Circuit City and Police Gestapo Tactics

[Kohinoor]

http://www.michaelrighi.com/2007/09/01/arrested-at-circuit-city/ (http://www.michaelrighi.com/2007/09/01/arrested-at-circuit-city/)

Today was an eventful day. I drove to Cleveland, reunited with my father’s side of the family and got arrested. More on that arrested part to come.

For the labor day weekend my father decided to host a small family reunion. My sister flew in from California and I drove in from Pittsburgh to visit my father, his wife and my little brother and sister. Shortly after arriving we packed the whole family into my father’s Buick and headed off to the grocery store to buy some ingredients to make monkeybread. (It’s my little sister’s birthday today and that was her cute/bizare birthday request.)

Next to the grocery store was a Circuit City. (The Brooklyn, Ohio Circuit City to be exact.) Having forgotten that it was my sister’s birthday I decided to run in and buy her a last minute gift. I settled on Disney’s “Cars” game for the Nintendo Wii. I also needed to purchase a Power Squid surge protector which I paid for separately with my business credit card. As I headed towards the exit doors I passed a gentleman whose name I would later learn is Santura. As I began to walk towards the doors Santura said, “Sir, I need to examine your receipt.” I responded by continuing to walk past him while saying, “No thank you.”

As I walked through the double doors I heard Santura yelling for his manager behind me. My father and the family had the Buick pulled up waiting for me outside the doors to Circuit City. I opened the door and got into the back seat while Santura and his manager, whose name I have since learned is Joe Atha, came running up to the vehicle. I closed the door and as my father was just about to pull away the manager, Joe, yelled for us to stop. Of course I knew what this was about, but I played dumb and pretended that I didn’t know what the problem was. I wanted to give Joe the chance to explain what all the fuss was for.

I reopened the door to talk with Joe and at this point Joe positioned his body between the open car door and myself. (I was still seated in the Buick.) Joe placed his left hand on the roof of the car and his right hand on the open car door. I asked Joe if there was a problem. The conversation went something like this:

Me: “Is there a problem?”
Joe: “I need to examine your bag and receipt before letting you leave this parking lot.”
Me: “I paid for the contents in this bag. Are you accusing me of stealing?”
Joe: “I’m not accusing you of anything, but I’m allowed by law to look through your bag when you leave.”
Me: “Which law states that? Name the law that gives you the right to examine my bag when I leave a Circuit City.”

Of course Joe wasn’t able to name the law that gives him, a U.S. citizen and Circuit City employee the right to examine anything that I, a U.S. citizen and Circuit City customer am carrying out of the store. I’ve dealt with these scare tactics at other stores in the past including other Circuit Cities, Best Buys and Guitar Centers. I’ve always taken the stance that retail stores shouldn’t treat their loyal customers as criminals and that customers shouldn’t so willingly give up their rights along with their money. Theft sucks and I wish that shoplifters were treated more harshly than they are, but the fact is that I am not a shiplifter shoplifter and shouldn’t have to forfeit my civil rights when leaving a store.

I twice asked Joe to back away from the car so that I could close the door. Joe refused. On three occasions I tried to pull the door closed but Joe pushed back on the door with his hip and hands. I then gave Joe three options:

“Accuse me of shoplifting and call the police. I will gladly wait for them to arrive.”
“Back away from the car so that I can close the door and drive away.”
“If you refuse to let me leave I will be forced to call the police.” Joe didn’t budge. At this point I pushed my way past Joe and walked onto the sidewalk next to the building. I pulled out my phone and dialed 911.

Two minutes later Brooklyn, Ohio police officer Ernie Arroyo arrived on the scene. As I began to explain the story leading up to Joe Atha preventing my egress from the parking lot, officer Arroyo began to question why I refused to show my receipt in the first place. I explained that I lawfully purchased the contents in the bag and didn’t feel that it was necessary for me to let a Circuit City employee inspect the bag as I left. Officer Arroyo disagreed. He claimed that stores have the right to inspect all receipts and all bags upon leaving their store.

At this point Officer Arroyo asked to see my receipt and driver’s license. I handed over the receipt, and stated that my name is Michael Righi. Again, Officer Arroyo asked to see my driver’s license. The conversation went something like this:

Me: “I’m required by law to state that my name is Michael Righi, but I do not have to provide you with my driver’s license since I am not operating a vehicle.”
Officer Arroyo: “Give me your driver’s license or I will place you under arrest.”
Me: “My name is Michael Righi. I am not willing to provide you with my driver’s license.”
Officer Arroyo: “Turn around and up against the wall.”

At this point I was placed in handcuffs, patted down, had my wallet removed from my back pocket and was placed in the back of Officer Arroyo’s police car. My three siblings sat in the back of the Buick crying their eyes out, which is the only part of today that I regret. I wish my little brother and sisters didn’t have to watch this, but I knew exactly what I was doing and was very careful with my words. Other than putting my family through a little scare I don’t regret anything that happened today.

Officer Arroyo ran my father’s license plate, my driver’s license and inspected my two receipts along with the contents of my bag. He also handed over my Circuit City bag to Joe Atha and allowed him to ensure that in fact I stole nothing from the store.

While being driven down to the station in the back of the police car I struck up a conversation with Officer Arroyo. I asked him if he was surprised that my receipts matched the contents in the bag and in a surprise moment of honesty he admitted that he was. I then asked Officer Arroyo what charges were going to be brought against me. He explained that I had been arrested for failure to produce my driver’s license. I asked him what would happen if I never learned to drive and didn’t have a driver’s license. After all, at the time that he arrested me I was standing on a sidewalk outside a Circuit City. I wasn’t driving a car, and even when I was seated in the Buick I was a back seat passenger. The officer never gave me a satisfactory answer to this question, but promised to explain the law to me after I was booked.

This morning I slept through my alarm clock and was in a hurry to drive to Cleveland. I didn’t have time to iron my shirt, and this is what I regretted while my mugshot was being taken. Listen up kids. Always press your clothes because you never know when you’ll be unlawfully arrested.

Shortly after being booked, fingerprints and all, Officer Arroyo presented me with my charges:

ORD:525.07: Obstructing Official Business (M-2)
(a) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s offical capacity shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.

Not being able to find the law in the books that states that a citizen must provide a driver’s license while walking through a parking lot, Officer Arroyo had to settle for “obstructing official business.” Keep in mind that the official business that I was supposedly obstructing was business that I initiated by calling the police. I called for help and I got arrested.

My father posted the $300 bail that was needed to get me out of jail and back on my way to Park Avenue Place. (Sorry for the lame Monopoly joke, but it’s my first time being arrested. Cut me some humor slack.) After being released I stuck around the police station for a little while to fill out the necessary paper work to press charges against the Circuit City manager who physically prevented me from leaving the parking lot. I’m most interested in seeing my charges dropped for refusing to present identification, but I view that as a completely separate issue from the store manager interfering with my egress.

I understand that my day would have gone a lot smoother if I had agreed to let loss prevention inspect my bag. I understand that my day would have gone a lot smoother if I had agreed to hand over my driver’s license when asked by Officer Arroyo. However, I am not interested in living my life smoothly. I am interested in living my life on strong principles and standing up for my rights as a consumer, a U.S. citizen and a human being. Allowing stores to inspect our bags at will might seem like a trivial matter, but it creates an atmosphere of obedience which is a dangerous thing. Allowing police officers to see our papers at will might seem like a trivial matter, but it creates a fear-of-authority atmosphere which can be all too easily abused.

I can reluctantly understand having to show a permit to fish, a permit to drive and a permit to carry a weapon. Having to show a permit to exist is a scary idea which I got a strong taste of today.

[Kohinoor]

continued


My hearing is scheduled for September 20th, 2007. I will be contacting the ACLU and the IDP on Tuesday (the next business day), and I plan to fight these charges no matter what it takes. I will provide updates on this page as events unfold.

September 1st, 2007 @ 10:50PM EST Update:The police officer never read me my Miranda rights. I’ve heard differing opinions on how much this really matters and will certainly be bringing this up with my attorney.

September 1st, 2007 @11:34PM EST Update:I found the detail on Ohio’s “stop and identify” law. I encourage you to read it in its entirety, but I will spell out the important part:

2921.29 (C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person’s name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person’s name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.

[firelizard]

That's awesome, really awesome. Kudos to Mr. Righi

[nizzan4u2nv]

Good for him I guess. Its kinda annoying when people get butthurt over small stuff but whatever. Id love to see him pull that kind of shit when he gets inspected at the airport and gets anal probed. He probably would be completely for bag content inspection if it was at a store he owned. Theres murderers, drug dealers and rapists running the streets and the police have to waste time on this guy cause he doesnt want his bag inspected. I really hope he doesnt get a dime. Of course, this is just my opinion.

[Kohinoor]

he was well within his rights to refuse. i seriously commend this guy for doing what he did - it makes this country what it is.

you pointed out an airport search, but that is completely different. he legally purchased items and refused to show a receipt upon request. circuit city employees stopped him from leaving, which is very illegal. the cop could have had reasonable suspicion, but taking him to the station was a big no-no as well bc once he had proof that he legally purchased the items, he shouldve been free to go. instead, the cop chose to violate mikes 4th amendment rights. i hope he sees a fat check for the city and circuit citys mistakes.

and cops have assigned duties, they have detectives allocated to work on murders, rapes, etc.

[elpresidente]

Fight the power...

[nizzan4u2nv]

he was well within his rights to refuse. i seriously commend this guy for doing what he did - it makes this country what it is.

you pointed out an airport search, but that is completely different. he legally purchased items and refused to show a receipt upon request. circuit city employees stopped him from leaving, which is very illegal. the cop could have had reasonable suspicion, but taking him to the station was a big no-no as well bc once he had proof that he legally purchased the items, he shouldve been free to go. instead, the cop chose to violate mikes 4th amendment rights. i hope he sees a fat check for the city and circuit citys mistakes.

and cops have assigned duties, they have detectives allocated to work on murders, rapes, etc.

Again, thats just my opinion. I may not agree with yours but I can still respect it. :biggthumpup:

[Dominik]

Dont you guys have signs at the entrance of your stores that say "by entering this store you agree to have your bags inspected when leaving the store"

???

[nextgear1]

Good for him I guess. Its kinda annoying when people get butthurt over small stuff but whatever. Id love to see him pull that kind of shit when he gets inspected at the airport and gets anal probed. He probably would be completely for bag content inspection if it was at a store he owned. Theres murderers, drug dealers and rapists running the streets and the police have to waste time on this guy cause he doesnt want his bag inspected. I really hope he doesnt get a dime. Of course, this is just my opinion.


You don't get it do you. We tend to live our lives here consistently compromising the general principles the country was built upon. To get finger printed and booked because a Circuit City employee asked to see a receipt and check a bag is ridiculous. What's more ridiculous is not getting mirandized while being arrested for nothing. This is not some third world country that we've invaded in order to displace leaders that operate in the same manner.... this is
America.

I commend his efforts and hope to get some follow up on what happens.

[nizzan4u2nv]

You don't get it do you. We tend to live our lives here consistently compromising the general principles the country was built upon. To get finger printed and booked because a Circuit City employee asked to see a receipt and check a bag is ridiculous. What's more ridiculous is not getting mirandized while being arrested for nothing. This is not some third world country that we've invaded in order to displace leaders that operate in the same manner.... this is
America.

I commend his efforts and hope to get some follow up on what happens.

Oh I get it, I just dont have any empathy for the guy. Why do I have to be wrong just because what everyone else is commending him for, I think is stupid? Sorry if im not a Mr. Righi sackrider, haha jk. :shrug::giggity:

[Kohinoor]

Dont you guys have signs at the entrance of your stores that say "by entering this store you agree to have your bags inspected when leaving the store"

???

those signs are bs. the store has the right to ask to see your receipt, and you have the right to say no. stores like sams and costco can check your receipt bc you sign a membership agreement that lets them do it legally. stores like frys, best buy, circuit city, walmart ask to check receipts, but tell them no! they cant do anything.

[firelizard]

those signs are bs. the store has the right to ask to see your receipt, and you have the right to say no. stores like sams and costco can check your receipt bc you sign a membership agreement that lets them do it legally. stores like frys, best buy, circuit city, walmart ask to check receipts, but tell them no! they cant do anything.
I thought that since it's private property, their word is law...except for in matters of the law. But in anycase what I mean is that if there is a sign saying "if you shop here, we can inspect your sack", by entering the store you accept this.

[Caoboy]

I'm assuming this man is African-American correct? That's why he's fighting this?

[Caoboy]

I thought that since it's private property, their word is law...except for in matters of the law. But in anycase what I mean is that if there is a sign saying "if you shop here, we can inspect your sack", by entering the store you accept this.
Once you walk out of the store, they have to call the police. They can't detain you, as they don't have the authority. The guy could have just called the police, gave them the plate number, and had the police show up at the house if it was that big of a deal. I think it's a case of racial profiling going on here.

[firelizard]

Where did you draw the conclusion that he was black?

Also, he was asked to stop before he left the store. So, if this was a store like Dominik's where they state they may check bags on exit, I'd stop the story there and say the guy was being a knob. I'm fairly certain the lot in this case would still be private property, and I'm even more certain that the area directly in front of the store is store property.

But since I'm also fairly certain Circuit City doesn't have signs like that, it's m00t, ..nothing but a side note.

[Gao Jian]

i have a question for you all. I know he didn't do this but what if someone does steal something and put it into a bag. Then what happens. You ask for recipt they say NO and walk out the door. Now you have lost the merchandise because of the law. I understand what this man is doing, but he is using the same legal system that allows a woman to sue McDonalds over spilled hot coffee, allows OJ to get off with murder, allows theifs to sue houseowners because they broke a bone breaking into the house. In the end the guy could have let the Circut City employee see the bag and then put in a complaint. It is not circut city's fault, it is the employee's fault. Yeah the cop was a knob but what can you do. I agree that fighting the good fight is a great thing. BUT, you gotta pic your spots and I don't think this is one of them.

[Kohinoor]

I thought that since it's private property, their word is law...except for in matters of the law. But in anycase what I mean is that if there is a sign saying "if you shop here, we can inspect your sack", by entering the store you accept this.


no law supports checking receipts. its your stuff once you pay for it, they have no right to check. if those posted signs were lawful on private property, i could post up signs on my front lawn saying that 'anyone who wishes to enter is subject to a strip search.'

however, if you complain about security cameras in a changing room at a dept store, and they have signs up in a reasonable location, they cant be held liable for privacy violations as privacy shouldnt be expected in a public place and they had signs up.

[Kohinoor]

i have a question for you all. I know he didn't do this but what if someone does steal something and put it into a bag. Then what happens. You ask for recipt they say NO and walk out the door. Now you have lost the merchandise because of the law. I understand what this man is doing, but he is using the same legal system that allows a woman to sue McDonalds over spilled hot coffee, allows OJ to get off with murder, allows theifs to sue houseowners because they broke a bone breaking into the house. In the end the guy could have let the Circut City employee see the bag and then put in a complaint. It is not circut city's fault, it is the employee's fault. Yeah the cop was a knob but what can you do. I agree that fighting the good fight is a great thing. BUT, you gotta pic your spots and I don't think this is one of them.

in that case, cc needs to have recorded evidence (cameras) seeing the person steal something before they can approach them and detain/search them. shoplifting is rare nowadays with cameras and other security measures . most loss is from employees anyway.

checking receipts is nothing but a scare tactic.

[firelizard]

if those posted signs were lawful on private property, i could post up signs on my front lawn saying that 'anyone who wishes to enter is subject to a strip search.'
Why couldn't you?
If someone complained about the strip search you could argue that they had fair warning that submitting to a strip search was condition of entering your property, and they did it.

[Kohinoor]

maybe strip search was a bad example. how about rape? or kill? posting up a sign is to give warning, but its not a way to bypass laws. like i said, they can certainly ask you, and you can certainly deny them.

[firelizard]

maybe strip search was a bad example. how about rape? or kill? posting up a sign is to give warning, but its not a way to bypass laws. like i said, they can certainly ask you, and you can certainly deny them.
It's illegal to ask for a reciept? I didn't know that.

[crxgames]

I had this happen to me at a walmart because a friend asked me to take his DVD player to his truck while he went back to get something he forgot. I got held in the store for 15 minutes and the door lady ran up and stole the bag from my hands with 0 consent. I haven't been to wacko wally world since.

Edit: The bag didn't have the receipt and friend did. :D

[Kohinoor]

It's illegal to ask for a reciept? I didn't know that.

not illegal per se, but it infringes upon your rights. you are certainly not required to show proof of purchase past the point of sale.

I had this happen to me at a walmart because a friend asked me to take his DVD player to his truck while he went back to get something he forgot. I got held in the store for 15 minutes and the door lady ran up and stole the bag from my hands with 0 consent. I haven't been to wacko wally world since.

Edit: The bag didn't have the receipt and friend did. :D

wow! i wouldve raised hell about that.

[firelizard]

not illegal per se, but it infringes upon your rights. you are certainly not required to show proof of purchase past the point of sale.
It could only be illegal to make you show it if you didn't agree to it when you entered the store, which is the case when they have a sign declaring that they may verify customers' reciepts.

It's illegal for me to charge things on your credit card number...unless you're buying stuff from me..

[Kohinoor]

you still dont have to show receipt of purchase when you leave, regardless of what a posted sign says inside the store.

[firelizard]

Based on what?
You yourself said it's not illegal to require it, and in my eyes (and it strikes me as common sense), if a sign says you may have to do something and you enter the private property, you understood and agreed to the sign.

It's like the Terms of Use that come with any software, and most forums: a lot of it is just company policy, and when you accept the terms of use, you must abide by the policies outlined therein

[widebody_Q]

shoplifting is rare nowadays with cameras and other security measures . most loss is from employees anyway.

You must not live in NY. $10 can get you 10 quarts of oil and cleaning products for a year if you run into the right crack head in the parking lot. "I said meguires! Not turtle wax-your only getting $8 now!"

I think the guy was being a prick to the cop thats why he took him in. Sometimes you can get out of the biggest mess if you act polite or you can get locked up for pissing on the street if you act like a dick. He clearly wanted to get in this mess. I give him props though.

[Oyabun]

WOW!! This just goes to show you how much our civil rights are being impeded on!!!! This country is starting to soung alot like George Orwells " 1984 "!!!! REMEMBER!! BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!!!!!!

[Yokotas13]

this guy is an idiot

how hard is it to say
Ok, sure you can look at my bag

then afterwards be a dick

[Caoboy]

I came to the assumption that he is of african american decent due to the way this article was written. It 'sounds' like a black male feeling like he was racially profiled and he 'knows his rights' so he is putting them to the test. It was only a video game after all, not some huge purchase with multiple items. Had he only stated, " No, I refuse to show you my receipt" and stayed in the store, instead of trying to leave the premises (which just leads to more confusion, and reason to believe he did actually steal something) then maybe it would have ended up different. But hey, if he wants to exercise his 'rights' just to 'put one on the man' then so be it. I would have just handed the man my bag, and be done with it.

[nextgear1]

I came to the assumption that he is of african american decent due to the way this article was written. It 'sounds' like a black male feeling like he was racially profiled and he 'knows his rights' so he is putting them to the test. It was only a video game after all, not some huge purchase with multiple items. Had he only stated, " No, I refuse to show you my receipt" and stayed in the store, instead of trying to leave the premises (which just leads to more confusion, and reason to believe he did actually steal something) then maybe it would have ended up different. But hey, if he wants to exercise his 'rights' just to 'put one on the man' then so be it. I would have just handed the man my bag, and be done with it.


Agreed but that still doesn't justify the police's reaction to the whole situation. Bottom line is that this wasn't about race....it was about our rights as citizens of the US being degraded a little bit everyday.

Furthermore....just goes to show everybody shoutin' protect my civil rights ain't black or gay....

http://www.post-gazette.com/businessnews/20000601hole1.asp

[Yokotas13]

no this just goes to show you that there are stupid ass people in the world that think they are entitled to minute stupid things that really dont matter in life

thats what this article tells me
he was basically harassing someone for doing their job....

[firelizard]

no this just goes to show you that there are stupid ass people in the world that think they are entitled to minute stupid things that really dont matter in life

thats what this article tells me
he was basically harassing someone for doing their job....
He didn't harass the person at the store...and for the record, the point was that he actually was entitled to do what he did. I'm sure he's not always a twat like that, it was just an experiment.

[DriftGirl]

I came to the assumption that he is of african american decent due to the way this article was written. It 'sounds' like a black male feeling like he was racially profiled and he 'knows his rights' so he is putting them to the test. It was only a video game after all, not some huge purchase with multiple items. Had he only stated, " No, I refuse to show you my receipt" and stayed in the store, instead of trying to leave the premises (which just leads to more confusion, and reason to believe he did actually steal something) then maybe it would have ended up different. But hey, if he wants to exercise his 'rights' just to 'put one on the man' then so be it. I would have just handed the man my bag, and be done with it.


thats a piss poor assumption. you should be ashamed of yourself for taking it to a racial level wihen its just a man who has the balls to stand up for his (and your) rights.

[Yokotas13]

He didn't harass the person at the store...and for the record, the point was that he actually was entitled to do what he did. I'm sure he's not always a twat like that, it was just an experiment.
but he is a twat

and yes, by actively resisting a simple check, he was harassing the guy, whose job it was to make sure things arent stolen

people dont just do this randomly, normally if they do it once, they have done it many times.
Its immature, stupid, and makes an unneeded scene, plus i mean, he got arrested for something so stupid.

[Yokotas13]

thats a piss poor assumption. you should be ashamed of yourself for taking it to a racial level wihen its just a man who has the balls to stand up for his (and your) rights.
from experience with a huge amount of races, i would have made the assumption as well
or some other minority... its just statistically correct, do you ever hear bill clinton doing shit like this
but you hear of jesse jackson all the damn time

it was a fair assesment
i dont think it was racist or antyhing

[DriftGirl]

Then you're just as ignorant. This wasnt about race, its about a policy that gets a lot of stores in trouble when someone decides not to put up with their bullshit.

Thats as retarded as someone calling all 'white guys' pedophiles :pat:


Anywayz, I never show those people shit when I buy stuff. :smiley: I wish they would stop me or call the police.....So I can add on to my Lexus collection.

Im doing them a favor by shopping there.

Costco and other places like that require it and state their policies when u sign up...but BEST BUY/Circuit City type places can kiss my A$$ right out the door. :smiley-rofl:

[Yokotas13]

and your just as bad
calling me ignorant

why make life difficult

just show them your shit and be on the way

[Caoboy]

Maybe it's this person who is the ignorant one, thinking that he has every right to not show the item/receipt for proof of purchase, walk out the door, and his uncle try to drive off in plain view of the man who asked him to show his reciept, and was chasing after him, who was only doing his job.

I for one, have been stopped several times and asked to show my reciept, when I have just paid for said item, in front of the said interrogator practically. I don't feel it's a crime and a revocation of our rights due to me having to show my receipt after I have just purchased the item.

How does this 'victim' know that it was not the said personnel's job as receipt checker to check receipts? Wouldn't that just throw the whole case out the window right there? That he was only doing his job, and that by the said 'victim' to have refused this question, therefore by not showing his receipt would possibly get this man written up, or worse, fired?

I mean, these are worst case scenarios of terminations and what not, but hey, this man was thrown in jail because of his refusal to show his receipt. That receipt checker could have lost his job for it.

So, if that were the case, then due to his breaking of this said law:

ORD:525.07: Obstructing Official Business (M-2)
(a) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s offical capacity shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.

The 'public official' may even pertain to the receipt checker, of the public store, where he would have been employed, among other positions, as said receipt checker.

It's 3:15. if it doesn't make sense, there should be a good reason.


Also, re-read the article, the whole time, it's tip-toeing around racial profiling.

[Yokotas13]

no it makes sense

the guy was a fucking idiot
a few of us have said it

[DriftGirl]

Maybe it's this person who is the ignorant one, thinking that he has every right to not show the item/receipt for proof of purchase, walk out the door, and his uncle try to drive off in plain view of the man who asked him to show his reciept, and was chasing after him, who was only doing his job.

I for one, have been stopped several times and asked to show my reciept, when I have just paid for said item, in front of the said interrogator practically. I don't feel it's a crime and a revocation of our rights due to me having to show my receipt after I have just purchased the item.

How does this 'victim' know that it was not the said personnel's job as receipt checker to check receipts? Wouldn't that just throw the whole case out the window right there? That he was only doing his job, and that by the said 'victim' to have refused this question, therefore by not showing his receipt would possibly get this man written up, or worse, fired?

I mean, these are worst case scenarios of terminations and what not, but hey, this man was thrown in jail because of his refusal to show his receipt. That receipt checker could have lost his job for it.

So, if that were the case, then due to his breaking of this said law:

ORD:525.07: Obstructing Official Business (M-2)
(a) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s offical capacity shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.

The 'public official' may even pertain to the receipt checker, of the public store, where he would have been employed, among other positions, as said receipt checker.

It's 3:15. if it doesn't make sense, there should be a good reason.


Also, re-read the article, the whole time, it's tip-toeing around racial profiling.

Uh, You cant be serious....A reciept checker is in now way considered a 'Public official'. :smiley-rofl:

He was arrested for not showing his ID to a public official...aka POLICE OFFICER. I think thats where he fucked up. But who can say what his mind state was after the HE called the police for help.

Yes, He's well within his rights not to have ID on his person but He shouldve shown it if he had it....

He couldve shown his ID and told the the punk ass door person to fuck off.

The charges will be dropped with little/to no effort by an attorney.

[DriftGirl]

no it makes sense

the guy was a fucking idiot
a few of us have said it

a few of us have said it...so that makes it 'so'? :smiley-rofl:

Maybe it would help if said persons had a basic undestanding of the law or their rights as a US citizen.:pat: evidence that a crime has been comitted must be established to detain a person for any reason. They can ask and you can tell them 'no thanks'. If they feel youve got sumthing to hide they are well within their rights to call the police.

If the police come, Id suggest doing everything within reason to let them do their public job: Like showing your ID if u have it.

Id let the police see my personal property without handing it over to the 'door person' and would be on my way....

I think the cop in question may have left himself open to scrutiny to a certain degree as well. All n all, I think it will be dropped. Theres no way a prosecutor will pick up these charges....and circut city doesnt want it to go to court either.

The store signs are for Caution ./ liability issues. "Wet floor" , car damage in the parking lot, etc...
You can have (Sign) conditions in regards to entering....but not leaving legally.

You have to sign away rights as a citizen...Like Costco, SAMS Club and other stores such as these.

My last comments about this:
- This is not a race card issue. its a rights issue,
- I love sams club :biggthumpup:
- People may think its no big deal but whats next...pat-downs? :pat:



anyways, its sad that people will freely give up their rights to avoid having to protect them :shrug:

[Gao Jian]

I have a few problems with our little VSC.com debate.

1) unless we are all looking up laws and ordinances from the same state or district then they are a moot point.
2) The guy is not standing up for any of our rights. He was taken into custody not for failing to show his proof of purchase but for not showing his ID. By taking legal action against this it will be dropped in a low level court. This will not make it to a high leval court in any way shape or form. WHICH means that we still will have to show our state ID when an officer of the law asks us to; that is unless we want to go to jail. Unless of course the cop doesn't feel like being a dick.
3) We are reading an article which has clear bias about the situation. We have no idea other than hearsay about how any of the people conducted themselves during this conflict.

well... i have said my peace,

debate on!

Jake

[Caoboy]

That said by Jake, we still don't know if it was just the guy's job to check receipts. I know at the Bestbuy here, they have a person standing at the Exit waiting to check receipts. I'm sure if I just walked out on them, they'd probably do the same thing, AND I'm white. I'd also just show the man my receipt.

Petty stuff like this doesn't need to be escalated in order to 'stand up for our rights'.

I still think a race card issue is being pulled here, as well as a powertripping police officer.

Race has not been stated, so until then, you can't rule it out. The race card goes both ways too, with the officials, AND the 'victim', if it is a case of race.

Since none of us are lawyers in this debate thread, and since the 'victim' is probably not a lawyer either, we'll just have to wait and see what happens.

That being said, I'd like the OP to keep this thread updated.

[firelizard]

"public official" doesn't refer to a reciept checker in a store.

Public officials are people who work for the city - police, paramedic, judges, construction (if municipally managed)

edit: oh, DG beat me to it!

[DriftGirl]

on the few forums this has been brought up on, VSC is the only one so far to 'play the race card'. :sad: I honestly dont think race has anything to do with it. ANYONE who feels violated should stand up for their rights no matter how small it may seem to the 'next guy'.

This isnt a lesson in law, its a lesson tought in 5th grade history.....the 4th amendment.

Also, I think we can all agree that he took it too far in most peoples eyes by refusing to comply with the police request.

[VipDout]

Nothing to do with race from my reading ...


But He knows his rights and he is going to get his money probably ... he sacrificed a little time one day and did everything he should have ... but has made his point very clear that he has rights ..


I for one would have been like Wtf ? I stole something ... then showed the m and would have been pissed anther said why would you have accused me and maybe took it further but the whole cop thing nahh wasn't worth that much to me ... but he is brave and I hope he wins ...

[jtanoyo1]

**edit**

Ok I wrote a lengthy reply on this topic. But for the sake of not starting a war, I withdrew everything I said and prefer to just remain silent on the subject.

[BOSOZOKU]

when i read it i didn't think it was a black guy. there's no correlation with race or discrimination within the original posting so thats pretty arrogant.. but anyhoo.. i'll give you guys some vital information.. the law is BULLSHIT and you have no rights in this country. my father has been a cop my whole life, my mother has worked dispatch for various police stations for half my life. if i told everyone a fraction of the stories of absurd abuse of power by police officers, you'd all be shocked. i'll tell you right now that i know the law more so than anyone on this board and you all have to remember than anyone in a postion of authority still has free will. a cop is supposed to literally BE the law, but we often forget they are humans. i used to try to protect myself with terms life 'reasonable suspicion' and 'probable cause' but there are no defining guidelines to describe these. any cop can pull you over, stop you, or arrest you by using one of these two terms and pulling something out of his ass that he knows you cannot disprove. if it had been me in that position, i probably would have given the employee a hard time for acusing me of theft when i know i bought everything with my hard earned money, but i probably would have shown my reciept. if the guy still gave me shit and threatened to call the cops and blocked my door, i would have driven off with him standing in the door, or just plain fvcked him up for touching my car which is my personal property. the last thing i'd do is wait for the cops to show up. i've been arrested, harrassed, and been given citations that are unlawful, yet more expensive for me to fight for justice than just dish out cash. all cops are either genuinely good people who got into law enforcement to better thier community and make a living or simple criminals with a badge. shit.. 6 cops here in mesa were discharged for sexual acts in thier patrol cars. a.k.a.- gobble my cock or let me pound your vag and you won't get a ticket. they are all just people with free will which means they are capable of anything.

[Caoboy]

Are you a lawyer? If not, then you probably don't know 'the law' more than anybody on this board.

Just like I said, until you can prove the races here in this case, you can't rule out racial profiling as reasoning for events that escalated on all sides.

You also can't take to heart what ONE PERSON is saying in this article. It's only the 'victims' side of the story. What about the officer, or the bag checker?

That's like listening (blowing this out of proportion here) to only Hitler's reasoning for why the holocaust happened, and why he wanted to rid the world of 'evil'.

[BOSOZOKU]

oh sorry, i didn't know this was an ongoing case.. haha.. no seriously, there are no indications of race within the original post. we aren't trying to solve this incident, i'm just giving my opinions based on the information provided and my experiences. doesn't matter what the other sides of the story are, or the race of the people involved. and you MUST be a lawyer since you oh so smoothly 'incriminate' the person who was wrongfully arrested by making a comparison with hitler. pshh.. give me a break.

[Caoboy]

Nah man, I just think it was not really smart of what this guy did, and I also think things were escalated to extremes, from both sides. And yes, comparing to Hitler is blowing things out of proportion, hence the () stating blowing this out of proportion LOL.

Not hearing both sides of the story is what causes a lot of problems in life.

[BOSOZOKU]

well i agree that the guy the guy should have just shown his receipt and the contents of the bag and been over with it, but he doesn't legally have to. once he stepped into the car, he is technically no longer on the property. the employee standing in the way of the car door is in the wrong by just touching his car. the only person (from this side of the story) that didn't break the law was this guy.