Legal Question

[wantin150]

Reasonable Suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed is the only basis needed for a stop, not probable cause.

I worked in Loss prevention for Walmart a few years ago. The guidelines for a shoplifter apprehension are MUCH more strict than our state statutes. Dollar amounts and ages come in to play for prosecution (and don't ask me what they are). We could put our hands on you if necessary and detain you. One of the reasons I left was because we had to let more people go than we could stop, just by playing by the rules. SO very frustruating.

There is nothing an 80 year old door greeter will do if you politely decline to show a receipt. Some of the same people who complain about the ever increasing prices are not willing to help with a deterrent. FWIW, shoplifting/shrink costs retail $13 BILLION a year.

 

[moribundman]

Quote:

---

Reasonable Suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed is the only basis needed for a stop, not probable cause.

---

Coming from the cashier 15 feet away does not imply "reasonable suspicion."

The California Supreme Court has defined "reasonable suspicion" by stating " in order to justify an investigative stop or detention the circumstances known or apparent to the officer must include specific and articulable facts causing him to suspect that (1) some activity relating to crime has taken place or is occurring or about to occur, and the person he or she intends to detain is involved in that activity." (In re Tony C. (1978) 21 Cal. 3rd 888, 893, [148 Cal. Rptr. 366, 582 P. 2nd 957]).

In order to arrest an individual, a law enforcement officer must have " probable cause". The California Courts have ruled that "probable cause for an arrest is shown if a man of ordinary caution or prudence would be led to believe and entertain a strong suspicion of the guilt of the accused". (People v. Fischer (1957) 49 Cal 2d. 442, 446, 317 P.2d 967)

 

[moribundman]

By the way, wantin150, because you worked in the Walmart theft prevention squad, vice, SU or whatever it's called (

), can you enlighten me why the bag checkers at Walmart never check what's actually in the bag? They only look at the receipt. As long as someone has a receipt he can take all the stolen good (RF labels/tags disabled) that fit in the bag(s) out the door without anybody doing anything about that. I doubt the door guy has x-ray vision, so the whole procedure is just annoying and utterly useless.

Shouldn't thieves be caught in the act, or taped and then stopped? Ineffectively bothering all customers at the exit is nonsensical.

 

[wantin150]

I mentioned "stop", not arrest. Two different beasts (essentially although lawyers have argued this for years).

You are confusing law enforcement constraints and civilian constraints (or lack thereof). What is legal in a civilian application may result in rights issues in a law enforcement (i.e. Miranda) application. Civil vs criminal.

 

[Al]

Quote:

---

Imagine how George Washington, General Grant, Jefferson (take your pick which one) any number of honorable folks from the past would behave if their integrity/honor was questioned with no shred of evidence that they were not honorable?
At the risk of appearing a braggart, I believe the Founding Fathers and many men of yore would accept me as an honorable man. I wonder how many of my naysayers would be viewed as such?

---

Unfortunately many shoppers at WallyWorld don't rise to your integrity ; let alone those of the founding fathers.

I have many times politely been asked to show my receipt or implication was that you show it. Like I said..no big deal. Seems like there worse issues to get upset about.

 

[wantin150]

Quote:

---

By the way, wantin150, because you worked in the Walmart theft prevention squad, vice, SU or whatever it's called (

), can you enlighten me why the bag checkers at Walmart never check what's actually in the bag? They only look at the receipt. As long as someone has a receipt he can take all the stolen good (RF labels/tags disabled) that fit in the bag(s) out the door without anybody doing anything about that. I doubt the door guy has x-ray vision, so the whole procedure is just annoying and utterly useless.

Shouldn't thieves be caught in the act, or taped and then stopped? Ineffectively bothering all customers at the exit is nonsensical.

---

Policy. With your permission, and in the interest of clarification, I'll PM you with some details but will not post them in a public forum.

 

[moribundman]

Quote:

---

I mentioned "stop", not arrest. Two different beasts (essentially although lawyers have argued this for years).

You are confusing law enforcement constraints and civilian constraints (or lack thereof). What is legal in a civilian application may result in rights issues in a law enforcement (i.e. Miranda) application. Civil vs criminal.

---

I didn't confuse anything. I simply pointed out the law.

 

[moribundman]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

By the way, wantin150, because you worked in the Walmart theft prevention squad, vice, SU or whatever it's called (

), can you enlighten me why the bag checkers at Walmart never check what's actually in the bag? They only look at the receipt. As long as someone has a receipt he can take all the stolen good (RF labels/tags disabled) that fit in the bag(s) out the door without anybody doing anything about that. I doubt the door guy has x-ray vision, so the whole procedure is just annoying and utterly useless.

Shouldn't thieves be caught in the act, or taped and then stopped? Ineffectively bothering all customers at the exit is nonsensical.

---

Policy. With your permission, and in the interest of clarification, I'll PM you with some details but will not post them in a public forum.

---

Thanks. I would love to hear some details!

 

[wantin150]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I mentioned "stop", not arrest. Two different beasts (essentially although lawyers have argued this for years).

You are confusing law enforcement constraints and civilian constraints (or lack thereof). What is legal in a civilian application may result in rights issues in a law enforcement (i.e. Miranda) application. Civil vs criminal.

---

I didn't confuse anything. I simply pointed out the law.

---

The Supreme Court Ruling you posted applies to law enforcement, not civilians. Civilians on private property do not need "reasonable suspicion" or "probable cause" as they are not held to the same standards. Within reason, if someone infringes on someone else's rights, they open themselves to civil "prosecution", not criminal (as long as the infringement isn't itself criminal). And no, a "stop" by Walmart greeters is not criminal.

Believe me when I say that the high paid Walmart lawyers have researched this to death. If it was illegal, it wouldn't happen (not the same as overtime and illegal hires).

 

[moribundman]

Exactly my point. Law enforcement acting is one thing, civilians bothering civilians is another issue altogether. They can try to bother me, but I don't have to let them bother me.

 

[Lonnie]

You should stop shopping at stores that think of all their customers as shoplifters.

Wally World does not bother me like Fry's does. There you march to a line and wait to be told which cash register to report to, then walk the line to the exit where someone checks your receipt. You have just arrived from the line of cash registers with not merchandice contact and you are isolated from other and in that short distance you get checked again.

The check at Costco appears to be useful. The catch mistakes made in checkout which could go either way.

All of this might make more sense if employees cared about their job at all. A friend told me he was quitting his job as a manager of a Big 5 store. He said that thieft was high and much of it was inside within the employees. They show up but are not really motivated and he said much of it was the lousy pay and crummy benefits. We tried an experiment. I walked into the store, walked around picking up things and when approached by an employee said I was "just shopping, thank you". I took all the stuff, put it in a bag and threw a couple of hockey sticks over my shoulder and walked out. No one even gave me a second glance or asked me to pay. Sad.

 

[Steve128]

Just remember, once you pay for the item. It is yours. If they want to check you, so what? The items are YOURS.

You are free to go. If they ASK to stop you, it is voluntary. You are free to go. Maybe you violated their policy and they don't want you back. Fine. Their store.

But, if they demand to stop you after you have paid. Well, their camera's and invoices are timed and integrated in unison. Sure does help later when $$$$ damages come up.

WM lawyer's know what they are doing. Yea, right. They paid 11 MILLION on their illegal immigrant hiring policy. They care about the bottom line, not about their customer.

 

[wantin150]

Exactly!

 

[moribundman]

Quote:

---

You are free to go. If they ASK to stop you, it is voluntary. You are free to go.

---

That was my point. They can ask for whatever they want, but I don't care.

And yes, I usually don't go to that type store anyway.

 

[wantin150]

Quote:

---

Just remember, once you pay for the item. It is yours. If they want to check you, so what? The items are YOURS.

You are free to go. If they ASK to stop you, it is voluntary. You are free to go. Maybe you violated their policy and they don't want you back. Fine. Their store.

But, if they demand to stop you after you have paid. Well, their camera's and invoices are timed and integrated in unison. Sure does help later when $$$$ damages come up.

WM lawyer's know what they are doing. Yea, right. They paid 11 MILLION on their illegal immigrant hiring policy. They care about the bottom line, not about their customer.

---

Specifically why I stayed away from overtime and immigration. As with some, the "policy" is get away with it as long as you don't get caught.

 

[wileyE]

Bud was wrongly accused at WM when he returned a defective car battery. Return counter gave him the ok to go get another one, so he grabs one off the shelf and heads out the door with it in the cart. Jr. Security camera kid has him intercepted out the door. He cooperates thinking it will be easy to clear up knowing he's in the right. They escort him back to a room and ask to see his ID, when he pulls his wallet out Sr. security dude (Barney Fife) grabs hiss wallet from him and won't give it back. Guess it's supposed to keep you from running. Police come and listen to both stories and profile Chuck as "not the type". Ask if they can review the video with the manager. Review proves Chuck is innocent so they send him on his merry way with NO apology of any sort. Chuck stews about it for a few days and calls store manager, regional manager, corporate asking for just an apology. Nada. So he sends a letter to to their legal dept. They respond "what damages are you seeking". Heck he just wanted a apology but what the heck, has a lawyer write a letter asking for $10k. They sent him a check.

 

[JHZR2]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You are free to go. If they ASK to stop you, it is voluntary. You are free to go.

---

That was my point. They can ask for whatever they want, but I don't care.

And yes, I usually don't go to that type store anyway.

---

That is a good point.

If Im out on the street, and a policeman tells me to stop, I MUST stop (to the best of my knowledge). However, if someone breaks into my home, and I had a booby trap set, Im the one at fault. If the person isnt explicitly threatening my life, and I shoot them, I am at fault. If someone came into my house (invited or not), and I bound them and held them until the police came (for good reason or not), Id bet that I could be in big trouble if I didnt watch my p's and q's.

What is really different at wal mart? They are INVITING me onto their property. Unless the beeper goes off, they have no good reason to detain me, or even hold me up.

Then again, likely me entering their store in not so many words assumes my agreement to search, verification of reciept, etc.

Its a good question... private property and assumed agreements, vs. no good reason for the holdup.

The best thing we can do is "vote" with our complaints, and "vote" with our pocketbooks.

Walmart is a decent oil shop. I only go there for oil, nothing else, because the hassle is more than the savings.

JMH

 

[alreadygone]

Might be of interest, at the Bateville AR store couple months ago guy working cashdrawer in/out duty (whatever it's called) was informed he was about to be demoted. Next shift he carried, in front of survelance cams $86,000. YES thousand to interior of store put it in a new microwave, ended his shift, bought microwave and walked out door with it. He was stopped a few hours later in a small town approx 60 miles away for speeding, given a warning ticket (before APB search was started) and as far as I know is still uncaptured.

All in all, not much money to start a new life with!

Bob

 

[Shannow]

We get in strife all the time with that.

Our kids drink water, and lots of it. We walk a lot (cars don't get used from Friday PM to Monday AM most weekends - remember the google earth pics).

We buy bottles of water, then refill them with filtered water at home. Run the bottles for a few washes/weeks/losses, then chick them

Innumerable times we've had pimply faced youths asking for receipts for the bottles of water the kids are drinking. Maybe ought to keep some "generic" hundred year old receipts for just those occasions.

 

[wantin150]

Stories like wileyE's are not uncommon, and as a matter of fact, that situation is very tame compared to some of the bad stops I've heard of. In defense, IF policy is followed, these types of situations should not happen. A bad stop is grounds for termination, just for the monetary reasons posted. I came into the job with a little background so I know what I could get away with. I knew how to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt. Some of the guys doing that job are "fresh" and have no clue. They want to save the world and get overzealous and throw better judgement out the door. Common sense isn't so common.