Skip to comments.Target security officer fired after reporting [cop] shoplifting
Posted on 07/14/2014 8:12:22 AM PDT by bornred
Dallas Northington spent nearly eight years working for Target in loss prevention, roaming the stores and scanning the surveillance cameras. In an episode at the Leesburg Target store in May that he said was typical, a man was allegedly captured twice on video shoplifting, and Northington responded as he said he always did: He called the Leesburg police, made a report and provided them the videos of the two incidents.
But the man in the video may have been a Fairfax County sheriffs deputy, Northington said he soon learned. And within days, two things happened: The deputy retired from the sheriffs office and Target fired Northington, 29, a married father of two with a third child on the way.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Note that the officer in question still has not been charged. And they didn't even name him in the article.
There is nothing, repeat nothing, in the District of Corruption or nearby that is not contaminated!
I won’t comment on the specifics of the case, but I will note that one of the goals of the gun control lobby seems to be to encourage and embolden shoplifters.
Target’s executive boards seem to have been taken over by people who will do absolutely anything to bring in Leftist clientele; liberals are stupid and spend too much money on objects, but they also have a Freudian paranoia of weaponry and an aversion to having their bratty selves or their children punished by the law for hooliganism.
Growing up there was a state trooper assigned to our little home town and all the teenagers loved the guy. I found out years later he threw his career away when he was caught stealing pocket knives from Walmart. He said he couldn’t explain why he did it.
Before we jump to conclusions, we need to know the races involved. That will make a big difference in who is arrested and who is not.
Because they make a lot of money off of purchases using EBT cards. Just like Wal-Mart.
From the article:
“Northington said Target officials told him that he had violated procedure by not filling out the proper paperwork before contacting the police, though he said his office had operated the same way for years. He said he also was told that he had been insubordinate for not seeking approval before calling police, though he said the standard practice was for him to act as needed.”
If the store has a policy in place I’m afraid that will overrule “standard practice”. He may not have a leg to stand on.
:: The deputy retired from the sheriffs office and Target fired Northington, 29, a married father of two with a third child on the way. ::
Not to disparage the rent-a-cap but...how does one retire from the local constbulary during their child-rearing years?
Just curious...follow-on? Is there a government guaranteed pension involved somewhere?
I once long ago made the “mistake” of reporting a shady manger to the senior management.I got fired. A year later the company owner admitted losing over a $100,000 due to theft at that location-FIVE times the amount under previous managers.I never got an apology or anything else.But I did have the satisfaction of hearing that some of those involved in the thefts stated they had to wait for times I was not there to carry out their schemes.Company management didn’t want the thefts publicized either ,the low-level thieves got plea deals and the manager abruptly resigned.Nothing was in the local papers or TV.
Diogenes would still have a difficult task.
“retired” at age 29. What’s up wid-dat?
Are you confusing the two men? Northington is not the retired deputy and the story gives no information as to the deputy’s name,age, or family status.’
Northington,who is the fired security officer, DOES have a family, and appears to be a decent working man.
A why use the disparaging “rent a cap” label?
You are confusing the perp and the guy who turned him in.
The policeman retired at an undisclosed age. The Target employee was fired at age 29.
Thanks for smacking-me-straight!
I would imagine a decent lawyer could sway a jury with questions regarding “why was it so vitally important now, out of nowhere?”
Re-read the sentence you posted. The deputy reitired, and the Target loss prevention guy was fired. The loss prevention guy (Northington) was 29, with two kids and one on the way.
Another masterful PR move by Target.
Some years ago my wife has the head of the accounting department (and she was the AR person) at a family owned lumber company. One of the inside salesmen was very obviously robbing the company, regularly.
My wife went to the owner about it, he refused to do anything. Eventually, my wife said you fire him or I’m leaving the company. The owner got very pissed, but he did fire the man. However, for 6 months he cr@pped all over her until she had enough. She left, we left the state and are much happier where we are. In an ironic way he did us a favor, giving us a motive to leave Florida, which we wanted to do, but were dithering about.
Ultimate irony: my wife was GOOD at AR. Her last year there they had uncollectables of $16K for $18 million in sales. That’s building contractors! The next year we learned that they had more than $250K uncollectables on about $8 million in sales.
See my Post 16 and associated.
Utilizing “drive-by” posting at work.
If the PD thought they could bury all this by letting the crook retire and getting the employee fired they have failed big time.
Loudoun is in the news a lot lately . .
I should have read further down, to see your correction. But then that would be a first for me, and I hate to break with tradition. ;-)
The way the MSM wrote the piece it was not difficult to confuse who’s who.
Just so the forum understands. I have difficulty recognizing the “executive branch authority” of any policeman outside of the purview of the local sheriff.
Why does the IRS have armed enforcers?
Why does the USDA have armed enforcers?
Why does the mayor of a duly cconstituted and incorporated village/town/city need “armed enforcers” (hint: is the mayor’s charge to defend the citizenry from harm, danger and other acts of war?).
Within the framework of the US Constitution, it does not make sense to me.
Now, when said “armed enforcers” go off-the-clock and yet remained armed in service to private business and citizens, we have made a step nearer a police-state.
Just my opinion.
And I could care less about the opinon of anyone here regarding the prejorative “rent-a-cop”.
Good shoes have a tendency to fit comfortably.
Now I thought rent a cop was directed quite wrongly at Northington who simply was an unarmed loss prevention officer for Target. Again,the quickly retired deputy was not working undercover for Target-the deputy was apparently the thief!!!!!!!
I do share dismay where sworn public officers are allowed to work private details while retaining all their on-duty police powers so they have an unfair advantage over others needing a job.
Your understanding is appreciated.