Shoplifting question

The issue that would not die. (Thanks, Rigamarole).

I once had a friend who worked security at a Wal-Mart. She (it was as she) said that security was routinely told by management to pay more attention to black and Hispanic shoppers than whites. This was only at one store, of couse, so it can’t be extropolated to conclude anything about corporate policies but she eventually quit that job because of a pattern of overtly racist instructions she was given by management as to how to do her job.

I don’t think it can be extrapolated to conclude anything about anything. Maybe your friend was just embarrassed about being fired and made something up. Who can say. I don’t know how various local Wal-Marts deal with security, but I do know that nationwide, Wal-Mart loses less than 1% of sales to shoplifting, a remarkable achievement which helps keep the prices low for people of every ethnicity. Whoever is doing the shoplifting at whatever place, they’re hurting the poor more than anyone else.

But remember I get the receipt, by definition, only when it’s been paid for, certainly at that point, the items belong to the customer.

What the exit drones are looking for is some sort of collusion between the checkout personnell/employees and their friends who pose as legitimate customers. So it’s kind of a check on their internal pilferage/theft, not so much catching more conventional shoplifters.

I hate to disagree, but I’m going to. I’ve worked in retail for a large department store chain, so I know that they like to aggressively interpret the laws in their favor, but they also know they have limits often short of what they would like to try for.

In the case of Colorado, the relevant statute regarding liability for stopping and detaining potential shoplifters is 18-4-407 of the Colorado Revised Statutes. This reads as follows:

emphasis added

Note the qualifier. The person attempting to detain a potential shoplifter must be acting in good faith and must have probable cause to believe the potential shoplifter has concealed unpurchased goods, or is attempting to otherwise carry them away. It does not say that the employee or peace officer has the right to stop you and ask for a receipt.

In the absence of an indication that some other statute conveys the right to stop you to inspect your person for a receipt, etc., then the store does not have that right. You might ask Mr. Kairos the future to offer a citation to authority for his contention that they do; it always helps to be working with authority citations. :slight_smile:

Yes, absolutely. If they detain you and you did nothing wrong, they are risking a lawsuit.

I have been recently ignoring security at the door in stores in my state (Illinois). I find it offensive that they think I stole something, and I don’t want to waste time looking for my receipt, so I just walk out with a smile and a “no thank you”. If they are so worried, they should post the guard at the registers and watch carefully.

The stores are just trying to fool people into thinking they must fork over the receipt (or else). I really hate deception.

And I really hate paying for the stolen goods that other people are lifting from the store. There must be 5,000 people going in and out of some Wal-Mart’s on a busy day. Don’t they have any right to maintain security for themselves, and by extension you?

I view this as a balancing act. What am I willing to give up, to save some money? How intrusive or inconvenient is this really?

When I get checked at Wal-Mart, some really nice old lady asks me if she can see my receipt. I hand it to her, she glances at my bag for about two seconds, smiles, and asks me to have a nice day. No strip search. No fingerprinting. No handcuffs. To me, this minor intrusion into my life is worth it if the store can trim some theft.

[QUOTE=spifflog To me, this minor intrusion into my life is worth it if the store can trim some theft.[/QUOTE]

But does it reduce theft?

Based on DSYoungEsq cite above:

If you choose to shop at a store that checks receipts, then refuse to show the receipt upon leaving, could that be interpreted as probable cause? Allowing them to detain you w/out civil liability (assuming they don’t manhandle you in the process)? Wouldn’t it be easier to just show the receipt - or shop someplace where they don’t ask to see it?

I don’t personally know if it does or not. But I’d guess that Wal-Mart has some serious bean counters in their employ. And I’d thik that if paying the receipt checkers wasn’t cost effective, than they wouldn’t be there.

It would not be probable cause of anything, except a determination that I don’t feel like digging out the receipt. Probable cause would mean a reasonable belief that I am actually attempting to carry out unpurchased merchandise, either because I’ve been seen to conceal it, or because the guard/attendent saw me walk through the line without purchasing it, etc. There are other ways to reach that conclusion, but refusing to give up my right to ignore you isn’t one of them. :wink:

Yes, it does. It is a perfectly logical inference to take from Wal-Mart’s 1% of sales figure that theft has been reduced.

You have been onboard long enough and I assume old enough to not be asking a stupid question.
Are you trying to show off? Make some obscure point? Be noticed? Or maybe you need help to unscrew the inscrutable? :smiley:

Ignoring the rather absurd reduction involved here, I will point out that, on occasion I need or desire to wear an item of clothing I have purchased right away. In such cases, I will repair to the dressing room to don the item. When I do, you can best be certain I damn well tell them what I’m doing, so I don’t attract attention walking out with their recently packaged/folded/hung, etc. clothing on my body. :wink:

My post was in response to this. Are either of you claiming that the burden is on me to *prove *I own something which any reasonable man would say is clearly mine? The absurity is not in my reply it is in this statement.

Question, if I may:

I buy a Large Expensive Item from a store. LEI is too big to fit into a shopping bag, and the cashier has no “paid” stickers to put on it. I put the receipt in my pocket, and walk out the door.

The security guard asks to see my receipt. I refuse, because I’ve got my hands full of an LEI. Both the security guard and I remain politely insistent. In the midst of the interaction, I extract myself from the conversation and walk toward my car, ignoring further requests/demands of the security guard. No detention takes place (i.e., I’m not tackled from behind). I put the LEI in the trunk of my car, and proceed to walk to the store next door (think strip mall).

A) Assuming I walk past the security guard again, can he detain me at that time?
B) If a policeman happens by at this time, would he have probable cause to open my trunk? Demand a receipt? Do anything?
C) Does it make any difference to the above (or the thread in general) if at this point my car is parked on a city street? On a general strip-mall parking lot? Still in the first store’s parking lot?

A) No, unless he had probable cause to detain you in the first place. (this cannot be answered definitively because we don’t know what the guard saw)

B) No. The officer would have nothing that the guard didn’t. Actually, the officer is in a more handicapped position, because not only does he have to work with the relevant statute, the officer is required to comply with the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.

C) No. Irrelevant where the car is parked, in my opinion.

Ummmmm… no. No, they aren’t.
Depending on the state you’re in, and, I hate to make generalizations here, but you can be detained if the security guy has probable cause and acts in good faith.

So, the guard could have a good faith belief that you shoplifted (you were lingering for a long time in the same area, looking squirrely, looking right into the cameras, etc.) and probable cause, he can detain you and search you. You may not have been shoplifting. In that case, you go on your way, feeling violated, and he goes back to checking receipts. And there’s no risk of a lawsuit.

“Large aggresive [sic] man?” I dunno where you shop, but I’ve never been intimidated by a security guard or a mall cop. Perhaps those are relative terms, but I don’t think that security are peacekeepers as much as they are fact-checkers.

**Kairos’**s anecdote has already been clarified, but you might want to tell future Mr. **Kairos **that what your employer tells you you can do and what you actually can do are worlds apart, sometimes.

Is it safe to assume that if it is one of those club stores, like a CostCo or a Sam’s Club, since I am paying to join that I am also agreeing to their reciept checking policy?

You can change your mind.