Injustice on St. Patty's

[vaemor]

I'm in Chicago, IL

Last night I was at the grocery store with my 18yr old nephew, I'm 25, it's St. Patrick's day and I wanted to get some beer for myself along with some snacks, while I was checking out at the register a security guard came up to me and said in a rude manner "you can't buy beer here if your with him", I told him "why, I'm over 21 and I'm just getting it for myself", he continued to get irate and told me "you can't buy beer cause you're with him and if you keep going I'm gonna have you kicked out". I said "for what, I've done nothing wrong or illegal" he continued, while I was leaving I said to him "I'll just take my business somewhere else!" He got pissed and got in my face, he started putting his hands on me like he was trying to hold me there, I said "what are you doing get off me" and he was trying to cuff me, I repeated saying "I've done nothing wrong" and passively resisted, he said "your being under arrest and waiting here until the cops come" I smirked and said "for what? for doing nothing?", he persisted on trying to arrest me for no reason.

I knew that I didn't want to do anything that would get me charged for anything real like battery because up to this point there was nothing he could charge me with, so I just passively tried to leave peacefully, but he was in my way and he didn't want me to leave. He grabbed me, pushed me back, tried to throw me to the ground, and all this time I was keeping my hands to myself, trying to get away from him in a passive self defense way, he was assaulting me, and I was doing nothing to him in return other than trying to go peacefully, telling him that.

The police arrived, and that was it, I told one of the police what happened and to review the tapes, they did, and because I did nothing and was "passively resisting arrest" I was charged with disorderly and battery. I told the police officer "but I never touched him", he told me "the slight bump of your shoulder to his shoulder while you were trying to leave was for battery", I was shocked because of this mockery of justice. I was peacefully escorted to the station where I posted bond for $150. I now want to sue the security guard and/or the store for wrongful arrest (or whatever's best suited) not only for damages but on principle, so that security guard that instigated the whole thing from the start knows he cannot treat people like that just because he has a semblance of power and can use the system against someone that has does nothing wrong - only just to get back at him for getting him angry.

I know nothing about suing, literally. And I have no money, literally, I live day by day in these times, I can't afford a lawyer, but I HAVE to right this wrong in a way that he would think twice before he does something like that again.

Do I have a case? And if so, how exactly do I go to get copies of the security tapes of what happened to prove it and sue him without any money? I have a feeling that if I just show up to my court date (April 1) with just my story and possibly a bar attorney, that it won't help me in the subpoena I need to get the security tapes beforehand. And all I will have is my word against his, if he even shows up to court. How do I sue him?

 

[FlyingRon]

First off, many stores will not sell alcohol to a group when some of the group is underage. The chances of this being a older person buying for the underaged is just too great.

As for the rest of what transpired, you two decided to start screaming at each other, and it's not going to be viewed as much more than a mutual argument and scuffle.

Barring some independent evidence, you're not getting anywhere on this.

You don't have any case for wrongful arrest. All an arrest requires is probable cause and there seems plenty here.

You'll need a lawyer on the criminal charge, you can ask him how likely you'd prevail in a civil suit.

 

[Isis1]

There's a funny little law (and I know you've seen the sign before) that allows mechants to reseve the right to refuse service to anyone. When you were told the store was not selling you beer, that was the end of that story. But you persisted. That wasn't a good idea. You should have said "okay", put the beer down and walked out the door. But you didn't. When someone stands in your way, you either walk around them or stand still. You do not use your body to shove past them. You can move back.

 

[justalayman]

he told me "the slight bump of your shoulder to his shoulder while you were trying to leave was for battery", I was shocked because of this mockery of justice.

was this the first contact? If so, while the security guys actions were really pretty stupid and should have simply let this go, the charge is likely legit.

If the security guy made first contact or even actively made an effort to prevent your egress, even without touching you, then the charge is improper and there are several charges the security guard should be charged with.

so, who made first contact?

 

[antrc170]

I would say that although the charge seems petty, it will have a solid chance for holding up in court. Once you were placed under arrest (ie. the officer stated that you were under arrest) and you had reason to believe that he was acting in his official duties (ie displaying badge, or symbol of authority) you were under arrest. Since you were both yelling at each other the officer could claim that you were being detained for trespassing or disorderly conduct depending on what else was said or done. Once you were placed under arrest the officer can use the appropiate amount of force to detain you. If you resist, you can expect to recieve charges for those actions.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

All an arrest requires is probable cause and there seems plenty here.

It's not clear that the 'arresting officer' was actually an officer with powers of arrest. If this was a citizen's arrest, different rules apply.

See a lawyer.

 

[justalayman]

Stevef

It's not clear that the 'arresting officer' was actually an officer with powers of arrest. If this was a citizen's arrest, different rules apply.

actually, in Illinois, not really.

725 ILCS 5/107-3 Arrest by a private person
"Any person may arrest another when he has reasonable grounds to believe that an offense other than an ordinance violation is being committed.

 

[mr_Goodbomb]

There's a funny little law (and I know you've seen the sign before) that allows mechants to reseve the right to refuse service to anyone. When you were told the store was not selling you beer, that was the end of that story. But you persisted. That wasn't a good idea. You should have said "okay", put the beer down and walked out the door. But you didn't. When someone stands in your way, you either walk around them or stand still. You do not use your body to shove past them. You can move back.

That's the merchant. The guard is not the merchant and has no right to deny him service. The cashier does, but according to his story, he wasn't spoken to by the cashier.

When the guard put his hands on him first, he was unable to walk around. The guard also isn't any form of law. He's a peacekeeper, at best, an employee of the store and had no right to detain him if no law was committed. No law was committed as his purchase was not completed. If he didn't suggest that any law was broken, and he laid hands on him first, then he wasn't attempting a citizen's arrest, and his first contact was assault.

 

[Silverplum]

That's the merchant. The guard is not the merchant and has no right to deny him service. The cashier does, but according to his story, he wasn't spoken to by the cashier.

When the guard put his hands on him first, he was unable to walk around. The guard also isn't any form of law. He's a peacekeeper, at best, an employee of the store and had no right to detain him if no law was committed. No law was committed as his purchase was not completed.

I agree that no law was committed.

 

[justalayman]

presumably the sec guard is an employee of the merchant and has the right to act on behalf of the merchant. Otherwise he would just be somebody hanging around watching people and starting fights.

When the guard put his hands on him first, he was unable to walk around.

well, we don't know if the bump or the hands came first.

as well, if OP is being charged with disorderly conduct, the guard did have a right to arrest for that.

He's a peacekeeper, at best, an employee of the store and had no right to detain him if no law was committed.

but there was a law broken. We just don't know in which order of events it came.

The guard also isn't any form of law.

that's where you would also be wrong. Every person in Illinois is "some form of law"

 

[BL]

I agree that no law was committed.

I just had to laugh .That's for the chuckle !!

 

[Isis1]

That's the merchant. The guard is not the merchant and has no right to deny him service. The cashier does, but according to his story, he wasn't spoken to by the cashier.

When the guard put his hands on him first, he was unable to walk around. The guard also isn't any form of law. He's a peacekeeper, at best, an employee of the store and had no right to detain him if no law was committed. No law was committed as his purchase was not completed. If he didn't suggest that any law was broken, and he laid hands on him first, then he wasn't attempting a citizen's arrest, and his first contact was assault.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

I agree that no law was committed.

But was one attempted?

 

[cyjeff]

That's the merchant. The guard is not the merchant and has no right to deny him service. The cashier does, but according to his story, he wasn't spoken to by the cashier.

Where the hell did you pull that from?

A security guard... the person charged with capturing shoplifters and protecting the property... cannot deny a customer service but a cashier CAN?

What a strange and rules based world you live in.

Unfortunately, here, you are completely wrong.

When the guard put his hands on him first, he was unable to walk around. The guard also isn't any form of law. He's a peacekeeper, at best, an employee of the store and had no right to detain him if no law was committed.

In most states including the one in question, store loss prevention does, indeed, have the authority to detain pending the arrival of police.

So far, you are 0 for 2.

Could the cashier have detained him? Nevermind...

No law was committed as his purchase was not completed.

So, only shoppers break laws after a purchase had been made?

That makes you 0 for 3.

If he didn't suggest that any law was broken, and he laid hands on him first, then he wasn't attempting a citizen's arrest, and his first contact was assault.

Wow... that's quite a little logic train you got going there. Not as good as...

God is love.
Love is blind.
Ray Charles was blind.
Ray Charles is God.

But close.

You are 0 for 4.

Don't post anymore. You aren't prepared for it.