Are A False Accusation And Refusal Of Detention Grounds For A Lawsuit

[cdwjava]

As part of the background, a prospective law enforcement employer will almost certainly obtain a copy of the report.

- Carl

[donnabert]

You might want to contact any local consumer advocates in your area. Sometimes they have them on local news channels or some legal clinics have a consumer law advocate. It sounds to me like your rights were violated. They have no right to detain you unless you committed theft. If you didn't, they can't. Next time (let's hope there is not a next time) if they won't move the conversation somewhere else... tell them you are leaving, and then do so.

[cdwjava]

They have no right to detain you unless you committed theft. If you didn't, they can't.

Not true. All that a detention generally requires is a reasonable belief that a crime was committed. In this case, there was apparently a store manager that claimed to have seen the theft occurred - that goes even beyond reasonable belief to what is referred to as "probable cause".

Next time (let's hope there is not a next time) if they won't move the conversation somewhere else... tell them you are leaving, and then do so.

And they will likely have the right to use that amount of force necessary to detain the person for the police. Unless NY state law specifically prohibits any force by a private person to detain suspects, then they will be permitted to do so.

- Carl

[CarmenLora]

According to the statutes posted in this thread, pretty much any personnel that a business hires under the guise to protect the business have the same rights as police. So, the accusation by the deli manager alone appears to be sufficient evidence. Had I declined to have them search my bags, little ole' recycling bag hipster would have been tackled by the supermarkets fake security linebackers as I attempted to leave.

Targeting consumer advocates is a step I wanted to avoid but the BB responded to my complaint with an email stating my problem is a legal issue and to seek counsel. Although the statutes are clear on my rights (or lack thereof) and posters on this thread seem to disagree otherwise, I will probably take the BBB's advice.

[cyjeff]

Let me change that wording a bit.

The people employed do not have the same rights as police. They have the same rights as any other CITIZEN to enforce the law.

I have been in, around and consulting to retailers for over 20 years.

What it comes back down to is Carl's original question. What do you want to happen?

If you are expecting a 5 figure check, that won't happen. Retailers will spend 6 figures to prevent a 5 figure payout. They have lawyers on staff... you don't.

Additionally, the store already offered you a reasonable settlement. You have a recourse in not shopping there anymore.

The whole "person of color" thing really doesn't travel as far as it used to unless you can prove a pattern of behavior on behalf of that store personnel and/or that chain. (I recommend researching the "Cracker Barrel" suit.).

[Advocateless]

Were you acting in good faith as a typical shopper who was held up for an hour or so do to the employee mistakenly believing items already (from the day before?) in your bag were store property?

OR, as your accounting of events is told, were you not acting in good faith as a typical shopper, rather, as some kind of social situation tester?

A. What REASONABLE explanation would you have for carrying unverifiable NEW merchandise INTO a store?

B. Why were you pressing so hard to be detained over the issue?

C. You were suspected of a crime, not denyed equal access, much less suffer measureable dollar amount damages from lost wages, negligent parties, etc... sorry.

D. At the least, if you did file a lawsuit (as anyone can, about any grievance) you would be at a determined percentage liable yourself for carrying in new goods without a receipt. As a matter of legal fact, if YOU had a receipt for the goods you carried into the store, you would not be in the predicament at all...

E. Discriminatory lawsuits with basis can prove that access or service was denyed or delayed for no other reason.

F. Store staff are BUSY and security has a very hard job. It is no wonder they are not amused by your "attempt" to showcase your new shopping bag. Again, regardless of your black femaleness, if you had a reciept, NONE of this would have occurred. Try this for an experiment. Do the exact same thing at another store, WITH a receipt.

PS. YOU may be sued for interferring with the employees as they try to monitor the store for real criminals. A dollar amount could be generated based on how many thefts may have occurred while you were occupying the staff. I doubt the employee was completely mistaken of what she or he saw. Did you purposely give an appearence of wrong doing so as to incite an inicident? Purposely means that at ANY given point, did you commit any act with the intent of creating suspicion on yourself?

Please understand that as long as you look for racism, you will always find it, because, you in the end, are the one actually discriminating against them. You chose the store and the area based solely on their race, did you not? How about instead of trying to promote racism and look foolish by carrying IN new items the store sells, without a receipt (or even checking the bag, again, what REASONABLE explanation do you have for walking around the store with a bag of new merchandise and no receipt when you could have had them mark the items or hold the whole bag?)

I hope you are prosperous in the future. I hope you are able to build wealth to the point you can risk it all to own and operate your own business. I hope though, it isn't public retail, as you will quickly find, there is an army of people (of ALL races) that prey on businesses for phony lawsuits, from the rather silly incident you incited (would have been over in about 10 secs if you had the receipt) to slips and falls costing hundreds of thousands. I would gather that they have video too showing you acting suspiciously (even though you knew it was on purpose, they didn't)

Go volunteer at an old folks home, they miss all of us...

[CarmenLora]

Woah, wait a minute Mr. 2 Posts Man (who JUST registered).

As your post may be littered with some legal facts - to answer your post, I was not looking to start ANY KIND OF trouble at the store. Again, this is a local neighborhood shop. Unlike middle America, New Yorkers actually walk (OMG) around to different stores to get different items sans car. Whole Foods and Trader Joe's are downtown (for example), local mom and pops uptown. All Uptowners and Brooklynites go downtown for good cuts of meat, cheese, wine etc, and go back home for the little things like rice or bread. It's an everyday thing. Therefore, one stop Targets and Kmarts are not our retail gods.

As I mentioned before, the items were purchased the day before when I slept over my partners home. I got on the train to hop back to my place the next day and stopped by the local store to get bleach. Wasn't showing off my bag to the staff, just explaining a situation that is common in larger cities. And who honestly keeps their receipts for household items from the day before? Since we don't suffer from OCD, yes the receipt was chucked into the recycling bin in the building on our way in.

I wanted to be detained to avoid interrogation in a public place. As someone who DID NOT STEAL THE ITEMS, it's an awkward situation to comply with security on all accounts and be publicly bullied. And perhaps I did not make this into a clear sentence before but hear goes, I DID NOT STEAL THE ITEMS.

The last thing I want is paycheck. In what rational world could anyone want to profit from a situation like this? I would like better loss prevention standards at the store. And no, they have not offered a settlement. Just empty words and a promise to follow-up. Still haven't heard back from them.

"The whole person of color thing" is a pattern for this store according to my peers. And in many other neighborhoods in large cities dealing with the pressures of gentrification. In general, it may seem like a "thing" now, but as class becomes a bigger issue here in the states, expect to see more suits coming up in the next few years that address race as a class discrimination (e.g. Rent see: NY State vs. Alan Sackman or Columbia University expansion lawsuits in Harlem. Discrimination see: RENT campaign in Miami, Crime Rate see: 2001 Cincinnati riots, New Orleans Post-Katrina renovations, "Attempts by some newer residents to clean up crime and drug dealing sometimes cross an invisible line separating these destructive activities from the regular doings of a dynamic urban neighborhood." -New Orleans City Business 2002).

To sum up and hopefully end this thread before it gets out of hand, I will seek physical NY state legal counsel for just that: counsel. Not for a lawsuit and a greedy wallet. And maybe become a cop, to work on the other side of the law and help differentiate real crime from the suspected ones.

Thank you all for your help.

[cyjeff]

You plan on race becoming a bigger issue in the days to come?

You are not in the majority there. Most companies, especially those that directly interface with the public, have made SURE their policies are gender and race neutral. Race, I hope for us as a civilized culture, has become less and less relevant in our day to day interactions with both business and each other.

Some have gone too far, IMHO (It really is okay to wish people a Merry Christmas), but that actually erodes your case.

While I don't doubt you have talked to your friends about this particular store, that does probably not approach the legal standard of precedence.

Just saying that "everyone know this" is not enough without proof.

And they DID offer a settlement.. you just considered it a "bluff"...

I spoke to a legal representative for the company and they offered a gift certificate for the confiscated items and stated they would follow-through on my issue regarding detention, video surveillance and staff cooperation in customer complaints. I considered the call a bluff, thus I requested advice from the forum.

Good luck with your case.

[Advocateless]

Hey Carmen,

Please don't take blunt and honestly given opinions personally. We have never met. Yes, I have only made a couple of posts.

I indeed, like yourself, became a little irritated with the answers I got to a scenario I posted, going so far as to write a reply to one would be answerer that makes your reply to mine look like a nursery rhyme for nap time. I quickly removed my reply to his answer, hoping no one would see how upset I was that he was pointing out facts and probabilities I knew existed, but refused to acknowledege, instead, I threw a few choice "smart ass white boy" verbal shots at him for which I regretted, and therefore removed my reply post. After all, I had ASKED for any and all advice.

In turn please forgive me if my reply to your scenario about the false accusations of shoplifting possibly motivated by race, was taken by you in a similar way. I think the injection of race into the scenario hit a nerve with me and from the looks of other replies, I was not alone.

Plain and simple, you and I both know that everyday, a lot of people are treated differently because of their race.

Let me share with you a prime example of a real scenario that would result in a real lawsuit. I witnessed this, and was a innocent party to the following:

At about 12:40 am, in a town of 45,000 roughly 65% white and 30% black, and 5% hispanic or other, located less than 45 minutes south of downtown Atlanta, I pulled up to the only gas station still open on this early Tuesday morning. I flipped up the handle, picked my grade, waived to the attendant, saw the pump come to life, and pumped my gas. I went inside to get some snacks. While inside, two black males pulled up to the next pump behind my truck, their headlights pointing at my tailgate. The Indian clerk refused to turn on the pump unless they came inside and payed first. One of the men came into the store. With a smile on his face the whoe time and never losing his cool, he asked the clerk to explain why, despite the lack of a "pay first" sign on his pump, close to the entrance, and other pumps having pay first signs so as to be expected at those pumps only, was he being made to pay first?

The clerk became agitated and began threatening to call the police if the black male continued to "make a scene." Although obviously blue collar, the customer was by no means at all a "thug" or the such, just a couple of guys getting of work, filling up now instead of the morning.

Keep in mind Carmen, that with racial discrimination suits, the plaintiff does NOT have to prove they actually suffered any kind of damages or distress. All they have to prove is they were treated differently solely based on their skin color. Denny's Resteraunt found this out the hardway, defending with the fact that the Plaintiffs suffered no damages by the seating arrangements, had not been denied service, nor had the black customers been mistreated at a personal level so as to suffer humiliation (racial slurs, rudely spoken to, etc...)

Back to my scenario.

A. Because I had been the white "control" subject, it is demonstrated that this store will indeed turn on the pump for a customer at 12:40 am on Tuesday morning without having to pay first.

B. The clerk minutes later refused to do the same for the two black men. THIS IN ITSELF PROVES NOTHING. However, Carmen, I will bet you are highly intelligent and you know what has to be shown at the one store.

C. A Pattern Of Discrimination. In previous cases it was shown that Denny's (as well as Cracker Barrel, I think) "often" and "routinely" segragated their dining rooms. Even if there was no memo, no plan, no conspiracy, the fact that it was happening over and over made it obvious and therefore "self-evident." Here lies the difference I was trying to make in my reply to your scenario: your event was NOT self evident. Your event would not have occurred at all if you had taken reasonable and performed common actions upon entering the store with merchandise in a shopping bag REGARDLESS of the color of your skin.

Whereas at the gas station, you can show a pattern of discrimination by having white participants and black participants arrive at similar times to the same two pumps, late at night/early morning and establish a pattern of racial discrimination. Keep in mind though, ANY pattern breaker will kill your ability to prove, well, a pattern:

1. Between 11:00 pm and 2:00 am, Monday thru Thursday, well dressed african american women in late model vehicles were just as likely to have the pump turned on as well dressed white females in late model cars. No negative Pattern

2. Between the same days and hours, white males, poorly dressed, in older vehicles were denied having the pump come on first at a equal or closely similar rate as African american males, poorly dressed, in older vehicles did. Althought it is a negative pattern, it is not discriminatory as the law currently reads.

3. Between the same days and hours all customers regardless of apparent economic status, that were white, had the pump turned on first 58 times out of 100 purchases at the same two pumps (58%) while African Americans, regardless of apparent economic status had the pump turned on first 16 times out of 100 purchases (16%). BINGO. Here you have shown a clear pattern with a wide difference in the number of african americans who were singled out due to race and must come in, stand in line, and pay the clerk (ask the clerk's economic permission) before being allowed to use the services of the gas station. Based on the data that Carmen, her long list of black friends, and her long list of white friends, all helped gather together plainly shows, the company will have a very difficult time defending again the suit, but ONLY if you and your friends did the social test as a way to spot real racism. If the Judge believes for one second that the test was contrived because you don't like Indian clerks in this area of the city because they were always accusing black shoppers of something... you have ulterior motive for the charges you are leveling... do you understand what I am trying to teach you here. If you go making charges at Indian clerks because they are Indian and you want to get back at them for whatever... YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN CORRUPT BILLYBOB... falsely accusing someone based on the group YOU have put them in as a way to humiliate or retaliate against the group.

True cases of discrimination that are made with pure intent, proved with unimpuneable evidence, and reddressed with the intent to admonish and then educate and inform those who may not even be aware they are discriminating; these charges that can change not just a society, but an entire species of intelligent beings so as to take us all one closer step toward the divine, these Cases for justice all are in constant danger of being drowned in a dark swirling pit of bickering, spite and respite, mistrust, and distrust fueled by the need for one individual who is wrong but unable to admit it for fear of looking foolish to their peers, that one would rather fool his peers with ommissions of his own faults in the matter so as to have his peers now be as foolish as he, but justified in their minds too, because they made similiar foolish choices, they refuse to admit to that, and here is a group that won't make them admit to it, rather, just the opposite, the group will relish in the poor choices to justify their past crimes agains the people directly around them, in the end, making themselves and their peers all look like fools, and all will refuse to admit it, and how dare anyone or any other group calll them fools.

The experiences of one wrong individual who will taint their intent and story by ommitting or not acknowledging their own fault in the matter are by definition unreasonable. In fooling their peers to their position, a group beyond reason is created. A group so entrenched in their own belief, even when the belief is so obviously flawed they hate to admit is well, a hate group.

Alot of white folks are seeing a trend where in urban areas, its "cool" to hate white people. For whatever reason. Entire articles in hip hop magazines are about how someone was the victim of white man laws or white man politics, or white man economics, yet the person in the article never admits that their own choices, behavior and the treatment of the people directly around them was in any way resposible for their hardships, much less the major factor. No, its easier to pick a target that the person thinks he can get a lot of his peers to all hate (whitey) rather than admit its his own damn fault he put himself exactly where he finds himself. The fact that now this attitude is being glorified and that the poor choices, behavior, and treatment of those closest to one is touted for entertainment as "how ya do it" makes entire segments of society their own worst enemy, and unable to lose enough pride to realize it.

As a real smart white kid thatwhile in school, was forced to constantly act dumb for fear of being singled out by the redneck bullies in the hallways as not being country enough, I can only imagine, and pray for the real smart black kid who is forced act dumb for fear of being singled out as not black enough by the self appointed color police in the hallways, telling him that he better start actin black (ironicly, the smart, intelligent, well spoken black kid IS black, he's not acting. Who really is acting? Who really is trying to act out behaviors and incidences they see in the videos and hear on the radio. They are the ones "acting" foolish... smart black kid, IS the smart black kid.

A mind is not a terrible thing to waste.














A mind is THE most terrible thing to waste.



Friends, Carmen?

[donnabert]

[QUOTE=CarmenLora;209306]According to the statutes posted in this thread, pretty much any personnel that a business hires under the guise to protect the business have the same rights as police. So, the accusation by the deli manager alone appears to be sufficient evidence. Had I declined to have them search my bags, little ole' recycling bag hipster would have been tackled by the supermarkets fake security linebackers as I attempted to leave.

QUOTE]

I don't believe that is true at all. In 1986 I was with a friend at a grocery store when she was surrounded by bag boys when we left the store. They accused her of shoplifting and said she had to back in the store with them. She didn't steal anything and walked up to the closest bag boy and kicked him in the nuts. The police were called by the store and the cops found us a few blocks away and took us back to the store. They found nothing on my friend or I and they told the store that since she believed she was being unlawfully restrained (and she was) that she had the right to use enough force to make sure that didn't happen. We walked.