Maybe you should be happy to help in a difficult situation. The more people they eliminate as suspects the closer they come to actually saving a child. Unless you are having a medical emergency yourself, whatever else you’re in a hurry to get to is second to finding an endangered child.
ETA if the police aren’t at the one open door, they will get there pretty quick and then you are obligated to show your ID and are subject to being detained, all against your will.
In theory, they could be ordered not to return to the premises, the same as if they refused to show their receipt to an employee doing a bag check. That’s not a criminal matter, though (unless they violate the order).
At common law, the tort of false imprisonment requires that you actually be prevented from leaving. It requires (a) willful detention in a bounded area; (b) without consent; and (c) without authority of lawful arrest. If you can leave the bounded area by any route, the first element is lacking.
Statute could of course override this, but I’m not aware of any jurisdiction where it does, and I can’t think of any argument that it should.
You aren’t obligated to show your ID to the police just because they want to see it.
That may be true as far as false imprisonment goes, but other areas of the law (like a fire code) may make it illegal to actually lock* any door that’s signed as an exit when customers are in the store.
*As opposed to turning off the automatic opener and tasking an employee with scolding people who try to open it manually, which I suspect is how the door would actually be “locked.”
This is going to depend on the technology and the terms of the local fire code, I suppose. The fire code may permit a locked door as long as there’s a failsafe on it which allows it to be opened if the fire alarms are triggered.
But, even if the measures taken in a Code Adam protocol did violate the fire code, that wouldn’t necessarily give UltraVires a cause of action against the store on account of the inconvenience and indignity of being required to use an exit other than the door they entered by, would it?
Meh. Every time I’ve been dispatched to a store about a missing kid it’s been a whole lot of nothing. Kid hid in a hanging clothes rack and fell asleep. Kid got bored and went out to sit in the car. One Little prick went into the women’s bathroom to poop and decided to wipe himself. Got shit all over the stall and then hid in the back storeroom and got shit all over back there. He wasn’t endangered until he was found!
We get lost child reports at parades and festivals all the time. You expect everyone there to start searching and the gates be locked? Ain’t gonna happen, cousin.
I must of been absent when they taught us this. :rolleyes:
Ten minutes? Methinks the horse will have bolted and locking the stable door will be a waste of time.
Yup. If it’s an actual abduction the Code Adam stuff is like CPR: Too Little Too Late, somewhat useless, and just putting on a show.
Almost all missing kids at businesses are just lost. However, there are rare cases where abductors will grab a lost kid under the guise of telling them they will help them find their parents. So the Code Adam step of monitoring the doors isn’t a complete waste. I just wouldn’t advise someone to get uppity and demand every customer participate in a search.
While I suspect most folks would cooperate there is no legal requirement to give any information to a store employee, nor does the employee have the right to detain you unless there is reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime. The same goes for LE, the key words being "probable cause" and " reasonable suspicion "
You may be a @#&% for refusing to cooperate but this is not a crime.
The purpose of a Code Adam event is not to catch a kidnapper (although that may be a nice side effect). The purpose is to find a missing kid, first and foremost by preventing the missing kid from leaving the store undetected (under the assumption that he/she may still be in the store).
Here’s the federal government’s info on their implementation of the Code Adam program for public buildings. Check out the poster PDF (link at that page): their implementation involves a coordinated search, but does not appear to involve restricting exits. In fact, I also couldn’t find any cites for retail establishments indicating that egress from the building via any exit is restricted; they all just say that every exit is monitored, and any child leaving the building (with or without an accompanying adult) is questioned.
Shopkeeper’s privilege allows a store employee to detain a person if they have reasonable grounds to believe that person has committed or tried to commit a theft (AIUI, this generally involves witnessing someone walking out the door with unpaid merchandise). There’s no indication that SP authorizes detention of persons suspected of kidnapping. It certainly wouldn’t allow detention of a cranky adult who just didn’t want to talk to an employee at at the store exit; I don’t believe that a jerk parent who walks out of a store with their own kid while ignoring questions from a store employee can legally be detained simply for that behavior, since it’s not a crime to tell that employee to go piss up a rope. However, that employee may choose to provide your description and license plate # to the cops, who may choose to follow up with you later. Still no crime, but by tying up police resources like that, such a parent may be reasonably regarded as a total douchebag.
If a person is actually witnessed abducting a kid, then SP isn’t even an issue. At that point any witness may conduct a citizen’s arrest. If you haven’t actually witnessed the crime with your own eyes, then you are not allowed to conduct a citizen’s arrest.
If the police ask you who you are, you are legally required to identify yourself, but you do not need to present ID. If this were not true, then people who do not possess ID would be screwed. The only time a person is required to show ID to the police is if they are sitting in the driver’s seat of a car (and in that case, it had better be a valid driver’s license).
Uh, no.
The International Building Code is the most common model building code in the US and Chapter 10 of IBC addresses this in some detail. A building owner can’t simply lock egress doors while the space is occupied. There are numerous reasons for this. Door locks are allowed on the egress doors in a Group M occupancy (Mercantile), but they must remain unlocked while the space is occupied. The egress capacity (determined by the number of egress doors and their width relative to occupant load) is carefully calculated when the building is designed. An owner can’t just change it by locking certain doors against free egress as he/she chooses.
Can you imagine what would happen if some/most/all of the doors were locked and someone pull a manual pull station and activated the evacuation alarm?
I’m a store cashier, and we’ve only had one missing child reported. We immediately locked the door and stationed someone at it to let people out, and to not let anyone in. Fortunately, the child was found in the back storeroom.
If I see a child by themselves in the store, I ask them where their caretaker is, and inform them that the store requires children to stay by their caretaker at all times.
I’ve also had to deal with children missing their caretaker. The procedure is to keep the child right by your side, and immediately page their caretaker (Will Adam’s father please come to the front registers?)
There are either some exceptions in the ICC itself or as it was adopted by different jurisdictions - because I very commonly see one or more doors locked under certain specific situations. For example, a store/restaurant/movie theatre with a street entrance and an entrance leading to the mall might lock the doors going to the mall at the mall closing time of 9pm while leaving the street doors open while leaving the street doors open until the store/restaurant/movie theatre closes hours later. Or the store/restaurant locks the doors at closing time and leaves an employee stationed at the door to let customers out.
(I don’t mean this to be a hijack, but I think it’s relevant to the discussion and OP’s question.)
Unfortunately, owners will often do things that violate the Codes (whichever is/are applicable), but it does not make their actions Code-compliant. Group A (Assembly) occupancies like theaters often have excess egress capacity and can discharge occupants through a dedicated set of exit doors. You see this all the time in museums and auditoriums that process groups of patrons.
Section 1010.1 of the IBC is rarely amended locally. Here, for example is the 2015 version of the requirements for Group M occupancies:
***1010.1.9.3 Locks and latches. Locks and latches shall be permitted to prevent operation of doors where any of
the following exist:
- Places of detention or restraint.
- In buildings in occupancy Group A having an occupant load of 300 or less, Groups B, F, M and S, and in places of religious worship, the main door or doors are permitted to be equipped with key-operated locking devices from the egress side provided:
2.1. The locking device is readily distinguishable as locked.
2.2. A readily visible durable sign is posted on the egress side on or adjacent to the door
stating: THIS DOOR TO REMAIN UNLOCKED WHEN THIS SPACE IS OCCUPIED. The sign shall be in letters 1
inch (25 mm) high on a contrasting background.
2.3. The use of the key-operated locking device is revokable by the building official for due cause. ***
Notice that the main doors in a Group M (Mercantile) occupancy must remain unlocked while the space is occupied. Other egress doors (usually at the sides or rear of the building) may NOT be locked from the egress side at all.
You’re telling me when LE asks me to identify myself I can just say “no” Around these parts you would get arrested or detained awhile. Hey, I watch LivePD.
What state do you live in? Many stop and identify laws are based on Terry and require RS that you committed or are about to commit a crime. Just wanting to leave a store does not pass the smell test on that.
This blanket statement is overall incorrect.
Even been in a dept store near closing time? They lock certain doors & only let you out of others. Part of this is to keep new customers from coming in but part of it is to create an orderly removal of customers from the premises (___ dept is clear). Are you saying that is illegal?