I need to check your receipt

[dburkhead]

Hmmm.....second time in a week that one of the loudest chest-thumpers on the board has spouted off about being arrested/locked up. I think I'm seeing a pattern.

Yeah, a lot of people get arrested who never actually committed a crime.

Or are you one of those who believes that "not guilty" or charges dropped means "they got away with it"?

Innocent people get munched by the system, thrown in with a bunch of real criminals, treated like dirt by both those other criminals and the guards subjected to fear, discomfort, and lost wages, all because of some "oopsie" by the police. And you wonder why those people might have a somewhat jaundiced view of "the system"?

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time." Well, unfortunately, not doing the crime is no guarantee that one won't do some time.

Is it too much to ask the system to remember that a significant number of the people in lockup/jail (not talking about prison here, after conviction) are actually not guilty?

 

[SirRealism]

You assume incorrectly Sir
That remark was directed at nobody in particular unless you are one that says "I don't mind showing my receipt for unbagged items but NOT if that intrepid alarm goes off. I just keep walking if that happens"
That's like saying I don't really mind if they check my receipt to see that I didn't steal that mop handle or case of water... but I will not be hasseled if the cashier didn't properly disarm the security tag in my new copy of Rambo and it made the alarm go off! I didn't do anything wrong for cryin out loud.
Just doesn't make sense to me.

Sorry for the assumption.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Just so everyone is aware of the power Beatrice, the Greeter, has:

****************************************************

IC 35-33-6-2

Probable cause; detention; procedure; statements by juveniles
Sec. 2. (a) An owner or agent of a store who has probable cause to believe that a theft has occurred or is occurring on or about the store and who has probable cause to believe that a specific person has committed or is committing the theft:
(1) may:
(A) detain the person and request the person to identify himself or herself;
(B) verify the identification;
(C) determine whether the person has in the person's possession unpurchased merchandise taken from the store;
(D) inform the appropriate law enforcement officers; and
(E) inform the person's parents or others interested in the person's welfare that the person has been detained; but
(2) shall not ask the person to make a statement that acknowledges that the person committed the theft or conversion or waives any of the person's legal rights if:
(A) the person is less than eighteen (18) years of age; and
(B) the person has not been afforded an opportunity to have a meaningful consultation with his or her parent, guardian, custodian, or guardian ad litem.
(b) A statement acknowledging that a child committed theft or conversion in violation of subdivision (a)(2) cannot be admitted as evidence against the child on the issue of whether the child committed a delinquent act or a crime.
(c) The detention must:
(1) be reasonable and last only for a reasonable time; and
(2) not extend beyond the arrival of a law enforcement officer or two (2) hours, whichever first occurs.

******************************************************

Fear The Beatrice!

 

[jjohnisme]

Ever seen Falling Down with Michale Douglas ?

"There are other people wanting to use the phone?
Well, that's too bad. Because you know what?
[fires into the phone booth]
I think it's out of order."

 

[dburkhead]

Just so everyone is aware of the power Beatrice, the Greeter, has:

****************************************************

IC 35-33-6-2

Probable cause; detention; procedure; statements by juveniles
Sec. 2. (a) An owner or agent of a store who has probable cause to believe that a theft has occurred or is occurring on or about the store and who has probable cause to believe that a specific person has committed or is committing the theft:
(1) may:
(A) detain the person and request the person to identify himself or herself;
(B) verify the identification;
(C) determine whether the person has in the person's possession unpurchased merchandise taken from the store;
(D) inform the appropriate law enforcement officers; and
(E) inform the person's parents or others interested in the person's welfare that the person has been detained; but
(2) shall not ask the person to make a statement that acknowledges that the person committed the theft or conversion or waives any of the person's legal rights if:
(A) the person is less than eighteen (18) years of age; and
(B) the person has not been afforded an opportunity to have a meaningful consultation with his or her parent, guardian, custodian, or guardian ad litem.
(b) A statement acknowledging that a child committed theft or conversion in violation of subdivision (a)(2) cannot be admitted as evidence against the child on the issue of whether the child committed a delinquent act or a crime.
(c) The detention must:
(1) be reasonable and last only for a reasonable time; and
(2) not extend beyond the arrival of a law enforcement officer or two (2) hours, whichever first occurs.

******************************************************

Fear The Beatrice!

What constitutes "probable cause" in such an instance? And what legal remedies are there if the detention is made or attempted without said probable cause?

This kind of reminds me of one of the serious problems with the exclusionary rules for dealing with illegal searches and seizures. I understand the reason the exclusionary rules were started in the first place. Originally, a person whose rights were violated was supposed to sue the government for redress but that was kind of hard to do if illegally obtained evidence had put the person in jail--and so there was no real "incentive" for law enforcement to actually follow the Constitution. And so evidence exclusion became that incentive and the form of redress.

The problem with that is when the government agents don't really care if the evidence is excluded or not. Case in point the US Marshals service tracking down fugitives as described in the book "Manhunter" (the autobiography of the Marshal who, among other things tracked down Mengele--or his body rather). They could ignore the Constitution because even if any evidence they found was excluded they had the original warrant for the guy being tracked.

Now, I'm all for putting bad guys away, but I'm more for protecting the innocent from the actions of government. And in the Marshal's case it wasn't just the fugitive whose rights were violated.

 

[JetGirl]

Perhaps my soft and cuddly facial expression, makes me appear innocent.....

That MUST be it.

has probable cause to believe that a theft has occurred

So exiting the store is probable cause? ...it's every. Single. Person. Leaving.
They think every single shopper is a thief?

 

[Scout]

Thats the line they parrot, when in truth less than 5% of "shrinkage" falls under that category.

The vast majority is by employees and vendors. Vendors steal stores blind. They never walk in with the merchandise, get a signature saying they brought it in while it was in their vehicle the whole time.

When I was a truck driver I used to deliver to Home Depot, and I once watched them throwing out carts and carts of good stuff. I asked about it and they said "You wouldn't believe."

If I was forcibly detained, I would ask exactly what they believe to be taken, ask to see the video, and ask for a police officer to do the search. I would tell them to tell the cop what they think I took.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What constitutes "probable cause" in such an instance? And what legal remedies are there if the detention is made or attempted without said probable cause?

Probable cause=>fair probability that one is shoplifting.

Remedies=>lawsuit, potential criminal charges (but unlikely)

IC 35-33-6-4

Civil or criminal actions; exclusion of lawful detention; burden of proof

Sec. 4. A civil or criminal action against:
(1) an owner or agent of a store or motion picture exhibition facility; or
(2) a law enforcement officer;
may not be based on a detention that was lawful under section 2 or 2.5 of this chapter. However, the defendant has the burden of proof that the defendant acted with probable cause under section 2 or 2.5

So exiting the store is probable cause?

Certainly not.

But maybe exiting the store like in Animal House where they stuff all the steaks down his sweater, "nothing for me today, thanks."

I just smile and wave at Beatrice. I'm not doing anything wrong so I'm not stopping. However, if I am carting out a couple of cases of .22 (yeah, like I used to and like to now), I would slow down and wave the receipt at Beatrice and tell her that I paid in sporting goods.

If the store dicks want to run after me in the parking lot, O.K. fine, but there might be a little litigation involved later.

 

[IndyBeerman]

The vast majority is by employees and vendors. Vendors steal stores blind. They never walk in with the merchandise, get a signature saying they brought it in while it was in their vehicle the whole time.

May I ask what proof that you have that says vendors steal stores blind.
Be very careful on how you answer this because how you do will depend on just how reply back to this.

 

[wtfd661]

Is it too much to ask the system to remember that a significant number of the people in lockup/jail (not talking about prison here, after conviction) are actually not guilty?

Hate to burst your bubble, but there is no significant number of people in lockup/jail (and I'm also talking about prior to conviction) that are innocent. Now you ask your self how does he know this, well I'll tell you its because I worked in the lockup/jail in a good size community for 15 years. Truth be told the significant number of people incarcerated (even the ones prior to conviction) are guilty. Sorry but thats the truth.

 

[public servant]

Hate to burst your bubble, but there is no significant number of people in lockup/jail (and I'm also talking about prior to conviction) that are innocent. Now you ask your self how does he know this, well I'll tell you its because I worked in the lockup/jail in a good size community for 15 years. Truth be told the significant number of people incarcerated (even the ones prior to conviction) are guilty. Sorry but thats the truth.

I can't verify any sources...but the last numbers I recall hearing were that an estimated 1/10th of 1% of the people that were incarcerated for a crime were actually innocent...on a national average.

In Marion County an average of 60 to 65,000 people are arrested each year (but I believe that number is down the last few years). That would mean an average of 60-65 of those may actually be innocent. Too high...but not that bad of an average IMO...unless you're one of the 60-65 people. The system isn't perfect...but it's not a bad system.

It does however take too long. A simple misdemeanor marijuana charge can drag out for 2, 3, 4 years or more. There are things that need fixed. But it's the only system we have. And in my opinion it works.

Again...I can't verify those numbers. It's simply what I was told by a prosecutor. If you want to dispute the numbers...feel free. I'm sure that if you took 30 seconds to look in the right place you could find a questionable source that says 95% of those incarcerated are innocent.

 

[hc4sar]

JAY KING KONG wouldn't ask you for your recipt even if you gave them your best warm and fuzzy smile!! so says the BLONDE.

 

[dburkhead]

Hate to burst your bubble, but there is no significant number of people in lockup/jail (and I'm also talking about prior to conviction) that are innocent. Now you ask your self how does he know this, well I'll tell you its because I worked in the lockup/jail in a good size community for 15 years. Truth be told the significant number of people incarcerated (even the ones prior to conviction) are guilty. Sorry but thats the truth.

I'm sure that belief comforts you.

 

[dburkhead]

I can't verify any sources...but the last numbers I recall hearing were that an estimated 1/10th of 1% of the people that were incarcerated for a crime were actually innocent...on a national average.

In Marion County an average of 60 to 65,000 people are arrested each year (but I believe that number is down the last few years). That would mean an average of 60-65 of those may actually be innocent. Too high...but not that bad of an average IMO...unless you're one of the 60-65 people. The system isn't perfect...but it's not a bad system.

It does however take too long. A simple misdemeanor marijuana charge can drag out for 2, 3, 4 years or more. There are things that need fixed. But it's the only system we have. And in my opinion it works.

Again...I can't verify those numbers. It's simply what I was told by a prosecutor. If you want to dispute the numbers...feel free. I'm sure that if you took 30 seconds to look in the right place you could find a questionable source that says 95% of those incarcerated are innocent.

"Incarcerated" usually means prison--you know, after conviction.

But thank you for demonstrating what has been told to me before and that I didn't want to believe: if a person is found "not guilty" the assumption of the police is not that they got the wrong guy (and thus might actually look for the person who is actually guilty) but instead that the person "got away with it."

You really mean to sit there and say with a straight face that the police only make a mistake one time in a thousand? I might believe that of the final outcome of the system (and even there, well, I want to see the actual source to see what it actually says and on what it's based and not "what [you] remember hearing"), but from simple arrest?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

 

[wtfd661]

I'm sure that belief comforts you.

And I'm sure that the fact that you just HAVE to know more about this then me must bring a tremendous amount of comfort and satisfaction to you.

 

[jedi]

Simple solution. DO NOT SHOW @ WAL-MART. I've been WAL-MART free for 12 weeks now. The wife is going on 6 weeks.
1) I have noticed that their prices (at least in Scherville, IN) have gone up.
2) When they started the remodeling of the store they had a freaking mess! It was worse than what K-Mart looks like everyday & I have not shopped at KMart since last winter.
3) I'm willing to pay a little more for food/basic goods and keep my local grocery store & fruit place in biz. They have much better customer service anyways. Plus I can walk to/from that store and not use up any gas. =)

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

In Marion County an average of 60 to 65,000 people are arrested each year (but I believe that number is down the last few years).

It blows my mind to think that we have that many arrests each year .

 

[dburkhead]

And I'm sure that the fact that you just HAVE to know more about this then me must bring a tremendous amount of comfort and satisfaction to you.

First "significant number" does not mean "majority."

Last time I looked into it about 40% of people arrested have charges dropped. Of the remainder, between 1 and 2 thirds end up being acquitted.

That means that more than half of people arrested are not convicted.

But, of course, you in your infinite wisdom are so certain that you can spot the guilty that the justice system just lets walk. And the police, of course, would never make a mistake and arrest someone who didn't actually commit the crime.

Must be nice to be so perfect.

 

[dburkhead]

It blows my mind to think that we have that many arrests each year .

It blows my mind that anyone could claim a 99.9% accuracy record in arresting the actual guilty party with a straight face.

 

[Oldcoyotedream]

This actually happened to me.
At Wal-Mart in Avon there was an ethnic family and then an ethnic gentleman with full carts in front of me as I exited the interior doors. I too had a full cart. The “Greeter” stepped in front of me and asked for my receipt. In a very loud voice I started in with “ Oh yea pick on the white guy cause you can’t speak Spanish, Go ahead and single me out because you think I’m passive enough to give into your racism, I’m tired of being discriminated against, you think I’m stealing because I’m white? I’m an American, I served my Country, I pay my Taxes, I’m not a Felon, Why does Wal-Mart continue to persecute me as if I had a Tattoo on my forehead saying don’t trust this guy. Why, Why, Why? Either ask every single customer or don’t ask anyone!

About that time a manager was there flailing his arms in the air and saying we are sorry for any inconvenience, Please Sir have a nice day.

I have seen that same greeter since and he hides when he sees me - LOL