Department store security authority

[TheFederalistWeasel]

Plenty of times, its called an investigative stop, you need not break a law to be stopped in a vehicle or on foot for that matter. This is not just GA but nationwide as the USSC set this president.

Circumstances may warrant an investigate stop of someone who is doing nothing wrong who may fit the description of some one we are looking for, we may be on a call for a prowler/burglar call, possible description of a suspect is given out, it’s dark and I see you walking down the street in the area you fit the basic description you are getting stopped and ID’ed.

Traffic stop the same, I had a recent call where a car left the scene of a fight, multiple witnesses stated someone in the veh fired shots as the veh sped away.

I stopped a veh fitting the description of the one last scene leaving the scene.

They committed no traffic violation; ironically the veh was occupied by two very stupid individuals who had nothing to do with the initial call, they decided they did not want to be detained “for no reasonâ€.

It started out verbal as I tried to explain the situation, when the driver refused to present ID, the passenger got involved, both got out of the veh. Backup was called, three Georgia State Troopers in the immediate area responded both went to jail for obstruction.

 

[SMMAssociates]

Weasel:

It started out verbal as I tried to explain the situation, when the driver refused to present ID, the passenger got involved, both got out of the veh. Backup was called, three Georgia State Troopers in the immediate area responded both went to jail for obstruction.

Don't you just hate it when that happens....

Locally, the Township kids do a lot of those "maybe" stops. Most of them are young enough to remember what's on the hot sheet and the last couple of BOLO's, and we all know that the White Buick turns out to be a Grey Pontiac or a Blue VW.... That, plus MDT's, and some good Police work is going to happen once in a while.

I did a ride along with a City Officer one night way, way back when. We were looking for a hit & run truck. He ran through the whole litany of who saw what. Then we passed a truck and he got mad 'cause it wasn't the one we were looking for.... It was close enough to stop, though, but we had another call to take.

Point being that you don't need much to make a stop, or, in the spirit of this thread, talk to somebody as they try to leave the store. You do need a bit of reasonable suspicion in some cases, but if the store policy is "tape of the day" or "show your receipt", you're kind of stuck.

(BTW, in terms of using the receipt to check the packages when the alarm is not set off, that shouldn't be necessary. The RFID thing may make it a lot easier to do that should that be policy, though, and certainly would be handy if the alarm does go off.)

If that doesn't work, I show 'em a picture of my kid.

 

[Norton]

Weasel,

To me, that's a totally different situation. I'm not sure of the legal definition of probable cause, but it seems that if you have a report of "two white guys in a dark colored Mustang were seen leaving the scene of the crime" and six blocks away you see a couple of guys sitting at the Taco Bell that match the description, you have some cause to make, as you call it, an investigative stop even though that particular Mustang has not overtly been involved a crime.

However, in the case of the Receipt JBTs .....I think that most people's beef here is that there is a presumption of guilt towards us without any reasonable suspicion that we've committed a crime.

For instance.....if there were a rash of 6'7" bald, white guys doing snatch and runs in the local Wal Marts......I think that the Wally World guys would have more of a cause to interrupt my day......but until then, they can leave me alone.

 

[Model520Fan]

I'm not going to write about the law, because I know very little about that, nor will I go on very long about the Constitution, because the SCOTUS has done their best to nullify that.

What I will do is try to point out that the folks who run stores don't have it very easy. The fact is that some people do steal a s***load of stuff from stores, and it raise the price to us and makes it harder for the victimized store to be price-competitive. Plus, success at criminal behavior encourages criminal behavior, of all sorts.

I expect to be spoken to respectfully, and I will answer very disrespexctfully when I am not. I usually enjoy escalating verbal conflict. However, I DO recognize the right of stores to protect themselves while speaking respectfully, and that includes looking in your shopping bag and matching the contents to your receipt, if that's what they find necessary. They have no right to search my person (unless they want to arrest me after witnessing me taking something of theirs and concealing it on my person, an event which will never happen), but I have no "right" to throw away my receipt before I get to the door and not get hassled.

A little bit of common sense and concern for the other guy will handle almost all of these situations. A loud mouth will usually take care of the remainder.

 

[Zach S]

Weasel, the examples you gave aren't baseless stops IMO. I should have worded my post better. Norton pretty much summed up what I was going to say.

 

[TallPine]

I can certainly see the reason for showing a receipt for large, un-bagged items such as ladders, etc ...

I am by nature a polite person, so I tend to respond politely in most cases, even some where it is not deserved.

But having to wait in line a second time at the door is definitely way over the top, IMO. I would either just walk around, or else demand my money back and never go back to that store again.

 

[Art Eatman]

The only place I've ever seen a line for receipt-check is at SAM's, and that's built into their deal. You know before you go in that they check receipts.

I've seen "door guards" at CompUSA, but they seem to be watching for anybody trying to bypass the checkout counter, not checking receipts.

Given what I know about the amount of shoplifting that's done or attempted, I don't mind cutting some slack for the store folks...

Art

 

[Nehemiah Scudder]

Here's something that's just as "intrusive" that I haven't heard many people complain about.

Nowadays, (especially at Wal-Mart) from the second you pull into the parking lot till the time you leave it...

You're never out of range of a camera. They've gotten 9/11 hijacker footage from that, and I know of a couple of cases where they were able to spot abductions happening after the vid was cleaned up.

I know the govt' is toying with the idea of putting public cameras up like the Brits. And if you keep an eye out you can spot all sorts of private cameras around.

 

[Firethorn]

Nehemiah Scudder,

Didn't they do that because of a couple incidents of people snatching/attempting to snatch people's kids in the lot?

I saw the video of one, and it was pretty brutal. Now there was a woman who wasn't going to give her kid up. The goblin pulled her out of the started car, and started to drive away. She punched through the window and grabbed her kid out as the crook was stealing the car.

 

[Edmond]

I know the govt' is toying with the idea of putting public cameras up like the Brits. And if you keep an eye out you can spot all sorts of private cameras around.

The People's Republic of Chicago has already done that in high crime areas. They think it'll actually prevent crime. The camera's have a little flashing blue light and are supposedly encased in "bullet proof" housings in case they are shot at. I believe they also has sound sensors to pick up gun shots so they can dispense the police to that area. Don't know why they have those sensors because Chicago is a gun free city.

 

[Nehemiah Scudder]

Didn't they do that because of a couple incidents of people snatching/attempting to snatch people's kids in the lot?

They do it for a number of reasons. The most important one being that it's pretty cheap nowadays. For around 100 buck you can go to Circuit City and get a home security vid system with a monitor. And it's just getting cheaper as time progresses.

I think alot of it has to do with shoplifting though, as well as assaults and the like.

Back when I was young and dumb, I kept my pin number in my wallet. Somebody stole my MAC card and withdrew money at an ATM. That was my one experience where it would've been handy, but the tapes were re-recorded over at the bank. So it's only as vigiliant as the people willing to run it.

It'll be interesting once most of them are digital and are stored off on hard drives instead of tape. They can even be centrally accessed off of the internet then. I'd expect a ton of "bloopers".

As far as the effectiveness of public cameras go. It'll prevent crime by providing direct visual evidence of criminal activity. That's better than having no evidence.

 

[DRZinn]

Weasel: Every one of those cases involved a LEO stopping someone, with probable cause. The receipt checkers are not LEO's, and do not have cause to believe I stole something.

Nehemiah: They already have public cameras in many ctities, just not all over. Just wait till they build in the facial recognition and/or behavior analysis. I'm not joking about behavior analysis; the much-loved TSA is considering implementing it at the airports.

 

[Nehemiah Scudder]

Yeah, behavorial analysis has had a good track record in the casinos.

I was just watching something on MIT card counting teams.

They can catch counters in seconds now.

 

[TheFederalistWeasel]

The threshold for a citizen to make an arrest is intentionally low so that they are permitted to "error on the side of caution" and let the justice system figure it out.

When they are aware of conduct that they believe "probably" constitutes a crime, they can make an arrest and the defendant will have to defend himself if the prosecutor files charges.

Essentially, he will have to defend himself by arguing that he either did not commit the conduct or that he did not have the state of mind that was required to make it a criminal act.

Lastly, a prosecutor has last say as to whether to file charges in these cases. Even if he thinks a person has committed conduct that could be criminal, he might not file charges if he thinks the matter could better be solved civilly for whatever reason.

For the police officer, we need solid probable cause to believe a crime was committed or immediate knowledge that a crime was committed such as in our presence, to make an arrest. And if the alleged 'victim' wanted to sign a citizen's arrest for the theft/larceny, then the officer (at least in GA) would HAVE to accept the arrest.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I dunno. I've had cases where the clerk didn't cancel the implant on something at a Wal-Mart or similar store. Naturally, I set off the alarms as I departed. I've never once actually had anyone check me. I stop, turn around and reach to open the bag, and the checker takes a look and tells me to have a nice day.

I think we need to pick our fights, and creating a ruckus that serves no constructive purpose isn't my idea of the best way to start or end a day. Life's too short.

 

[CannibalCrowley]

The threshold for a citizen to make an arrest is intentionally low so that they are permitted to "error on the side of caution" and let the justice system figure it out.

"Intentionally low"? I believe you're speaking beyond your bounds here. It may be low in your state, but not in all. I don't know about your state, but here's the law in Michigan:

764.16 Arrest by private person; situations.
Sec. 16.
A private person may make an arrest—in the following situations:
(a) For a felony committed in the private person's presence.
(b) If the person to be arrested has committed a felony although not in the private person's presence.
(c) If the private person is summoned by a peace officer to assist the officer in making an arrest.
(d) If the private person is a merchant, an agent of a merchant, an employee of a merchant, or an independent contractor providing security for a merchant of a store and has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has violated section 356c or 356d of the Michigan penal code, Act No. 328 of the Public Acts of 1931, being sections 750.356c and 750.356d of the Michigan Compiled Laws, in that store, regardless of whether the violation was committed in the presence of the private person.
History: 1927, Act 175, Eff. Sept. 5, 1927 ;-- CL 1929, 17150 ;-- CL 1948, 764.16 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 19, Eff. June 1, 1988Link


Is refusing a voluntary search reasonable cause? That's what this all boils down to, whether or not one wishes to submit himself to a voluntary search. Why do you view said refusal as a bad thing? Why shouldn't people exercise their rights? Should they simply agree to all requests to search, would you?

 

[TheFederalistWeasel]

The law in Ga does differ from your state law as do both our states differ from California according to what I can find on the net.

Subsection (d) of the code section you cite has the term “reasonable cause†in it…

The definition of Reasonable Cause is: REASONABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE - To have knowledge of facts which, although not amounting to direct knowledge, would cause a reasonable person, knowing the same facts, to reasonably conclude the same thing, that a crime has been or is likely to be committed.

Pretty ambiguous isn’t it?

“To have knowledge of facts which, although not amounting to direct knowledgeâ€â€¦

Hmmm…. Not amounting to direct knowledge, now think about that.

You are in the back of Wal-Mart, you made a purchase at the gun counter and now are making your way to the front…

You are observed by say a customer who thinks you are shoplifting, said customer alerts a clerk who alerts LPO, they watch you, say you did do something which caught the eye of the customer, which on it’s face “looked†suspicious, maybe you had to scratch “Willie†or something you tried to hide the motion, it appeared you were stuffing something in your pants…

Now security is watching you, “Willie†needs scratching or adjusting again, no one on the isle except big brother on camera you make the adjustment, security makes the call to stop you.

You are leaving, you do not set off the alarm, and you know you did not steal something but security has alerted LPO that you may have stuffed something down your pants.

See where this is going and how it would look to LPO or even an LEO in the same shoes?

 

[Andrew Rothman]

I knew we'd talked about this before:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=43944

Here's what I said last time. Still goes.

I am sick unto death of the treatment at Sam's Club. After standing in a long line at the register, I am in no mood to stand in a long line at the exit door for some employee to "check the receipt" (count the items in my cart and compare it to the total items on the receipt).

My usual response, if there is a line, is to walk past the line and out the door. I have paid; my business with the store is concluded.

And I don't think I can be detained, either. Sam's can't have "reasonable cause" to believe that EVERY customer is a thief.

I talked to the manager about this. He said it is to "make sure the cashier didn't miss any items."

Tough noogies. It's not my responsibility to help train or audit their employees.

So far I have gotten yelled after, but never been stopped.

Matt

 

[XavierBreath]

Years ago, right after I left the Navy, I worked in store security while going to college, and I've been harrassed at the door as a customer, so I can see both sides of the issue. Nevertheless, it burns my bottom if I am questioned after I have paid. Laws vary from state to state, but here is what I know about where I live.

Where I live, a merchant can legally detain you if he has reason to believe you have not paid for an item in your possession. Other than the obvious seeing a person steal, the door beepers going off is sufficient reason. So is an unbagged item in your buggy.

For this reason I request that all items be bagged at the cash register. I do not care if the checker does not have a bag big enough for that bag of dogfood. She can go get one, or it can be restocked.

Concealment of an item is reason for detention. For example, if a person conceals an item, notices security or gets scared, then dumps the item, they can still be detained.

It does chap me that somebody would presume me to be guilty, but just as often a cashier will not see that item on the bottom of the cart. It is not uncommon for a crooked cashier to work with an accomplice who is a "shopper". It's called "sweethearting". I once caught a cashier on camera who had a barcode for hamburger on her wrist, which she would scan instead of her friend's steaks. At holiday time, many new cashiers are hired, and the store is subject to this kind of loss in increasing numbers. That doesn't excuse ignorance at the door, but it does give a little insight into it.

Where I live, the store employee cannot search you without your consent. Basically, as much as it galls me, I know that I can be detained, forcibly if I resist, but I can control where I am detained, and I can request a LEO's presence. All in all it will take about an hour or so of my time to be detained. Showing a reciept will take 30 seconds. Chances are, I'm going to complain, show my reciept, request to see the manager and waste as much of his time as I have time to do. Complaining to the door person does no good, and neither does complaining to the manager, but wasting his time will at least give me satisfaction after the store wasted mine. The door person has a thick skin and plenty of time. The manager is busy. If I am ever detained, my plan is to stay at the front of the store, to be escorted to the rear by LEOs, inform them that I am carrying, and allow the search.

There was one time, years ago, at Wal-Mart, when I had the time, and the spunk of a young man, that I was reciept checked with a full cart of frozen food, including ice cream. I had all day, so once I was cleared to leave the store, I went to the return line and returned every bit of it, item by item. I then went and spent the money in Brookshires. It gave me sweet satisfaction then, but I just don't have the time now.

Heck you make a trade off, low prices for being treated like an dishonest customer. Other stores have higher prices, but do not want to offend a customer. Make your choices.

edited to add: There is a REASON Brookshires has bag boys who walk your groceries out to your car for you. It, to, is loss control, just not as apparent.

 

[Big Gay Al]

Geez, I don't know where you guys go, but the Wal-Marts I go to don't ask to see a receipt when I go out the door. Maybe y'all look suspcious??

 

[deanf]

Why create a confrontation . . .

Again, the person who simply walks by the door person or theft alarms is not the one creating a confrontation. If the store employee is yelling at me or lays a hand, they are the one creating the confrontation. They have taken an affirmative action to alter my course or speed. They have confronted me.

 

[RGO]

TheFederalistWeasel:

It's still up to the accuser to meet the burden of proof in court, is it not? As I understand it, once I have paid for goods, they are MINE and I do not have to consent to let any private citizen search MY goods just because their manager told them to try. I understand the issue is checking if I actually did pay, but with all the cameras the others have mentioned, proving a shopper's innocence should be trivial.

Yes, the law you cited is vague. That's why we should err on the side of the right to privacy. Else, like with gun control laws, the public's tolerance for invasiveness will rise and we will be stuck with unfavorable interpretations of the law.

I'm afraid this is a sorry state to live in if it's considered foolish to stand up for one's privacy and integrity.

 

[TonyB]

I'm kind of torn on this one..on one hand I don't want to be treated like it's Berlin in the 30's..OTH,it only takes a few seconds to prove you didn't steal anything...Being that I carry,I'd probably cooperate,unless they try to put hands on me,but for the most part these are just underpaid kids doing what they're told..I've been there,and it sucks to have some a-hole get all"I know my rights" on you...lighten up,if you got nothing to hide and are one of the good guys,just play along..like I said,unless they try to go beyond the scope of reasonable behavior...
Once the cops show up,it becomes a nother ball game all together,and also your hopes of getting home quickly have vanished...if you carry shouldn't you be trying to avoid confrontations....and what if you get the ONE cop who hates CCW...and a nervous store manager......I'd rather keep my CCW permit,even if it means letting go of some pride and showing the pimply faced kid the reciept for my $20 worth of crap.....just me

 

[spacemanspiff]

Especially when it come to pass that you in fact did not steal anything but instead of acting like a sane, normal human being you decided to nut up and cause a scene creating a problem, yes that is exactly how the courts here in GA would see it

so a sane normal human being is supposed to accept being treated like a theif by a wannabe-authority-figure that has watched you in the checkout line, watched the clerk bag your stuff, and watched you walk the ten feet to the door where the wannabe-authority-figure is standing, giving you no opportunity to put any 'extra' stuff in your bags, because you are still stuffing your change and reciept in your pocket and fumbling for your keys. were supposed to be treated like a thief? a sane normal person will accept being treated like a theif at walmart?

yeah, whatever.

 

[spacemanspiff]

reminds me of a little 'incident' i had last summer. i was leaving my office, dont have a car, i was on my roller blades. the rent-a-cop security guard that was driving in the parking lot making his rounds chases me down to 'see some id'. starts talking some bulloney about 'i've already called for police, just show me some id'. i laughed in his face and said 'okay bright one, lets wait for police.' then he gets on his radio and calls for police.

so he lied, and i told him since he had no authority over me, he could take a long walk. i told him to tell the police i went 'thattaway'.