Town Square

Post a New Topic

Tiffany at Stanford Shopping Center robbed

Original post made on Jul 8, 2007

Two masked men boldly robbed the Tiffany & Co. jewelry store at Stanford Shopping Center at 6:30 p.m. Saturday, telling 15 employees and 12 customers to get on the floor.

Read the full story here Web Link

Comments (30)

Posted by Still shopping
a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Jul 8, 2007 at 10:26 am

I wonder if this will have any effect on business at Stanford? Not likely. Thank goodness nobody was hurt.

Posted by Not a PR Flack
a resident of Green Acres
on Jul 8, 2007 at 11:46 am

Well, the above comment seems quite likely to have been written by someone from the Shopping Center's PR Agency. Keep shopping folks!!!! Keep shopping!!! Never mind those masked and armed burglars - they are just a minor distraction..... keep that money flowing....

Posted by Still shopping
a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Jul 8, 2007 at 12:41 pm

Um ... you're completely wrong, but the pesimism and sarcasm are entertaining. Just saying that I won't allow criminals to deter my day-to-day activities. Frankly don't care whether people shop or not.

Posted by qq
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 8, 2007 at 3:36 pm

OMM: Thou art a subject of the divine, created in the image of man, by the masses, for the masses.
OMM: Let us be thankful we have an occupation to fill. Work hard, increase production, prevent accidents and be happy.
OMM: Let us be thankful we have commerce. Buy more. Buy more now. Buy. And be happy.

Posted by Robert
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 8, 2007 at 10:27 pm

Not a PR flack is a liberal extremist. Pay them no mind.

Posted by Andrew
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 8, 2007 at 11:49 pm

Isn't there a security guard outside Tiffany & Co? Or is that Cartier?

Posted by Chris
a resident of Ventura
on Jul 9, 2007 at 12:14 am

What happened with the Tiffany's security guard? There's always one inside the door. Very odd that the guard would do nothing against some armed with a "tool" of some sort.

Posted by Jerky McGrammer
a resident of Duveneck School
on Jul 9, 2007 at 7:43 am

"None of the employees or customers were injured." Should read, "None of the employees or customers was injured."

Posted by Shannon
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 8:15 am

there's always an armed guard in that store. that's odd

Posted by Not a PR Flack
a resident of Green Acres
on Jul 9, 2007 at 8:46 am

I would be equally justified in asking why Stanford has allowed it's security to be so lax and unprepared that unarmed men can walk in to a store in the center of the complex and in broad daylight steal thousands of dollars of jewelry? And then walk out to a waiting car. Won't this weakness embolden other criminals to do the same at other stores at Stanford? What will Stanford do to improve security so that their shoppers are not in danger? What on earth happened to the armed guard at Tiffany's - was he asleep? On a break? Out sick? What is Tiffany's doing to ensure this will never happen again? Obviously they were well cased prior to the robbery - isn't there undercover security at the Shopping Center watching out for just that?

A strongarm robbery at a major shopping center is a serious matter - not something to brush off with a 'I'll keep shopping' comment! So, if you are not the PR wing of the shoppping center, I apologize to you personally Still Shopping, but I still think this is a serious issue worthy of serious discussion.

Posted by Orange Julius
a resident of Stanford
on Jul 9, 2007 at 8:51 am

You wrote....

"None of the employees or customers were injured." Should read, "None of the employees or customers was injured."

I beg to differ.

Since there are multpile individuals being referred to in the past tense, "were" is correct. Had there been only one employee, "was" would be appropriate.




Posted by what!
a resident of South of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 1:02 pm

no mention that this kind of event increases the ''public perception'' that ''black men'' or others similar are ALWAYS armed and criminal . thats how PAPD act toward people.

Posted by GrammarGuru
a resident of another community
on Jul 9, 2007 at 3:31 pm

Oh my oh my. Orange Julius, you are in error. I realize that this has nothing to do with the main point of the thread, but I can't help myself when someone not only makes a grammatical mistake, but gets into someone's face with it. The verb references "none," not "employees." That's none, as in no one. Would you say, "No one were injured?" I thought not...

Posted by joyce
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 3:46 pm

I remember going into Tiffany's and being treated like dirt, presumably because I wasn't dressed to the nines. Too bad, as I had money to spend.

Now Walgreen's, that was a nice store and one I will miss.

Posted by Miffed
a resident of South of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 4:29 pm

A few years back when we were shopping for wedding rings, my soon-to-be husband went to Tiffany's. I don't remember what he was wearing that day, but I'm sure it was clean and not smelly. Anyways, the young salesman looked at my fiance and flat out said to him, "You can't afford anything in here." From that day on, we've been put off by the store and the attitude of its salespeople who think they are beyond everyone else.

Tiffany's does sell nice stuff, but if you put a lower-quality diamond in the right lighting, it, too, will sparkle as if it were in a Tiffany's showroom.

Posted by agree
a resident of Stanford
on Jul 9, 2007 at 9:27 pm

I COMPLETELY agree with the above comments on how they treat people! I am more than willing to spend money on beautiful jewelry, but they do not deserve my business or yours with that attitude. Go to Gleim or Diamonds of Palo Alto, you'll be treated a lot better. I promise!

Posted by Lyla
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:37 pm

Where was the intimidating-looking,big,armed Tiffany's security guard?

Posted by Old English teacher
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:24 pm

"None" = "not one". Is IS "was", not 'were".

Posted by Luz Marie Guerra
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 10, 2007 at 9:43 am

I went into Tiffany's and looked at the remains of the robbery. Sad. A jewelry cabinet covered with a felt cover with a sign, "Excuse the inconvenience". (I don't remember the exact comment. ) I asked the saleslady if she had been in the store at the time, and she replied, "We're not allowed to talk about it". Yes, the guard was there when I went in....but WHERE was the guard on the day of the robbery? Strange.

Posted by Kris
a resident of Downtown North
on Jul 10, 2007 at 8:24 pm

Wow! This is a shock. Sad.

I was at the mall the following day, though I did not know about the robbery then, and all appeared business as usual, including security riding around on their Segways. Do these devices directly contribute to better security? Performance? Time to incident?

As graceful as the Segways appear/move, all I can imagine are people getting hit by them as security tries to respond quickly to an incident. Can you really close in on a suspect who is running away, hiding in crowds or between cars while manuevering these things? The lack of fitness these men and women lose by not walking during their shift crosses my mind also. Hope I'm wrong.

Posted by surprised & disappointed
a resident of Duveneck School
on Jul 10, 2007 at 10:19 pm

Surprised since this is an upscale mall. I was just in the mall probably an hour after this happened and did not even notice anything after got home.

I am a little disappointed on how little police or security involvement in the case. (I hope I am wrong). That just makes us an easy target for crimes.

Posted by Abstains from diamonds
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jul 10, 2007 at 11:17 pm

Blood Diamond, anyone?

Posted by Jamba Juice
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Jul 11, 2007 at 8:27 am

1) if any hourly employee at any store dare tell me that "you can't afford anything" then I would not rest until that employee would be out of a job

2) having an armed conflict might not always be the best course of action for a security guard. jewelry is insured, but people's lives are not. we might never know why the guard did not "act" but thank God that no one was hurt.

3) you'd be surprised but the greying baseball cap and shorts wearing customers are the ones with the big bucks

4) we never notice any police roaming around in segways. if there are no undercover police roaming around, then something needs to be done. whatever will be done should not affect the shopping experience and ambiance though.

Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 11, 2007 at 9:47 am

In Silicon Valley, the people who are the best dressed are the salesmen (particularly realtors) and the TV people. Everyone else dresses the same and I bet you couldn't tell the difference between a t shirt from Nordstroms or a t shirt from WalMart. Most people I know get so many t shirts free from some activity or other that they don't even need to buy any.

No, the lesser paid dress up to look like they are paid a lot and those that get paid a lot don't care. Have you seen how Steve Jobs' dresses. (No criticism, Steve).

Posted by OrangeJulius
a resident of Professorville
on Jul 11, 2007 at 2:59 pm

You win the battle GrammarGuru..........but not the war

Posted by Jerky McGrammer
a resident of Duveneck School
on Jul 17, 2007 at 10:22 am

Grammar Guru, thanks for watching my back, been on vacation for a while. Julius, love your passion.

Posted by Annoyed
a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Jul 22, 2007 at 10:30 am

The guard did act he acted as trained. He made sure that the customers and employees complied, allowed the bad guys to leave and then secured the area checking on the well being of his co workers and customers. He is not armed as armed security is not a deterent just a hinderance. Does anyone want to shop in a store where a shoot out may occur. Guns are for police not private security. Tiffany has state of the art cameras that caught every detail of this crime. It is better to let them take the merchandise and then have the police catch them from the video. As for the"tool" they were was a sledgehammer which I assure you can be used as a weapon. Just beacuse they didnt dispaly a gun does not mean that they did not have one. This can happen anywhere anytime dont blame the store or the mall.

Posted by QualityWear
a resident of Los Altos Hills
on Sep 25, 2007 at 9:46 am

<<Everyone else dresses the same and I bet you couldn't tell the difference between a t shirt from Nordstroms or a t shirt from WalMart.>>

It's obvious that you do NOT know anything about the quality of clothing. No use in trying to educate you.

Posted by natasha
a resident of Meadow Park
on Sep 25, 2007 at 10:04 am

On the subjexct of grammar, this is what the online grammarian had to say:

There is one indefinite pronoun, none, that can be either singular or plural; it often doesn't matter whether you use a singular or a plural verb — unless something else in the sentence determines its number. (Writers generally think of none as meaning not any and will choose a plural verb, as in "None of the engines are working," but when something else makes us regard none as meaning not one, we want a singular verb, as in "None of the food is fresh.")

None of you claims responsibility for this incident?
None of you claim responsibility for this incident?
None of the students have done their homework. (In this last example, the word their precludes the use of the singular verb.

Posted by zztee
a resident of Community Center
on Jan 3, 2008 at 5:20 am

May I suggest that if people are online shopping and they need some

ideas for kids of all ages, is a really cool site. They

have over 2,000 products for sell. Pretty much any t-shirts you love, they

have. It's a great site and in speaking with customer service, they were

really nice as well (a rarity when it gets close to the holidays). I suggest

everyone try it out.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Palo Alto Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

Farm Bill and the Organic Movement (part 5) Plus: Global Plant Forward Summit, April 18 – 20
By Laura Stec | 23 comments | 4,507 views

New Palo Alto sushi spot highlights late-night hours and affordable prices
By The Peninsula Foodist | 0 comments | 2,853 views

Sharing That Just Works
By Sherry Listgarten | 5 comments | 1,565 views