Mys Terry wrote:

Many years ago, a friend of mine was being followed around a
department store by a security person, because he "didn't look right".
In other words, it was the 1960's and he had long hair and a beard. My
friend decided to respond by playfully ducking behind counters in an
exaggerated manner, and generally playing cat and mouse with the jerk.
The end of the story, however, was that he was arrested for "Intent to
shoplift". He was convicted and had to pay a fine. I think he got a
term of probation as well.

Heh! The closest one can get today is "conspiracy" to do something. But
"conspiracy" is an agreement between two or more to commit some unlawful act
coupled with an affirmative act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

"Intent" is often an element of an offense, but it is not an offense per se.
For example: "burglary" is defined as the entering of a building (often a
dwelling) with the intent to commit a felony or the crime of theft. Now the
"intent" on the part of the accused burglar can often be inferred by a
rational person (the TV, stereo, and jewlry were stacked by the front
door...), but mere intent is never an offense - intent is often necessary,
but intent alone is never sufficient to establish the crime. There must be
some overt act as a necessary element of the offense.