Firs

Regarding your last paragraph, I must disagree with the implication that the U.S. should not enforce crimes that cost more than the damages that were done. First, the officer's time is already a sunk cost. The real cost is the opportunity cost of not patrolling while filling out paperwork. ("Don't you have REAL criminals to find?") If anything, this should be weighed against the deterrent for future crimes (e.g. Punishing 1 thief prevents 1,000 other thefts). Secondly, this would set a bad precedent for law enforcement. Most crimes aren't worth the ~$10,000 in time and materials spent working any case. What about crimes that can't be dollarized? Trespassers don't cost property owners any money, but the owners still expect law enforcement support in removing the trespassers. I don't agree that plugging into an open outlet is stealing, and I believe that the charges (pun not intended) will be dropped excepting a verbal wrist-slap to not do it again. Perhaps in the future the school will either restrict access to the outlet or provide a sign that forbids electric vehicle charging.