Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: antiRepublicrat
I'm interested to see whether it's OK legally for a store to do the bag/receipt check thing on your way out of the store; I know a lot of stores are doing it, and that's what started this particular ball rolling. I did find this:

2935.041 Detention and arrest of shoplifters - detention of persons in library, museum, or archival institution.

(A) A merchant, or an employee or agent of a merchant, who has probable cause to believe that items offered for sale by a mercantile establishment have been unlawfully taken by a person, may, for the purposes set forth in division (C) of this section, detain the person in a reasonable manner for a reasonable length of time within the mercantile establishment or its immediate vicinity.

(There's some other stuff that has to do with museums and libraries specifically, but here's the next section that mentions merchants...)

(E) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, the merchant or employee or agent of a merchant, or the owner, lessee, employee, or agent of the facility acting under division (A) , (B), or (D) of this section shall not search the person detained, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person’s consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.

So is the act of refusing to show the receipt enough to warrant suspicion and thereby initiate detention? Or does the receipt become your property as soon as it's handed to you and is therefore not subject to search or seizure?

Ugh.

160 posted on 09/03/2007 9:43:38 PM PDT by dbwz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]


To: dbwz

Interesting questions. But here it looks like the demand to search came before any actual suspicion. In that case my guess would be that it can’t be refusal to a search that causes suspicion, because the demand was already made.

Looks like random checks by stores may be in a sort of catch-22, at least in that state. I have an idea — don’t check unless you actually suspect.


164 posted on 09/03/2007 9:55:53 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]

To: dbwz

Having spent many years in retail and having given training and received training regarding “shoplifting” here is what I/we train to:

In order to have “cause” to stop and detain a shoplifter,

the clerk must observe the person take the items

the clerk must observe the person conceal the items (ie. you must know exactly where the items are on the shoplifter) lawsuits happen when the shoplifter ‘dumps’ the item in the store and you didn’t see them do that.

shoplifter must remain under observation and be given every opportunity to pay for the items

shoplifter can only be stopped after passing the last opportunity for payment (ie. they are leaving the store)

if you are going to make the shoplifting stop, never accuse the person of stealing. Simply state: Excuse mam/sir, but I believe you may have forgotten to purchase the (state the item) you have in your (location of item).

if the person bolts, runs, etc. to not attempt to detain. Most shoplifters when confronted with the exact information regarding their theft will simply give you back the merchandise. The professional shoplifter is entirely another matter as they often use things like booster girdles etc.

As far as the bag check thing, they are not checking you for theft. Those are done to audit cashiers. I had one employee that was seen and caught passing off merchandise at the checkout. When we questioned them, they confessed to over $10,000 in theft.

And then there is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ND0yRRpPeyo


194 posted on 09/04/2007 3:47:00 AM PDT by EBH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson