var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
Gokuhouse
June 26, 2009 7:03 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

He wasn't fired? Or did I miss that part? There is no way this loose cannon with a gun and badge should be allowed any authority over the public.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
GMFish
June 26, 2009 8:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Gokuhouse:\"There is no way this loose cannon with a gun and badge should be allowed any authority over the public.\"

So, this your first day in the US?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Gokuhouse
June 26, 2009 8:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@GMFish: I'm not quite sure what you mean by that? Are you saying this is all too common and I should be used to it by now?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
July 6, 2009 8:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Gokuhouse: Basically, there is nothing citizens can do about it because time and time again we are met with \"well that's just our policy\" from the police force when it involves police brutality. It seems these days that the answer to police brutality is to rename it to policy and thus the system continues to protect crooked cops.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Josh Saint Jacque
June 26, 2009 9:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Gokuhouse:

Unfortunately adequate discipline of police brutality is short coming throughout the US. There is no way this officer should not be serving jail time, at least 30-90 days IMO, and should - without question - lose his job. Unfortunately having a badge in this country means you can do wrong, whether it be kicking a man in the face when he's on the ground, throwing a law-abiding citizen into a wall with such force as to through him into a coma, or this incident at Wal-Mart.

He should be prosecuted, after all, if you or I did this we would be.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
morlo
June 27, 2009 12:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Josh Saint Jacque: He wasn't on duty, so this wasn't a case of brutality. The greeter was out of line when he laid his hand on the cop. All the cop did was push him--not his fault that guy was a weakling who thought his job would give him physical power. Now if the cop turned around and shot him 15 times, it would have been excessive. Two in the chest, one in the head is enough for a receipt checker.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Leksi Wit
June 27, 2009 2:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@morlo: Are you out of your freaking mind? This is a 71 year old, 5'4 man with a hearing aide who who coworkers describe as a \"gentle soul.\" This detective should be severely reprimanded as a public menace!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
christoj879
June 27, 2009 3:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@morlo: You give those that support the second amendment a bad name, and I am ashamed that you are a fellow human.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
layton59
June 27, 2009 3:27 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@morlo: Poster morlo, the cop also pushed a customer coming to the greeter's aid through a glass door. This cop gives all cops a bad name. He should have been fired and then sued until HE CRAPPED HIS PANTS. I support law enforcement, just not bad cops and their shopping buddies. I doubt you would be so cavalier if it happened to you, but I am hopeful.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
killest
June 27, 2009 3:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@morlo:
You must be a cop.
Just like cops to stick up for each other.
If I, a private citizen were to shove someone to the ground so hard for being touched on the shoulder, I would be serving jailtime for domestic violence, Aggravated assault.

If, as you say, he was off duty, he should be charged as a citizen.

if he brandished his weapon, or performed these actions as \"an officer\" then I would consider that unauthorized use of privilege.
he should spend time in jail, should be dishonorably discharged, and have to wear a large hat that says: \"I'm a violent man\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
morlo
June 27, 2009 5:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@killest: I'm not a cop, I'm a consumerist, who hates receipt checkers and other retail drones who act heroically to fulfill their slave-wage jobs. Usually it's the cops who force you with guns to comply with stupid policies and repressive measures, so I tend to support this cop, though I'm sure if I pushed the old guy that same cop would show up and taser me into submission. And then club me to stop the twitching.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
June 27, 2009 5:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@morlo: You don't often pause to parse out the ethics of a given situation, do you? Your comment is riddled with so many contradictions that I'm surprised a black hole didn't appear to suck the letters you typed into the whirling, black universe of Fail.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
6502programmer
June 26, 2009 8:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Gokuhouse: That was my question too. Apparently, the answer is oh hell no. He was suspended for 28 days, will be retrained in use of force, needs to take anger management and verbal judo courses, and is moving from the detective to the patrol division.

My guess is that with his rank, and his age (he has a 27 year old son who was charged in February with vandalism and theft [fruit, tree, insert analogy here]), he's being given a desk job to wait out the next few years until he is eligible for his pension, then he becomes Private Citizen Asshat, instead of Officer Asshat.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
chattanooga
June 26, 2009 7:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Welcome to the South. UGH.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
Stannous Flouride
June 26, 2009 10:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chattanooga:
An SF Bay Area cop got transferred to desk duty for allegedly falling asleep (no breathalyzer) and KILLING two people.

The kind of crap is by no means limited to the South.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
HiPwr
June 26, 2009 8:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chattanooga: If he were a Chicago cop, the greeter would probably have ended up in jail.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Adhominem
June 26, 2009 10:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HiPwr:

\"If he were a Chicago cop, the greeter would probably have ended up in jail.\"

LOL Amen to that. I don't call the police for anything here if I can find ANY way to resolve something w/o their assistance.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
LadySiren is murdering her kids with HFCS and processed cheese
June 26, 2009 8:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chattanooga: If you don't like it here, why not move? Nobody is forcing you to stay and actually, we'd probably prefer it if you went.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
nuton2wheels
June 27, 2009 2:02 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LadySiren: Remind me to burn a kerosene soaked cross in your front yard while running around with a pillowcase over my head. Is your mother your sister too?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Ben Deming
June 28, 2009 5:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nuton2wheels: That's ridiculous. Are you saying that Southerners are inbred racists? Come on. Act like an adult.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
winshape
June 26, 2009 7:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chattanooga: Because this NEVER happens in anywhere else except for the South? STFU.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ptkdude
June 26, 2009 7:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why did this have to get violent? As long as you don't ignore the receipt checkers they'll usually let you go. My standard policy is when they say they need to see my receipt, I respond \"good for you\" and keep walking. One woman did chase me out the door at Wal-Mart insisting she see my receipt. When I advised her that if she thought I stole something she needed to call Atlanta police and they would straighten it out, she gave up.

Reply
13 replies
\"user-pic\"
Mari Walker
June 27, 2009 6:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude: There's no need to make things harder on greeters. Their supervisors TELL them to check your receipt, and they really don't get paid enough to put up with crap like this. After I covered a greeter's break and got SCREAMED AT because I asked a customer for his receipt, I always have mine ready. Is it really that big a deal to fish your receipt out? Pick your battles.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
oneliketadow
June 26, 2009 9:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude: I usually just say \"no thanks\" and keep walking. I've never had an issue.

Question for the \"Why not\" folks. Do you give your phone number out at Radio Shack, Michaels, et al? I just say \"no thanks\" to that one too. I assume that all your original logic still applies in the case of handing our your phone number.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
winshape
June 26, 2009 9:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@oneliketadow: In those cases I have a standard fake phone number to give them. The phone number is for ease of looking up purchases in case you don't have a receipt.

Regardless, that's a different scenario. Your phone number is a personal bit of information that can identify you. A receipt is a timestamped list of items you purchased with no identifying info (other than maybe the last 4 digits of the card you used).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Galactica
June 26, 2009 9:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: I do the fake phone number thing too. I actually do it for a variety of things. Why does Radio Shack need my number??

Reply
\"user-pic\"
winshape
June 26, 2009 9:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Galactica: They say it is for looking up the items you bought in case you need to return them in the future. Since I probably spend a max of $3 at any time for random pieces of electrical junk, it's not worth the gas to drive out and return something.

Either that, or they use the phone number scheme to catch you off guard while they swipe your DNA from the electric card swiper so that the gov't can keep track of how many CAT5 connectors you are buying. Because only terrorists make their own cables.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BertMask
June 26, 2009 11:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: You can argue all you want. That will not change the law. Refusal to show a receipt is perfectly legal, and is not just cause to detain someone.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
June 26, 2009 8:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude:

It had to get violent because the perp is a douchebag cop that thinks he's above the law no matter what he does.
He should be fired, but we don't do that to criminal cops. They get desk jobs instead.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
crymson777
June 26, 2009 8:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude: There is a much happier way to handle it and it always works for me. Simply say, \"Have a nice day!\" and keep walking.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
June 26, 2009 7:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude:

See, why do people have to make the jobs of others harder. You think she WANTS to check your receipt? Do you think phone operators WANT to call you at 5pm during your dinner? They are just doing their jobs, just like you. What do you think her supervisor will say to her if she just let everyone walk on past without checking their receipts, despite his order to check every single one?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bairdwallace
June 26, 2009 8:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Saboth: While I agree that its easier and more civil to show the receipt, that's a place you have frequent. Calling my phone around dinner time is an infuriating sales tactic, and while I'm never abusive, I don't really have a problem with other people yelling at them. Their jobs have no worth, and maybe these sales people will find enough dignity to quit.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
June 26, 2009 8:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bairdwallace:

Their jobs have no worth, and maybe these sales people will find enough dignity to quit.

That's the most ignorant thing I've read all day. You'd probably be surprised to know that some people's pride isn't above supporting themselves and their families.
Reply
\"user-pic\"
winshape
June 26, 2009 8:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: Agreed. If it comes down to feeding my family or keeping my pride, hand me the phone list.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ptkdude
June 26, 2009 8:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Quite frankly, that's a matter between him and his manager.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
winstonthorne
June 26, 2009 7:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude: I will only refuse to show a receipt when I don't have time (i.e. I'm rushing to work with donuts or candy for my team). Otherwise, I comply with the greeters' request because hey, it's their job - while it may seem annoying and redundant to us, they're proud of it (at least enough to work there) and I don't want to be a self-important jerk who doesn't have the time to let an elderly or disabled person make their contribution to society.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
winshape
June 26, 2009 7:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude: Seriously? Would it kill you to show your receipt? They usually only ask if you have stuff that doesn't fit into a plastic bag, like electronics. They aren't singling you out specifically as being a shoplifter - you show the receipt, they pretend to glance at it and you keep walking.

If you don't like the policy, shop somewhere else. Being an ass about it just makes you look like an ass.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
katstermonster
June 26, 2009 8:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: Seriously? Would it kill WalMart to obey the law? They have no legal right to demand a receipt, except at places like Sam's, Costco, etc., where it's a requirement for membership.

As a side note, I generally show them the receipt, given that I have time and it's easily accessible. If not, I'm polite but firm in informing them that I don't have to show the receipt. Why should I be punished because WalMart purposely trains employees to do something illegal?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
secret_curse
June 26, 2009 8:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@katstermonster: Like bairdwallace pointed out, it's not illegal to ask. Further, the store could make it policy to ban customers that don't show a receipt. Sure, the first time you shopped there they couldn't detain you if you didn't show the receipt, but they could ban and then have you arrested for tresspassing if you ever go back.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RandaPanda
June 26, 2009 9:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@secret_curse: I'm fairly positive that it is policy for the door greeters to ask for receipts if the alarm is sounded.


I'll have to ask my door-greeter grandfather when I get the chance.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Mari Walker
June 27, 2009 6:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RandaPanda: It is. There are also numbers from the receipt that you have to write down (which identifies the cashier and the register, probably so the CSM can get on them about deactivating things properly), as well as a number that the detector displays each time it goes off.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ktetch
June 27, 2009 4:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RandaPanda: In such a situation ,they have strong evidence that there may be the incidence of a theft. As such they're legally entitled to detain you, as thye've had certain evidence. Now, you are perfectly within your rights to attempt to work out why it went off while you're being detained. But it's not required.


Legally, once that alarm goes off, they have grounds to detain you until the police arrive. However, if you have been offering to prove your innocence, and they refuse to listen, they might still be guilty of fale imprisonment.


Again, Walmarts *should* have a log book by the loops, and when the alarm goes off because a cashier has improperly deactivated it, its supposed to go in it (along with the number on the loop's counter) giving the cashier's ID and the product. That way they can tell if it's a problem deactivating it on that product, or if someones not bothering to deactivate the tags.


BTW, just because 'it's policy' doesn't mean it's legal, or they should do it. If he was told to punch anyone he thought might be shoplifting, saying 'it's store policy' won't shield him from that (they're both violatons of the law)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
June 27, 2009 4:48 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ktetch: So what steps should Wal-mart take to deter theft if the receipt checks are causing problems??

I mean I know they annoy some people but it seems to me a receipt check is a rather simple way of deterring at least some theft.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
winshape
June 26, 2009 8:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@katstermonster: What law are they breaking? You're under their roof, you're under their rules. They have every right to protect their merchandise from theft. It's not they are doing full-body cavity searches, they are asking to see your receipt. If you have a receipt that matches your product, then what's the deal?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jswilson64
June 27, 2009 2:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: Seriously? You really think they're protecting anything from theft by checking your receipt? They have no interest what's in your pockets, what's inside your coat, what you've got secreted in the custom fat suit you had tailored so you could stuff a Virginia ham inside your clothes, so they're NOT doing anything to prevent theft. Except by the most idiotic of thieves.

And something I read here on Consumerist: Just because something is store policy, doesn't make it law.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
slickdealer
June 26, 2009 11:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape:

It's not illegal to ask. However, they cannot demand it from you with threats, nor prevent you from leaving the building. Nor can they touch you in an attempt to stop you. Those actions are what would make it illegal.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Adhominem
June 26, 2009 10:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: I think the issue is once you've finished with the Point of Sale the property is yours and unless there is blatant evidence of theft there's no legal basis for needing to show your receipt.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 26, 2009 9:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

They have my money. I am in possession of my personal property. They have no right to an illegal search of my person, their house or not. Walking in to your home doesn't give you the right to search me, or look through my bags.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ktetch
June 26, 2009 9:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: Can they also go through yoru pockets? your wallet/purse?


It is your person and your property. If they believe you have stolen an items (watched you bypass checkouts, observed you consealing items, or other such suspicions, they can detain you, BUT THEM MUST HAVE CAUSE. else it's a false imprisonment suit.


At no time are they allowed to search you, or your bags. That is something only an LEO can do.


The exception is if they have a prior written agreement from you that gives their employees the ability to do a search (its in the membership terms of membership stores).


Checking your reciept, or your bags is legally defined as a search.


If anything, Lt. McPhereson could have arrested the greeter for that crime. The cop however acted beyond reasonable force, the first time. The second time was plain assault+battery, possibly criminal damage too. However, the store manager should be fired.


One of my local walmarts tried this on me. Unf. the wifes uncle works at their Little Rock HQ. quick complaint via head office and he was fired. They haven't asked me for my reciept again....

Reply
\"user-pic\"
oneliketadow
June 26, 2009 9:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: I often toss my receipt on the way to the door, especially if I just buy one or two things. Second, I might be in a hurry. Once I've paid for the items, they are mine and you have no right to inspect them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
winshape
June 26, 2009 9:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@oneliketadow: I agree, they don't. However, where's your proof that you did buy it? Why not just pick up an ipod and walk out? I'm sure they'll believe the \"I threw the receipt in the trash\" excuse.

Or just grab a Coke from the fridge and start drinking. Because, hey, you \"bought\" it from another store and don't have the receipt on you.

And who doesn't keep their receipt after buying crap from Wal-Mart?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
tmed
June 26, 2009 10:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: Point #1 is that the country is founded on the notion of not having to prove that you are following the law, that the law must prove that you did not.


It is legal to ask, but it is just as legal to refuse. Wal-mart (and others) have chosen to treat everyone as a criminal until proven otherwise. That should make you angry. Next up is the idea that someone not \"proving his innocence\" is clearly acting so suspicious he must be breaking the law.


Above the law, there are principles that founded the USA. Wal-Mart wraps itself in the flag as often as possible while finding little ways to step on the prinicples of the country it represents.


BTW, while they busily treat you like a criminal, they don't do it for a good reason. They don't stop much, because the bulk of shoplifters (by $$) have someone on the inside.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jswilson64
June 27, 2009 2:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tmed: Receipt checking does not equal treating a customer like a criminal. That would require checking all of your pockets and inside your clothing. Checking receipts treats every customer like you think they're an idiot.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
June 27, 2009 3:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jswilson64: Please explain this statement. I fail to see how Wal-mart has decided all of their customers idiots but insisting upon receipt checks in many cases.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jswilson64
June 27, 2009 9:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dragonfire81: Any thief with half a brain knows Wal-Mart only checks receipts and what's in your bags. Therefore, stuff whatever you want in your pockets; if Loss Prevention didn't see it, you walk. Any thief who doesn't realize this is an idiot. Ergo, checking receipts for all patrons implies the store thinks everyone who walks out the door is an idiot.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Mari Walker
June 27, 2009 6:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tmed: Trying to prevent crime, though, is not treating you like a criminal. Receipt checking is probably more of a deterrent than anything else, just like an associate's presence at the fitting rooms.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
outlulz
June 26, 2009 10:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

As someone who worked retail, I have no problem with the receipt checking policy. You wouldn't believe how many people would steal and/or switch price tags at even a non-profit secondhand store. Stores have the right to practice loss prevention. If you don't like their policy then stay the hell out their store.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Adhominem
June 26, 2009 10:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: I don't know where you're from, but in America we're innocent until proven guilty(mostly)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bairdwallace
June 26, 2009 8:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@katstermonster: Its not illegal to ask... I'm curious as to what the actual training manual says.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
R3PUBLIC0N
June 26, 2009 7:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape: You both have a point. On the one hand, you never have to be rude to another person; you always have a choice. On the other hand, you have no obligation to stop.

So if you choose not to stop, be polite about it. Making other people feel bad gets you nowhere.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
coan_net
June 26, 2009 7:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So is it OK for a greeter to touch a customer?

The person being a cop should have nothing to do with it. (it just add's unimportant information to the story)

If a greeter attacks me, and or touches me, am I not allowed to defend myself and push him away? (if he falls & poops himself, then he should not have touched me)

Reply
12 replies
\"user-pic\"
Mari Walker
June 27, 2009 6:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: The proper \"defense\" against an old man touching your shoulder is NOT to shove him down so hard that he loses consciousness. Him being a cop is scary, because someone with a badge and a gun is overreacting so badly. How is that not scary?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
chris_d
June 26, 2009 9:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net:
My response to this is don't feed the troll.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ChuckECheese
June 26, 2009 8:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: No, I don't think the fact that somebody touched your shoulder gives you the right to assault him or her. Touching is not assault. Throwing somebody to the floor is. So is throwing somebody through a glass door. It is probably not illegal for a WM greeter to touch a customer.

The person being a cop is very important to the story, as this person has a public trust to uphold. Assaulting people that annoy you means you're on a power trip, and cannot be trusted with the authority that public safety officers are given.

Good luck with that trolling.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
June 26, 2009 7:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net:

Knocking people 6 feet through the air or through plate glass doors is not a proper response to a tap on the shoulder. ESPECIALLY FROM A POLICE OFFICER.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Drew5764
June 26, 2009 7:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: The fact that he's a cop has everything to do with it - police are held to a higher standard than ordinary citizens when it comes to how they're dealt with. People curse at cops all the time - when they're caught responding in an inappropriate way (such as by throwing a punch or shove), they generally have harsher penalties than you or I would.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
thomamas
June 27, 2009 1:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Drew5764: What? When? The harshest penalty an officer can ever get is suspension with pay, unless maybe you kill more than one of your wives.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Hoss
June 26, 2009 7:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: If the old man spit in the officer's face, the appropriate response is to put the man under arrest, not spit back. That's how it works. As for the bystander -- it takes an incredible amount of force to break the kind of glass used for a Walmart door. And why didn't the old officer intervene?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
hi
June 26, 2009 7:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I've heard recently that there are a lot of corrupt Tennessee police, but I agree if someone/anyone touches you that you have the right to defend yourself. Especially after hearing other receipt horror stories where a person is kidnapped or detained for no reason. @coan_net:

Reply
\"user-pic\"
josephbloseph
June 26, 2009 7:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hi: You know, I don't think the police officer was in any sort of danger of being kidnapped and detained by the 71 year old greeter. And for future reference, you do *not* have the right to defend yourself with disproportionate violence if someone touches your shoulder. A touch to the shoulder doesn't stand up in court as something you need to defend yourself against.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
June 26, 2009 7:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: You're associating attack and touch - a frail old man touching you on the shoulder isn't an attack.

Him being a cop should have something to do with it - the man should be trained to handle situations without entering a physical altercation.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
shoelace414
June 26, 2009 7:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: If the greeter bumps into you it is not ok to pull out a firearm and kill him.

Lets talk proportional response.

If he puts his hand on your shoulder, it is not ok to shove him to the ground, but it probably would be ok to remove his hand from your shoulder, but I'd recommend against it. the better way to handle it would be saying \"Do not touch me\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coan_net
June 26, 2009 8:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shoelace414: If a greeter grabs my shoulder (not bumps me, not touches it, but grabs it), and it startles me into turning and possible resulting in the person that grabbed me in stumbling and falling backwards a few feet and pooping themselves - then they should not have grabbed me.

As for the next incident where he pushed another through a window, I have not read where if the that person started the physical confrontation with him or not, but again, responding in pushing someone away is a response that I would have also. (If they stumble and go through a glass windows - Opps, I guess they should not have grabbed me.)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ChuckECheese
June 26, 2009 9:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: You've twisted the story. The details have already been provided, and your interpretation does not follow the established facts. There are counseling, education and medication for people with violent impulses and lack of self-control and a tendency to manipulate facts and details to suit oneself. Civil societies have laws to protect themselves against people who think and behave as you do in this thread, for the reason that it is dangerous and disruptive. Such things are not to be supported, encouraged, or even excused.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
korybing
June 26, 2009 9:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ChuckECheese: I might be wrong, but I read the greeter's touching as more of an \"excuse me sir I don't know if you heard me so I am trying to get your attention\" sort of touch, not an \"assault\" in anyway. I wasn't there so I don't know for sure, but that's how I interpreted the description.

And that doesn't even matter. The guy was a cop, and like others have said, we hold cops to a higher standard than civilians (and in return we prosecute those who assault cops with harsher punishments than if they assaulted non-cops). Even if the greeter had hauled off and slugged the cop in the face, the appropriate response would have been an arrest and a charge of assault against an officer, not a punch back.

The story you're telling of the guy \"falling\" after he startled you is a complete perversion of what really happened. The man was shoved, he didn't get startled and fall backwards on accident.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ChuckECheese
June 27, 2009 12:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@korybing: You have confused me with coan_net, the person who wrote the post to which I responded. In fact I agree with you. Check the posts again.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
henneko
June 26, 2009 8:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: That's a lot of if's there. Good thing that when you walk into most wal-marts, you can see yourself on TV because the entire store is covered in surveillance cameras, which I am sure observed whether the people involved \"just happened\" to trip and fall.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
June 26, 2009 8:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net:

Well geez, I hope you don't go out very often, like to clubs. You must be constantly getting your ass handed to you/dragged out of there by your hair...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Parapraxis
June 26, 2009 8:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coan_net: thank god not everyone else in the world is always on SELF DEFENSE ALERT NINJA MODE.

thanks for making the world a safer place.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Scoobatz
June 26, 2009 7:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The 71-year old got $20,000 for pooping in his pants. That's awesome, but I question if that was a pre-existing problem or not. What about the guy who got thrown through the glass door?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Shoelace
June 26, 2009 8:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Scoobatz: The 71 year old guy got thrown 5-6 feet away, landed on the floor, briefly lost consciousness, and pooped in his pants. Then his supervisor, instead of sending the poor guy home, \"allowed him to change clothing and get a clean pair of underwear\".

I wonder if he had to pay for his new underwear.

I think the guy who got pushed through glass/door should be getting at least as much as the greeter, especially if he was really hurt.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
June 26, 2009 7:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Scoobatz:
I was wondering about that guy too. Seems like if pooping yourself and getting knocked down is 20k, going through plate glass is worth 40k.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Aladdyn
June 26, 2009 7:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Scoobatz: I think it needs to be clarified if they mean pushed through the GLASS of the door, as in stuntman, shatter the glass type meaning (probably unlikely) or through the glass DOOR as in he was pushed so hard that he hit the doors and the force caused the doors to open (im guessing this is what they mean).

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
H3ion
June 26, 2009 7:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

There was nothing in the article about whether either officer was disciplined, the one for committing a crime and the other for watching the crime being committed. Is there any further information on that? This type of conduct is unacceptable for anyone, much less for a police officer.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
bravo369
June 26, 2009 7:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@H3ion: I agree...the officer committing the assault should have been fired and the one that sat there and watched, if he didn't arrest the other officer, should be reprimanded and/or fired as well. just because he was a cop does no mean they should be able to do what they want. i bet if i did that and those cops were there, i probably would have been tasered, cuffed and dragged to jail.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
June 26, 2009 8:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bravo369:

No betting necessary. We all know that is exactly what would happen.
Until the public demands justice, there won't be any. They always protect their own...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
hi
June 26, 2009 7:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@H3ion: The guy grabbed him on the shoulder. You don't grab a stranger you don't know and expect nothing to happen.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
hi
June 26, 2009 7:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hi: I feel I must correct myself.


I wrote \"a stranger you don't know..\" when all strangers are people you don't know... i know i know

Reply
\"user-pic\"
korybing
June 26, 2009 9:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hi: The article said the greeter touched the man on the shoulder, not grabbed (unless I read that wrong...), and the officer went around the man deliberately, meaning that he saw the greeter and knew he was an old man. The most I would reasonably expect from touching a stranger (in order to get his attention, I would assume) would be a startled reaction and backing away from the touch, not a full on shove so hard it knocks an old man unconscious.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
JoeDirt
June 26, 2009 7:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Cops are out of control.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Galactica
June 26, 2009 9:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@JoeDirt: Yes,because a small percentage of them make mistakes (or on purposes, depending how you look at it) we should paint them with one brush.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
admiral_stabbin
June 26, 2009 8:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@JoeDirt: Most of them are not, but that one apparently was. Even if he was being attacked, the described situation does have a ring of excessive force to it.

I'm not trying to be an apologist for the officer. When your job is to determine the amount of force necessary to deal with situations, you'd think some better judgment would have been used.
Still, we're all human.

I hope he received significant discipline for this incident. I'm not saying he should lose his job, but that sounds like an excellent time to have him take 90-180 days of unpaid leave.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
JohnDeere
June 26, 2009 7:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

probably worth the 20K.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Galactica
June 26, 2009 9:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@JohnDeere: I would crap my pants right this second for $20k

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
coren
June 26, 2009 7:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What about the guy who went through the glass? Does he see some of that 20k?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
thomamas
June 27, 2009 1:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coren: He's probably still in prison on trumped up charges.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rectilinear Propagation
June 27, 2009 12:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coren: Hopefully there's a separate civil case for that.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
JoeDirt
June 26, 2009 7:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What are my rights at Wal Mart when someone wants to see my receipt? Can I say no and keep walking?

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
morlo
June 27, 2009 12:10 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@KLETCO: I would shove any strange old guy who grabbed me by the shoulder, especially if I had just rebuffed his verbal harassment. Actually if he was harassing me, I'd give him a good kick once he was down if he hadn't magically fallen into a coma. For a younger male I think I'd go with a throat punch. Oh, who am I kidding, I'd knee him in the balls.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
6502programmer
June 26, 2009 8:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@JoeDirt: Yes, you can. Their policy is to not physically restrain you, and if they do, you sue them. Now, many jurisdictions use the concept of \"Shopkeeper's Privilege\", which allows them to detain a suspected shoplifter until the real police show up. Still though, it's expensive to defend a civil suit, and due to the cost of litigation, nearly every retail store out there has a \"no touch\" policy.

This does not apply to Costco, Sam's Club, or any other place you signed a contract to shop at. Often, those establishments have contract language that you agree to a receipt inspection. They still won't detain you (probably), but you won't be able to collect if they do.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
newfenoix
June 27, 2009 4:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@6502programmer:
You are correct. My wife is a CSM at Wal Mart and their policy is that THEY CAN'T LAY A HAND ON YOU, nor can they step in front of you to block you. All they can do do is ask to see the receipt. If you refuse they can do nothing. If the security alarm goes off they can get management and LP. Wal Mart is changing their policy to prevent door greeters from evening asking to see your receipt. Law suits cost more than the theft that might occur.

The \"no touch\" is more than a policy in several states; it is the law including Wal Mart's home state of Arkansas.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
La Mareada
June 26, 2009 7:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Typical Wal-Mart employment practices:

Elderly greeter just attacked by customer, knocked unconscious, soiled himself?

\"Change your pants and get back to work!\"

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
coolteamblt
June 28, 2009 4:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@La Mareada: Yet another reason I liked working for Target. When I worked at Food Ave, someone turned on the popcorn maker, put in oil, but no popcorn. The timer went off and I went to dump the corn, and instead poured boiling oil on my hand. They sent me to the ER immediately and actually let me go early (I had put in my two weeks' notice the week before.) They paid me for my last week without me working, as well as the bills to fix the burns.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
HogwartsAlum
June 26, 2009 9:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@La Mareada:

I got hit in the face with a bucket of ice once when working in a cafeteria. I was hefting it up to pour into an ice machine and it slipped and the bottom edge hit me in the bridge of the nose and drew blood. They sent me to the hospital for X-rays right then and there.

That was one of my better food jobs.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
June 26, 2009 7:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@La Mareada:

Lol I thought that too. I've seen it many times in low wage jobs. I remember when a guy was hit over the head by a falling flourescent light, and touched his hand to his head and it came back covered in blood. I believe they were hesistant to send him home. (Roses dept. store).

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
LordofBacon
June 26, 2009 7:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Humm...for 20 grand I'd defiantly let myself be pushed through a glass door and poop my pants.

Any takers?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Drew5764
June 26, 2009 7:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LordofBacon: Not if I have to go back to work soon thereafter, no.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
LordofBacon
June 26, 2009 7:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Drew5764:

Umm...a negotiator. OK, i'll do it for 15 grand and a free pack of walmart underwear!

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Sheila Cook
June 26, 2009 7:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If the greeter signed up with your typical personal injury lawyer, that means said greeter walked away with $12,000, less expenses, for this incident.

Not a bad haul for going after a customer and physically touching them because they ignored your demands to produce a receipt.

Granted, the cop's violence wasn't justified, but you can knock me down and I'll shit my pants for $12,000 every day of the week.

Reply
1 replies
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
RobertW.TX
June 26, 2009 7:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have a couple friends that work for a city police department in Texas. We talked about this story back when it happened. Neither had any question in his mind if you did something like this, on duty or off, you would be terminated immediately. Their department really pushes the \"you will be held to a higher standard\" philosophy. I wish more police agencies would do the same.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
June 26, 2009 7:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

No discipline for the officer? Seriously?

Can't say I'm surprised, though. I've heard about many of the men and women in blue taking advantage of their positions to get away with things such as ignoring receipt-checkers in stores. In a town not far from here, the police routinely expect freebies from local businesses, e.g. free coffee at the donut shop, and businesses that don't comply get the short end of the stick if there's a problem (such as taking a couple hours to respond to a burglary call).

The police need to be respected, but by the same token they should conduct themselves in a way that earns that respect.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
aikimann
June 26, 2009 7:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PsiCop: While I do believe police should be held to a higher standard, \"ignoring receipt-checkers\" is not something you \"get away with\". Showing your receipt is merely a courtesy you can choose to extend to the receipt checker. You're under no obligation to do so, unless you're shopping at a place like Sams Club where you agree to it in the terms of your agreement as a member.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
June 27, 2009 2:46 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aikimann: I wasn't aware that pushing people through windows was an acceptable reaction to having been touched.

The detective should have been a grown-up in the first place, and showed his receipt when asked. There's nothing unusual about the request. For him to shove someone through a window over it shows he's far too childish to be armed.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 26, 2009 8:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aikimann: I doubt the issue is regarding the officer \"getting away with\" bypassing the reciept checker. the issue is with the response to the touch. A policer officer, more than anyone else should know the proper response to unwelcome physcial contact and be able to effect the proper response.

quite simply, the way it could have gone down with out a civil lawsuit is:

old man: I need to see your reciept.

officer : ...

old man : I need to see your reciept (shoulder touch/grab)

officer : you are under arrest for assault.

and the officer would have been in the right. there can be sever reprocussions for unwelcome physical contact that do not involve the use of physical force.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
aikimann
June 26, 2009 8:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aikimann: I read a few other stories and found out the officer did indeed set off the alarm when he walked out the door, so I retract my previous statement.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
lehrdude
June 26, 2009 9:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aikimann:


Doesn't the fact the the alarm went off give Wal-Mart more rights to see the receipt and/or merchandise in the bag? Couldn't it then be inferred that once the alarm goes off that there is some sort of \"probable cause\" (for lack of a better term) to scan the item/receipts?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
June 27, 2009 2:47 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@lehrdude: Probably, but most of the commenters here seem to think the police are immune to any kind of reasonable request. They get to shove people through windows when requests are made of them. I guess.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Hoss
June 26, 2009 7:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Assault on an elderly person where I'm from (Boston) is a felony of 3 to 5 years. This cop should have faced a jury

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
KLETCO
June 26, 2009 7:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Really? People are that offended by the fact that someone would touch you on the shoulder? REALLY? I can't believe that anyone would be saying the police officer's reaction was justified.

If you read the article, it states that store policy was that the greeter needed to ask for a receipt if the alarm went off, and it did with the officers. I think this is a rather unfair policy for the greeter, as they aren't exactly security guards. But still, I might not like the policies to see receipts, but if the alarm had gone off, I would show mine. And I certainly wouldn't push an old man (the article says he's 5'4\") on CHRISTMAS EVE (that was my favorite part).

Come on, that guy should be terminated.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Skaperen
June 26, 2009 9:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@KLETCO: Chattanooga PD has a ticking time bomb on the force. $20K was too little. If you live around the Chattanooga area, you should refuse to shop anywhere within the city limits of Chattanooga, and make sure the store management, mayor, and police chief know why.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Kimberly Gist-Collins
June 26, 2009 7:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I think police departments need to get a little more strict with their psychological evaluations b/c it seems like so many control freaks and loose cannons become cops.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Galactica
June 26, 2009 9:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Kimberly Gist-Collins: I get the gist of what you're saying.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
knyghtryda
June 26, 2009 7:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

$20K? Thats IT? Isnt assault like... a crime, with... you know... REAL punishment behind bars? The cop needs some time on the other side of the bars in order get his head straight... I think the best we can do spread the name of the cop around and make sure his community knows exactly the kind of person he really is.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Squeezer99
June 26, 2009 8:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@knyghtryda: the old guy touched the cop first. if anyone needs to be charged with assault, its the old guy.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
John Israel
June 26, 2009 11:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Squeezer99: Description of assault: \"A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim. Intent is an essential element of assault. \"

Simply put, being touched does not constitute assault. And if you think that this elderly man posed any sort of threat to the detective, then you're just a complete dumbass.

At least you gave everyone here at Consumerist a good example of a total and utter comprehension fail.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
morlo
June 27, 2009 12:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@John Israel: The old guy intended to physically detain the cop. He wasn't giving him a back-rub. And a \"threat\" doesn't mean mortal threat. 99% of suspects charged with \"assaulting a police officer\" were never in any position to more than inconvenience the officer in question. Do you really want old guys grabbing you continuously because they aren't dangerous enough to be charged?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Skin Art Squared
June 26, 2009 7:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

People like that cop eventually learn the hard way when they try that un-called-for shit on someone that's capable and willing to put him to the ground and make him cry for his mama.

What that idiot fails to understand is, no matter how badass you think you are, there is always someone more badass, more disturbed, more unstable, and more unpredictable.

And shoving a Walmart greeter to the floor makes him a pussy. He should be barred from law enforcement for life.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
jswilson64
June 27, 2009 9:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BZMedia: Oh, but then the cop will play the \"assaulting an officer\" card, 'cuz he's a puss.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
thomamas
June 27, 2009 1:10 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BZMedia: Remember, if a cop does it, it's not illegal.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Landru
June 26, 2009 7:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Well, I may have not pushed a 71 year old man to the floor, but if a receipt checker touched me, I'd be pretty mad. Imagine if it happened at Best Buy? Come on.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
John Israel
June 26, 2009 11:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Landru: Yeah, like you would let a receipt checker touch your $6300 suit. COME ON!!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
axiomatic
June 29, 2009 4:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If you own a $6300 dollar suit you have more problems than people wanting to touch it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
June 26, 2009 8:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Landru: I legitimately feel sorry for you if you would react like this just because someone \"touched\" you. A rational person, as Saboth pointed out, wouldn't immediately be in panic/outrage/lawsuit mode as you apparently would be.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Landru
June 26, 2009 9:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: Please, don't feel sorry for me, I'm perfectly fine with it.


If a security representative of a large corporation (Greeter? He was checking to see there was stolen merchandise)touches me, it is unwanted contact. I think the term for unwanted contact like it is \"Simple Battery\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
June 26, 2009 11:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Landru: It's not really a feeling of sorrow for you, but rather sympathy for a society that has to deal with paranoid, overreacting folks like you.

But typically, something has to be of a malicious, provoking, or harmful nature for any battery charges to hold. A mere tap on the shoulder or brush of the hand is none of those. Good luck proving an intent to harm if an old guy taps you or quickly brushes against you to get your attention. You'd be wasting your own time and law enforcement's time pursuing anything remotely close to the scenario in this story.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
June 26, 2009 7:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Landru:

Yeah, I probably would have been like \"whoa, hey there\" then said \"what's up?\" ...like a reasonable person!

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
shepd
June 26, 2009 8:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Seems to me if you're a good manager and you have an employee go through all that one day, you let them go home, paid, for the rest of the day. You don't just have them \"clean up\" and keep working.

*sigh* That's probably why I'm not a manager. Too soft.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
forgottenpassword
June 26, 2009 9:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shepd:


I remember in my walmart days.... I had some bizarre medication reaction where my skin broke out in little red dots all over my body.... I mean it was VERY noticeable.


My manager made me stay & finish my shift.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Haggie1
June 26, 2009 8:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Technically, the cop could have charged the greeter with assault, since the greeter had no right to touch him or detain him in order to request the receipt.

Yes, the cop may be a whack job ready to explode, but that does not justify Wal-Mart's actions. Security people that are requesting to check receipts should be fully briefed that it is at the customer's discretion and that they cannot detain the customer in any way if the customer elects to leave the premises without showing a receipt.

Wal-Mart is really the party at fault both because a.) the employee was acting as their agent b.) they failed to properly train their employee.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
June 26, 2009 8:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It really is unbelievable that the cop is going to get away with this by only paying a $10k fine. Private citizens would be in jail for assault. I hope they review this case and press criminal charges at some point.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 26, 2009 8:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This bugs me. If you read the initial post, it states that the officers were on duty at the time. Which means, more than likely, they were in uniform. As a Wal-mart greeter, would you really think to check a police officers receipt...if hes a cop, i would let him go. Second, again....They were on Duty. Which also means, more than likely, he had a weapon on him at the time. Whos to say it wasnt some robber going for his gun, he did what i feel and police officer should have, if he was touched by someone he doesnt know. Especially if his back was turned. If i was a cop, and someone came up and grabbed my shoulder, i would turn and push them away too....

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
jgodsey
June 26, 2009 8:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

well...what do you THINK happens when you grab a cop? I am sorry but walmart employees shouldn't be touching people...and this happy horseshit of checking receipts should be stopped.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Mari Walker
June 27, 2009 6:33 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jgodsey: Oh FFS, he just touched his shoulder! It's not like the man grabbed his arm and yanked on it or anything. The cop's reaction was completely unwarranted.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rectilinear Propagation
June 27, 2009 12:13 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

well...what do you THINK happens when you grab a cop?

@jgodsey: You get their attention? The same way that anyone grabbing anyone else's arm would get their attention?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
John Israel
June 27, 2009 12:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jgodsey: Uh...I would expect a man of the law to show a modicum of restraint and composure, especially when he's in a non-hostile situation. As annoying and useless as receipt checkers are, a touch on the shoulder from one does not mean you should shove them, no matter who you are.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
unpolloloco
June 26, 2009 9:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I just ignore the receipt checkers unless there's no line and they ask nicely - then I'm more than willing to hand my receipt over. It's interesting though that the checkers typically don't usually care or even notice.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
CRSpartan01
June 26, 2009 9:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That's assault, brotha!

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Corporate_guy
June 26, 2009 9:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What a scam. The town has no involvement and the guy was justified in protecting himself from the greeter.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
John Israel
June 26, 2009 11:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Corporate_guy: Please tell me how the detective's physical assault was justified.

And don't give me this crap about the greeter assaulting the detective. Touch does not immediately constitute assault.

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
cecilsaxon
June 26, 2009 9:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Shame on WalMart for training the the old man to \"greet\" folks in this fashion. He should have sued WalMart for forcing him to check receipts and getting the Poop knocked out of him.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
lehrdude
June 26, 2009 9:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What about the person who got the \"Clean up poop in aisle 7\" page over the intercom?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
pwillow1
June 26, 2009 9:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The officer who shoved the Wal-Mart greeter was suspended without pay for 28 days. The officer who accompanied him was also suspended without pay.

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) investigated the officer, Kenneth Freeman, as a result of this incident.

The case was presented to a grand jury in March, who heard testimony from witnesses, including the greeter who was pushed to the floor. The grand jury declined to indict the officer.

I haven't been able to find out any information as to whether this officer was fired.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
pwillow1
June 26, 2009 10:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The local police department declined to arrest this officer for assault. However, the County District Attorney requested an investigation by the TBI and the findings were presented to county grand jury, who declined to issue an indictment.

Some articles say he was given a 28 day unpaid suspension, others say it was for 30 days. He was required to attend anger management classes.

He was not fired.

I think any employee who caused this kind of trouble for his employer should have been fired. The fact that he did not lose his job speaks to the culture in that particular police department.

I wouldn't be surprised at all to hear that this officer has similar incidents during his service.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
FrankReality
June 27, 2009 2:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wait for the next time the police officer blows up like that and injures someone. That suit would be a biggie - the City would be very much at risk of a large payout because they retained a known problem officer.


I think the officer and the city got off very light.


As for the TBI investigation and going before a grand jury, can someone confirm that the grand jury and prosecutor was moved to a venue other than Chattanooga? Normal procedure around here would be to convene a grand jury in another county and assign a prosecutor from that county to handle the case due to the appearence of conflict of interest.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
arcticJKL
June 27, 2009 2:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wonder to what extent Lt. McPherson's testimony played a part.

Also, did the good Samaritan, who touched no one, receive any money?

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
layton59
June 27, 2009 3:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

If cop-shoplifters get away with stealing, then the terrorist win. It is all stated in the Terrorist Manifesto. I believe it is on page 59. Undermine free-enterprise from within by using rogue cops. People, people read your assignments before coming to class. All kidding aside, I wish this cop nothing but sorrows from here on out.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
alulim
June 27, 2009 6:04 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't see this as a cop issue, i see a CORPORATE isusse.

If i go into a store, browse, pick out merchandise, and pay for it; I expect to leave without any more interaction from employees.

Big box stores generally operate on a low margin high volume sales strategy. I feel no sympathy for the thin P/L ratio, not when livable wages are not paid and foriegn workers exploited.

With all that out the way, most (by a far margin) retail theft is done by employees. From my second hand experiences, albeit limited, companies are more willing to cut a deal with their ex employees than your average shoplifter. Yet for some reason its becoming more common to see \"greeters\" more concerned with people leaving the store and random receipt checks at teh door. The moment i pay for something and it placed in my possession that item is no longer any concern of the corp/retailer. I don't care about store policy or if alarms go off. I would take any attempt to verifiy or inspect my purchase as an insult. Physical contact in any way would be seen as a threat on my safety and to my civil rights.

Now from the articles i've read the cop as completely out of line. He should face whatever legal and professional consequences his peers find just. I feel sorrow for the old man, i'm sure he's worked far too hard and long in his life to deserve anything near this incident.

In the end I blame walmart. Their policies, training, and culture (or lack of any) caused this. I, unfortunately, to see more of it too.

One man's beat, another punished. What happens to the company under who's pervue this all took place?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
ceilingFANBOY
June 27, 2009 5:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@alulim: @morlo:

It was completely left out of this article, but the alarm went off when the cop passed through the sensors.

[www.chattanoogan.com]

This was not a case of the greeter randomly touching any customer who goes through the door without showing a receipt.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Mari Walker
June 27, 2009 6:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@alulim: That's a bit of a stretch to blame Walmart, isn't it? Walmart is not responsible for the police officer's gross overreaction. At the very least, it's a huge misplacement of anger; don't get mad at the greeter who's just doing their shitty job. Go to corporate and get mad at them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
June 27, 2009 2:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Mari Walker: Welcome to Consumerist, where \"Wal-Mart is always wrong no matter what they do rightâ„¢.\" It's sad, really.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
morlo
June 27, 2009 5:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: Wal-Mart is clearly not right. Accusing innocent people of shoplifting will annoy them, and those who haven't been brainwashed into submissiveness will react badly. Wal-Mart knew this would happen, but has no respect for their customers or their employees. A million customers who never shop there again or a million checkers who are beaten to death mean nothing to a corporation with an unlimited supply of customers and workers.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Allison Granados
June 28, 2009 5:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

there's a lot of comments about people saying they'd be really angry if someone touched them. i could understand touching as in someone groping your butt or forcefully holding you, but i don't mind a tap on the shoulder. the other day i helped a customer carry something out, and she kind of hugged me and i hugged her back, one of those one- armed hugs.... and after that i started freaking out thinking i would get in trouble.

i guess i should just be grateful she didn't throw me through a window... but it kind of makes me sad that i need to worry about getting someone's attention or making a friendly gesture.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
vladthepaler
June 29, 2009 3:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Too bad; I still think the cop was in the right here. The receipt checker touched him first, which crosses the line.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
almightytora
June 29, 2009 3:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That loser of a cop needs to get his ass fired so he can work at Wal-Mart.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
axiomatic
June 29, 2009 3:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Although I do sympathize with this elderly receipt checker the real criminal here is Walmart.

They fail to properly POST A SIGN to the \"suggestion\" that we customers allow the receipt checker to check receipts.

The reality is that there is no sign and this receipt checker gets to \"surprise\" people on the way out the door with his banal job.

Is this cop 100% pure douchebaggery? Sure, fire him. But Walmart needs to acknowledge their complicity in this affair.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 29, 2009 5:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What I think is sad is that we are justifying that someone be hurt and knocked unconscious for doing their job. No he maybe shouldn't have touched him, but does he really deserve to be embarrassed and have to be \"allowed\" to change his pants. OMG I can't stand Walmart in the first place and I don't shop there because of their moral practices as a company. It sad enough in the first place our elderly are having to work but now to justify hurting them and then complaining when they win in a case of justice is horrible.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
East_Coast_Midwesterner
June 29, 2009 5:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wish I was a massive asshole and my company would pay settlements for me.

Very quickly becoming anti-police..... sigh .....

Reply
","");