Left The Store Without Merchandise And Refused To Be Detained

[Putz]

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Arizona

My husband and I were stopped on our way out of Walmart when the alarm went off, and we did not have our receipt. The assistant manager came and we said a few things to try and get out of there, and we left the store without the merchandise. At that point they hadn't told us we couldn't leave, just that we had to leave the cart.

The assistant manager came out to the parking lot after we had gotten to our car and asked for our I.D. - We refused and she told us we had to come back in and we refused. We got in the car, and she stood behind our car, but my husband began slowly backing out, careful not to run her down and let her know that we were leaving.

She banged on the rear of our car, and ripped our temporary tags off of our car. We proceeded to leave the parking lot and on our way out there were about 20 or 25 employees attempting to make some sort of human wall to stop us. Again, we didn't hit anyone, but we went through their wall. Employees were coming at us from all differant angles and it looked like some scene from the night of the living dead or something - one woman was litterally running and jumping in front of our car and we went around.

We've never been charged with any crime of any kind before, and were so incredibly panicked, and with all those people rushing our car, I have never been so frightened in my life. We didn't peel off or drive recklessly or hurt anyone - but we did leave.

We have been searching the internet for some sort of information about what happens when you flee the scene like that but have come up empty handed. We've been half expecting the police to show up at our home at any time, but all has been quiet so far (This incident happened about 4 hours prior to this typing).

I presume the police will be able to get our address from the temp tags the woman tore off of our car - so, what happens now? It's my name on the car - my husband was the one driving when we left though.

My husband and I have been discussing that we won't say anything to the police and ask for a court appointed attorney if/when anything does happen - Is it even reasonable to think that will be an option?

Thanks in advance for your answers and/or advise.

[BOR]

First, ripping your temp tags off is a CRIME. IF the police come after you, you merely reciprocate against the jerk employee and file charges against him or her.

I would do this anyway, they want to play hard ball, hit em hard. You are probably obligated to report the theft of tags regardless of what happened, as they need to be replaced.

Blocking your car is a crime also. No one is permitted to disrupt the flow of traffic.

Mob action against you is tortious. They want to play hardball, tell them an attorney will be consulted. I can imagine your fear, thinking you may literally be beaten.

Generally there are torts of fear and fright, such as "PRE impact fear" when a crash is about to occur and you loose your mind.

I knew if I were surrounded by such, I KNOW I would panic to a great degree thinking I will be beaten if got a hold of.

Unlawful restraint/unlawful imprisonment are two options. Thinking you may be mobbed is IMO, assault by action, and depending what they said, by words.

As far as "fleeing the scene", I would not worry about that. NO person is legally required to remain "stationary" when threatened with violence or the fear of, you did NOTHING wrong, especially in light that they followed you out of the store.

Bottom line, following you out and and doing what Wal-Mart's agents did is absolutely ripe for review by a law firm.

If you can, nail em!!

[cyjeff]

I agree that it was illegal to rip your plate off.

However, the owner of a private parking lot may block egress however they wish.

This was not traffic. It was a felon fleeing the scene of a crime.

[BOR]

However, the owner of a private parking lot may block egress however they wish.

Not true!!

This was not traffic.

Sure it was, you can NOT impede the flow of vehicular movement on property that is open to such business invitees.

It was a felon fleeing the scene of a crime.

"Alledged criminal" # 1, and no one said it rose to the level of felony #2.

As I said, no one is required to stay at the scene of a crime or any other event when they feel they will be possibly harmed, especially by mob action, period.

If they were beaten, would you be the first to say they should have gotten the heck out of there instead of staying??

[jk]

I agree that it was illegal to rip your plate off.

However, the owner of a private parking lot may block egress however they wish.

This was not traffic. It was a felon fleeing the scene of a crime.

really now. How about false imprisonment? I don;t care if they own the lot or not, if the prevent you from leaving, they are committing a crime, and not a civil violation either but an actual criminal action.

IF they are suscpect of a crime, it may change the allowed actions but your statement did not seem to take any actual situation into account but was merely a blanket statement.

and to the "it was a felon fleeing the scene of a crime"

FELON!! where do you get this?

the problem with all of this is: was the OP stealing? If not, why would they leave the cart of merchandise they paid for? If they were stealing, the next step is what actions are employees allowed to take to prevent a suspect from fleeing the scene?

I would strongly suggest the actions taken were WAY beyond what is allowed. Google seems to be having some problems and I am too lazy to use other search engines I am not familiar with so maybe somebody else will relay the info needed to make the call.

[BOR]

I agree with you jk, even if they were shoplifting, that is a crime, okay, a merchant has to follow the law in such situations, surrounding a car and frightening the heck out of a person is NOT within the law.

[aaron]

I would put the odds of the police charging a store employee for ripping off the temporary tag of a fleeing shoplifter at about 0.1%, +/- 0.1%. Backing a car at somebody who is lawfully trying to detain you under state laws permitting detention of shoplifters can be construed as felonious assault, even if they get out of the way. False imprisonment? Dream on.

A. A person commits shoplifting if, while in an establishment in which merchandise is displayed for sale, the person knowingly obtains such goods of another with the intent to deprive that person of such goods by:

1. Removing any of the goods from the immediate display or from any other place within the establishment without paying the purchase price; or

2. Charging the purchase price of the goods to a fictitious person or any person without that person's authority; or

3. Paying less than the purchase price of the goods by some trick or artifice such as altering, removing, substituting or otherwise disfiguring any label, price tag or marking; or

4. Transferring the goods from one container to another; or

5. Concealment.

B. A person is presumed to have the necessary culpable mental state pursuant to subsection A of this section if the person does either of the following:

1. Knowingly conceals on himself or another person unpurchased merchandise of any mercantile establishment while within the mercantile establishment.

2. Uses an artifice, instrument, container, device or other article to facilitate the shoplifting.

C. A merchant, or a merchant's agent or employee, with reasonable cause, may detain on the premises in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable time any person who is suspected of shoplifting as prescribed in subsection A of this section for questioning or summoning a law enforcement officer.

D. Reasonable cause is a defense to a civil or criminal action against a peace officer, a merchant or an agent or employee of the merchant for false arrest, false or unlawful imprisonment or wrongful detention.

E. If a minor engages in conduct that violates subsection A of this section, notwithstanding the fact that the minor may not be held responsible because of the person's minority, any merchant who is injured by the shoplifting of the minor may bring a civil action against the parent or legal guardian of the minor under either section 12-661 or 12-692.

F. Any merchant who is injured by the shoplifting of an adult or emancipated minor in violation of subsection A of this section may bring a civil action against the adult or emancipated minor pursuant to section 12-691.

G. In imposing sentence on a person who is convicted of violating this section, the court may require any person to perform public services designated by the court in addition to or in lieu of any fine that the court might impose.

H. Shoplifting property with a value of two thousand dollars or more, shoplifting property during any continuing criminal episode or shoplifting property if done to promote, further or assist any criminal street gang or criminal syndicate is a class 5 felony. Shoplifting property with a value of one thousand dollars or more but less than two thousand dollars is a class 6 felony. Shoplifting property valued at less than one thousand dollars is a class 1 misdemeanor, unless the property is a firearm in which case the shoplifting is a class 6 felony. For the purposes of this subsection, "continuing criminal episode" means theft of property with a value of one thousand five hundred dollars or more if committed during at least three separate incidences within a period of ninety consecutive days with the intent to resell the merchandise.

I. A person who commits shoplifting and who has previously committed or been convicted within the past five years of two or more offenses involving burglary, shoplifting, robbery or theft is guilty of a class 4 felony.

[jk]

You missed my point Aaron. cyjeff did not specify his "it's ok to prevent somebody from leaving your property" to the situation at hand. That is why I said he seemed to be applying it as a blanket statement.

If cyjeff's statemant of :

However, the owner of a private parking lot may block egress however they wish.

is not intended specifically towards a theft prevention situation, I see no reason unlawful imprisonment would not be applicable.

13-1303. Unlawful imprisonment; classification
A. A person commits unlawful imprisonment by knowingly restraining another person.
B. In any prosecution for unlawful imprisonment, it is a defense that:
1. The restraint was accomplished by a peace officer acting in good faith in the lawful performance of his duty; or
2. The defendant is a relative of the person restrained and the defendant's sole intent is to assume lawful custody of that person and the restraint was accomplished without physical injury.
C. Unlawful imprisonment is a class 6 felony unless the victim is released voluntarily by the defendant without physical injury in a safe place prior to arrest in which case it is a class 1 misdemeanor.

Please take note I did state that additional info (as I suggested it could have been shoplifting as well by questioning the leaving of a cart of merchandise) was needed to determine what, if anything was applicable and allowable.

and from your citatiion:

C. A merchant, or a merchant's agent or employee, with reasonable cause, may detain on the premises in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable time any person who is suspected of shoplifting as prescribed in subsection A of this section for questioning or summoning a law enforcement officer.

reasonable is not a defined limit. Would you think standing in front of a vehicle by a group of employees resaonable in this situation? (serious question) As well, this action:

She banged on the rear of our car,

Does not seem a reasonable action. I think it a bit immature and foolish actually. If a shoplifter had gone this far, I would suggest that taking of the plate and then getting the hell out of the way as the limit of reasonable.


and to cyjeff's claim of an escaping felon:

Shoplifting property with a value of one thousand dollars or more but less than two thousand dollars is a class 6 felony. Shoplifting property valued at less than one thousand dollars is a class 1 misdemeanor

It may very well have been to a felonious level but I believe the statement was a bit, shall we say, an excited utterance.

[cyjeff]

really now. How about false imprisonment?

So, when a paid parking lot puts down a gate to prevent you from leaving until you pay the fee it is false imprisonment?

IF they are suscpect of a crime, it may change the allowed actions but your statement did not seem to take any actual situation into account but was merely a blanket statement.

You can read into it what you want. I was answering the question.

and to the "it was a felon fleeing the scene of a crime"

FELON!! where do you get this?

The moment the car was placed in motion forcing pedestrians to get out of the way, it was felonious assault and, possibly, assault with a deadly weapon.

Pedestrians always have the right of way... even if it inconveniences the driver.

the problem with all of this is: was the OP stealing? If not, why would they leave the cart of merchandise they paid for? If they were stealing, the next step is what actions are employees allowed to take to prevent a suspect from fleeing the scene?

You noticed that they didn't say, didn't you.

No one leaves behind paid merchandise and then plays "Butch and Sundance" to get out of the lot.

Not to mention the amount of time it would take to arrange the whole "human chain" thing.

I would strongly suggest the actions taken were WAY beyond what is allowed. Google seems to be having some problems and I am too lazy to use other search engines I am not familiar with so maybe somebody else will relay the info needed to make the call.

That is for a court to decide.

[cyjeff]

You missed my point Aaron. cyjeff did not specify his "it's ok to prevent somebody from leaving your property" to the situation at hand. That is why I said he seemed to be applying it as a blanket statement.

If cyjeff's statemant of : is not intended specifically towards a theft prevention situation, I see no reason unlawful imprisonment would not be applicable.

No crime need be committed.

If I own a parking lot, I can change the traffic flow via paint and/or signs at any time I wish, right?

Could I, theoretically, close down a particular exit to the parking lot with barrells or signs if I thought it prudent?

Of course I could.

The whole "human chain" thing bothers me. That would mean cleaning out the store personnel and then having them move to the exit.

However, the proper response would have been for the driver to call the police.... not to play "chicken" with the pedestrians and hope they got out of the way.