Charges dropped against man for refusing to show receipt at Circuit City

[TechAlG]

http://www.michaelrighi.com/2007/09/20/success/

All charges have been dropped against a man who refused to show his receipt upon exiting a Circuit City store, then refused to show his Driver's License to the responding police officer.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1190278957130100.xml&coll=2


wouldn't it be accurate to say that this "hero of the revolution"  signed an agreement to not pursue action against the cop?  after trolling for legal defense funds?  he sending back the money now?

[SteveS]

Whew...I guess this means the revolution does not start now.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

yea  talk was cheap maybea betterpaypal responsewould have inspired the young ceo of the multi mill it company

[TechAlG]

He is donating the money to the Ohio ACLU.  He raised in the neighborhood of $5, and his legal defense is expected to cost around $7500.  If someone asks you how they can send money to aid in your defense, is that really "trolling" for defense funds?

[Paddy]

So what did he prove?  Nothing. It would have taken all of 30 seconds to show his receipt.

[jnojr]

So whatdid he prove?  Nothing. It would have taken all of 30 seconds to show his receipt.

But there is no requirement that he should do so.  I'm not trying to "prove" anything when I leave a store with something I've bought... I'm simply trying to leave.  I want to go on about my business, and I don't feel the need to stop and explain myself to every interested party along the way.

That guy ought to be suing Circuit City and that manager personally.

[Paddy]

Think about it. You're leaving private property carrying goods from that property that didn't belong to you when you arrived.  Is it really too much for the owner or owners agent to ask for verification of purchase?

[tyme]

You're right.  Circuit City should strip-search departing customers, whether they've bought anything or not.  After all, it's only prudent.

It's ultimately not about the store asking to verify items in the bag against the receipt.  It's about their power to detain you until you comply with that request.

[Paddy]

It's ultimately not about the store asking to verify items in the bag against the receipt.  It's about their power to detain you until you comply with that request.

Simple solution: Don't shop there.

[tyme]

So by entering a place open to the public, I can be detained in order to force me to comply with arbitrary rules they come up with?

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

psst   their place their rules  and if you know what they are when you walk in   you are trolling


as to the ceo of the multi mill it firm hero of the revolution he pegged my bs meter  when he trolled for his defense plan.  he only raised 5 k?  not much revolutionart fervor out their  at least not conpared to the revolutionary rhetoric.   he is of course disclosing his paypal records right? hmmm now that i think about it would it be a criminal fraud were he to be fibbing a bit about the amount raised? or disposition of it?  obtaining funds under false pretenses or such?  might be interesting to turn over a few rocks. rocks that might get overturned by cc's attorneys were he to take cc to court

[wooderson]

Their rules? Never once seen a place state on the door that you are expected to show your receipt on exit. Nor is it on the receipt as any kind of purchase agreement. They expect you to acquiesce because there's someone official-looking standing at the door. But it ain't a 'rule.'


I don't care, so I'll stop and let them look - unless there is any kind of line. If the manager expects me to stand around while one lackey checks a bunch of Christmas shoppers ahead of me, dude can kiss my...

[Paddy]

So by entering a place open to the public, I can be detained in order to force me to comply with arbitrary rules they come up with?

I thought libertarian types were big on free markets and private property rights. What do you suggest?  Using the power of government to force Circuit City to do or not do something?

Double standard?

[tyme]

Private property rights do not include the rights to falsely imprison or assault people who are not clearly breaking the law.

Yeah, if there's a government at all, I want it to force Circuit City not to assault people.  Death to capitalism!  The Bourgeois are just like pigs!

[Paddy]

Private property rights do not include the rights to falsely imprison or assault people who are not clearly breaking the law.

Because a clerk asked you for a receipt on the way out? You might have a tough time convincing a court of either.  If you make a hasty exit rather than stopping, you become a suspected shoplifter which triggers Shopkeeper's Privilege   You will then have foolishly given the store the right to detain you.

A lot simpler to just show the receipt, or don't shop there.

[Fjolnirsson]

If you make a hasty exit rather than stopping, you become a suspected shoplifter which triggers Shopkeeper's Privilege   

Nonsense....
I worked as Loss Prevention for Longs Drugs in CA. Also, for what it's worth, I attended a full length POST academy in CA. Believe me, the first guy to try that move will wish he hadn't. Corporate rules not withstanding, trying to hurry as you exit a store does NOT give that storekeeper a reason to detain you. Can they? Sure. Citizens arrest, and that's exactly how the police will treat it, as an arrest requested by a private citizen. And then that same private citizen will have his day in court when the receipt is removed from his former customers pocket during the investigation, and the arrest turns out to be false imprisonment. I've also been there, done that. Walmart in Oregon and Best Buy in CA. Both times I was asked to show a receipt, and refused. In both cases, the cops showed up. In both cases, the store employee told the cops I wouldn't show a receipt. Both times, the police asked if they thought I was stealing, and if so, why? *crickets chirping*.....
A refusal to show a receipt does not mean one is a thief.


I don't show receipts. I'm an honest citizen, and I don't steal. If the store really has a theft problem, they need to hire somebody to make arrests of suspected shoplifters. Don't post a 65 year old guy at the door, and tell him to make me show a receipt, 'cause it ain't gonna happen. If a store employee approaches me, and can articulate to me a reason they think I may have stolen something, I'm  willing to show my receipt.
Now, if a shop has a sign at the door where I enter, which states their right to do receipt checks upon exit, fine. I might go along, or I might not shop there. It's an  arbitrary requirement, selectively enforced. Same thing if I hold a party, then require before leaving that people genuflect to me. Does it harm them? No, but it's sure as hell unusual, and unreasonable. If they refuse, can I call the cops?
Or, how about if I require guests to show receipts for items they have on their person when they leave? Fair?

[SteveS]

Didn't we already discuss this?  Maybe I am thinking of another forum. 

IIRC, refusing to show your receipt (by itself) is not grounds for being detained under the shopkeeper's privilege.  Additionally, you may ONLY be detained if they reasonably suspect you of shoplifting.  Posting a notice that you have to submit to a check is not a reason.  Signing a contract that you will submit to a check is not enough, either.  They may refuse you entry in the future, but this is it.

That being said, I consider myself one of the people that doesn't mind showing a receipt.  It really isn't that big of a deal.  Call me statist, I guess.

[Fjolnirsson]

I used to not mind being asked for a receipt. But it gets old after a while...

[Mabs2]

The hard part is the little old lady is so nice I'd feel bad if I didn't show it to her.
THAT MUST BE THE TACTIC.

[MechAg94]

I notice that most of the stores I visit that used to check every receipt now check maybe 1 in 5 people or less.  I think they decided that if you just left the register, there is little reason to suspect you are shoplifting. 

[Euclidean]

I've worked big box store retail for years.

Look folks, it goes both ways.  The store may have a legal right to detain in some states or circumstances, but I've never encountered a big box store with an experienced manager who actually tries to use this policy.  Retailers are far more worried about liability costs than shoplifters.  On the other hand, if they made no effort at all to stop shoplifters prices would be higher.  Sometimes they gamble and lose.  Seeing as how you could easily take the store to task if it did gamble and lose, I'd say this system is probably as close to fair as we can get.

It's clear to me the store has no right to search its customers, but it's also clear to me the store has the right to protect its property.  There's just no clear way to resolve this, and it will always be a mucked up, inconsistent state of affairs.

In my retail career, I usually profile by behavior, not appearance.  I admit it.  I realize the odds of any one person being a shoplifter are poor.  I realize the odds of ticking off a customer are high.  I pick my battles based on what I know about the habits of shoplifters vs. customers.

I'm not some super sleuth but I've had LP training and sometimes I see something that's "off".  I have more than once asked somebody for a receipt and had them cough up some BS excuse and quickly flee the scene.  Good thieves are smart and realize that we can't do anything against them if they just leave.

When I do that, it's not because I think I'm special or have the right to detain you or any such thing.  I make just above minimum wage, I'm not getting paid enough to do anything besides say "Hi how are you?  Mind if I verify that for you?"  I am being a retail professional and trying to save my customer money.  I the retailer do not pay for the cost of shoplifting, you the customer do.

But probably for every time that I happened to catch a crook, I've had ten hunches that turned out to be wrong.  I try to be nice about it and I know not to press it if someone refuses.  I also know there's nothing wrong with asking someone to voluntarily produce a receipt, and I believe a savvy consumer will do exactly that. 

As a consumer, I personally value both my rights and low prices so I hold my receipt aloft as I exit any store, a clear sign to the door watcher I've not stolen anything.  If I bought anything expensive I even approach them and quickly show it as I leave.  They don't have to look in bags or ask me any questions, and I don't have to pay higher prices.  Voluntarily helping the store realize who's a thief and who isn't is a win win proposition which doesn't infringe on anyone.

[Paddy]

Why is an articulate intelligent guy with a degree earning only just above minimum wage?  Something's wrong.

[Euclidean]

Ya flatter me Riles.  Because I'm going back to school, and job opportunities are poor.  Some jobs that don't pay a lot have other redeeming features.  For example my job is easy, and it adapts to a full time student's schedule.  It also involves little commitment beyond time.

FWIW I expect to springboard into a slightly better job with the same employer once a few months pass.  It's just the nature of the beast, new company, you start at the bottom.

It's either make more money and go to a different school, or go to the school I want and make less money.  I don't want an online degree, and I do want to finish this degree sometime relatively soon, so I have to let something go.

I also got screwed by my last employer and honestly want nothing to do with my former industry any more, at least not until I calm down and stop seeing red every time I think about it.  The desire for revenge is why I'm not afraid to live like a pauper for a few years in exchange for a reasonable chance at better opportunities later.

I did this to myself; I should have gotten the degree I'm working on now years ago.  In a way I am extremely lucky I get to rectify my mistake at all.  If I have to work a crappy job or hopefully jobs for a few years, that's just how the ball bounces.

[Paddy]

Ah-Hah! Just as I suspected. You are being exploited by those running dogs of capitalism, the corporate globalists.

I'm only half joking. There was a time when employee loyalty and hard work were reciprocated by the employer. People went to work for a company and could remain for the rest of their working career, if they wanted. Companies met their pension obligations after workers retired.

No longer. Corporations today consider their employees liabilities. 
Today's corporate execs are no better than blood sucking parasites. They can only see as far as the next quarter's financial statements; whatever accounting manipulation can boost the bottom line and/or the stock price is what's important. The foolish profit taking 'investors' dictate corporate policy for the quick short term buck.  Then they move on to another 'investment'.

I've been in the corporate world, and I've had it shoved up my ass and broken off. My 'supervisors' have for the most part been phonies who had no idea what they were doing and were subsequently fired (after wreaking havoc with me).

Good luck, Euclidean. You're gonna need it.