Illegaly Detained By WalMart Assoicate. Pressing Charges.

[Free_Advice]

I just ignore the folks at walmart when they ask for my reciept for stuff i paid for.

I guess the OP may have a case for an improper citizens arrest. Amt to win (from the employee)?? Minimal at best is my best guess.

 

[asiny]

Asiny -

The situation is diplomatic. I am a citizen of the United States. I must follow the laws which I do happily. And I expect other individuals to do the same. I even warned him.

And I agree with you - but in being diplomatic, having been in many situations when I have had to assert my rights, also include a concession to diplomatically end the situation.

Although I do support ERAUPIKE;

As a veteran, I am embarassed that people like you play that card in such trivial situations.

Your military status and citizenship was never up for argument. Why you feel to state this is not needed.

 

[LatitudeClear]

I didn't repeat the entire conversation with the officer verbatim.

After showing him that I paid for my purchases I said the reason why I refused is because it was within my right to do so and the employees actions were obviously illegal.

He admitted that it was illegal (which should have been the end of the conversation) but then continuously stated that the matter was trivial because "everybody does it every day and doesn't seem to have a problem. Why are you just trying to cause trouble and waste everyone's time. And that I was just some punk trying to win free money."

Well, I'm not just trying to cause trouble and I very clearly warned the clerk, then the manager, then the other manager exactly what I intended on doing and the reasoning of why if this continued.

I signed up for duty because I feel strongly on this subject where as I would not join the Chinese military or the North Korea military and God knows I make a whole hell of a lot more money now in the private sector than they would ever pay me. I did my job, pay my taxes, and have no criminal record - and so really this should not have been too much to ask that when I am off buying my groceries and I don't want to show my ****ing receipt to some minimum wage jerk off who thinks he's the Police Chief - I'm not going to. If they harass me, physically grab me and take my possessions then that is something serious. When I walk into their store I do not sign a contract saying that they can search my car, my house, my wallet, or my bag. They can refuse to do further transactions with me. But that is it.


See how simple that is to understand?



And it's unfortunate that there are so many apologists who if they saw an individual do this to another individual would cry out, "He should be jailed with multiple felonies that scum!" where as when it is done by a Wal-mart suddenly it's making a big deal out of nothing.

I can only hope that someday my business becomes so large that I can operate above the rules and regulations of our society put in place to protect our freedoms and just kind of do whatever I want. Then there will be a bunch of lazy ass people making excuses for me too.

 

[cyjeff]

No. No they don't. Once you have paid you are free to leave.

So you are saying is that all I have to do to steal Walmart blind is to buy ANYTHING?

In other words.... you are assuming that thieves NEVER buy one thing as they steal another.... just for this very reason.

 

[ERAUPIKE]

I didn't repeat the entire conversation with the officer verbatim.

After showing him that I paid for my purchases I said the reason why I refused is because it was within my right to do so and the employees actions were obviously illegal.

In your mind they were, in reality, not so much.

He admitted that it was illegal (which should have been the end of the conversation) but then continuously stated that the matter was trivial because "everybody does it every day and doesn't seem to have a problem. Why are you just trying to cause trouble and waste everyone's time. And that I was just some punk trying to win free money."

Unfortunately, for you, the police officer is not an expert on law. The matter is trivial. I am going to have to agree with the officers point on this one. You came prepared to this fight.

Well, I'm not just trying to cause trouble and I very clearly warned the clerk, then the manager, then the other manager exactly what I intended on doing and the reasoning of why if this continued.

Exactly, you researched this and expected to be stopped. In essecence, you picked the fight. I am willing to bet that Wal-Mart has attorney's sharp enough to pick up on that fact.

I signed up for duty because I feel strongly on this subject where as I would not join the Chinese military or the North Korea military and God knows I make a whole hell of a lot more money now in the private sector than they would ever pay me.

You wouldn't join those militaries because you are not Chinese or North Korean.

I did my job, pay my taxes, and have no criminal record - and so really this should not have been too much to ask that when I am off buying my groceries and I don't want to show my ****ing receipt to some minimum wage jerk off who thinks he's the Police Chief

So, the guy standing at the door at Wal-Mart wasn't doing his job. Do you think maybe he doesn't have a criminal record either? What does a criminal look like? Do you think that the Wal-Mart greeter is tax exempt? Is he less of a person because his earning potential is lower than yours? Your attitude stinks.

- I'm not going to. If they harass me, physically grab me and take my possessions then that is something serious.

How is it harassment to ask you to show your receipt? You created the situation by failing to abide by a lawful request. This is all your fault.

When I walk into their store I do not sign a contract saying that they can search my car, my house, my wallet, or my bag. They can refuse to do further transactions with me. But that is it.

You don't need to sign a contract. You knew that they were going to ask for your receipt, you came prepared. Nobody from Wal-Mart searched your car, house, wallet, or bag. Take your hyerbole somewhere else.

See how simple that is to understand?

I understand much more clearly that you are simply attenton starved.

And it's unfortunate that there are so many apologists who if they saw an individual do this to another individual would cry out, "He should be jailed with multiple felonies that scum!" where as when it is done by a Wal-mart suddenly it's making a big deal out of nothing.

Two different situations, the logic doesn't fit.

I can only hope that someday my business becomes so large that I can operate above the rules and regulations of our society put in place to protect our freedoms and just kind of do whatever I want. Then there will be a bunch of lazy ass people making excuses for me too.

For the last time, you do not have the right to avoid the persecutions of the loss prevention brigade in private enterprise. You either need a tin foil hat or a cabin in the woods.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Without an injury, the term you're looking for is "nominal damages". While it varies by court, it usually ranges from $1 to $10. Punitive damages, for a single isolated incident that did not cause any injury, are exceedingly rare.


PS. Yes, you were 100% within your rights, and no, the guard should never have laid a hand on you, but as a practical matter, a Walmart gift card is about the most realistic outcome of all this. Good luck.

 

[ERAUPIKE]

Without an injury, the term you're looking for is "nominal damages". While it varies by court, it usually ranges from $1 to $10. Punitive damages, for a single isolated incident that did not cause any injury, are exceedingly rare.


PS. Yes, you were 100% within your rights, and no, the guard should never have laid a hand on you, but as a practical matter, a Walmart gift card is about the most realistic outcome of all this. Good luck.

Why did the security guard not have the right to detain someone he suspected of shoplifting?

The OP was in the wrong here. The corporation, and the agent of the corporation, were acting within their rights.

 

[dmcc10880]

To clarify here, the statute to look for in MO is 537.125 2,

Any merchant, his agent or employee, who has reasonable grounds or probable cause to believe that a person has committed or is committing a wrongful taking of merchandise or money from a mercantile establishment, may detain such person in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable length of time for the purpose of investigating whether there has been a wrongful taking of such merchandise or money. Any such reasonable detention shall not constitute an unlawful arrest or detention, nor shall it render the merchant, his agent or employee, criminally or civilly liable to the person so detained.

OP was asked for the receipt. He refused. Security/employee at that time had reasonable grounds to detain and investigate.

So, NO, OP may have been within his rights to refuse, but at that time the merchant was well within its right to investigate and ensure that the receipt matched what was in the bags. By refusing to cooperate, OP raised a level of suspicion.

OP damaged? Nope. OP created his own detention. This could have been over in 30 seconds and OP could have been on his way.

 

[xylene]

I actually do this.

This works for me.

You are rung out.

Grab, with a maniacal glint in the eye, the receipt.

Ball the receipt up. TIGHT AS POSSIBLE (It helps if staff see this)

Obviously don't do this if you are buying something you might return.

Optional - Shove it down your drawers.

Bonus points - make your way out of the store muttering about either ammo prices or some paranoid thing, loudly.

When asked for the receipt... well they won't ask.

 

[asiny]

This works for me.

You are rung out.

Grab, with a maniacal glint in the eye, the receipt.

Ball the receipt up. TIGHT AS POSSIBLE (It helps if staff see this)

Obviously don't do this if you are buying something you might return.

Optional - Shove it down your drawers.

Bonus points - make your way out of the store muttering about either ammo prices or some paranoid thing, loudly.

When asked for the receipt... well they won't ask.

Quoted for truth.

 

[csi7]

The individual who did the detaining did break Walmart's policy and should be terminated. At the different Walmart locations in our general area (there are ten) no one is to be detained, nor questioned, without witnesses.
By using more than just the two individuals involved, it keeps the employee honest.
I would have made a complaint to the corporate office about this particular employee's continued harassment of you at the exit point of the store.

 

[ERAUPIKE]

The individual who did the detaining did break Walmart's policy and should be terminated. At the different Walmart locations in our general area (there are ten) no one is to be detained, nor questioned, without witnesses.
By using more than just the two individuals involved, it keeps the employee honest.
I would have made a complaint to the corporate office about this particular employee's continued harassment of you at the exit point of the store.

How dare that employee do his job.
How did you become privy to this policy?

 

[Zigner]

The individual who did the detaining did break Walmart's policy and should be terminated. At the different Walmart locations in our general area (there are ten) no one is to be detained, nor questioned, without witnesses.
By using more than just the two individuals involved, it keeps the employee honest.
I would have made a complaint to the corporate office about this particular employee's continued harassment of you at the exit point of the store.

This happened at the freaking exit. You don't think there were witnesses?

 

[dmcc10880]

Just read the code section posted above. EOS.

 

[You Are Guilty]

To clarify here, the statute to look for in MO is 537.125 2,
...
OP was asked for the receipt. He refused. Security/employee at that time had reasonable grounds to detain and investigate.
...
So, NO, OP may have been within his rights to refuse, but at that time the merchant was well within its right to investigate and ensure that the receipt matched what was in the bags. By refusing to cooperate, OP raised a level of suspicion.

Had you read any of the cases, you would see that what constitutes "reasonable grounds" is a question of fact. An argument that frequently works (I have not looked it up for MO) is that asking EVERY patron for a receipt when there is no other evidence of shoplifting is insufficient to physically restrain a customer from leaving.

If you have a case from MO (or any other state) that says otherwise, I would love to see it.

OP damaged? Nope. OP created his own detention. This could have been over in 30 seconds and OP could have been on his way.

Irrelevant.