tried to pay for three cellphones in cash The cashier declined and asked Davidson to leave
It is my understanding that a business cannot refuse to accept legal tender, is the Treasury Dept going to Prosecute the store??
walked over to Davidson and grabbed him by the arm to get him to leave,pushed him out the doors and told him he was no longer welcome in the store.
Assault and Battery is a CRIME, is the security guard being prosecuted??
There are so many things wrong with this story, the Security Guard had NO RIGHT TO ASSAULT this man, he has every right to escort him out, but once he laid his hands on him without cause, the man had every right to defend himself against this violent criminal.
Yes the Security Guard assaulted this man first and he has every right to defend himself against a violent person. The cop/security guard had it coming to him, in my opinion and should be prosecuted for being the AGGRESSOR in this case.
Now go ahead and tell me this thug deserves some “special right” to Assault people whenever he wants to.
What in the hell are you talking about? This is literally the dumbest thing I’ve ever read on this site. And I’ve been around for some time.
“This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.”
At least that’s what I thought until 5-6 years. I tried to pay a bill at tOSU with cash. Nope. No way. I almost got escorted from the building. I well understand Mr. Davidson’s feelings, although I do not agree with his actions. Nor the LEO’s.
I would like to know why they refused to sell him the three phones.
Please. Think there’s a tiny chance there was some history between this guy and the store (or perhaps you want to take away the store’s right to decide how it runs it’s business)? And maybe some details left out as to what went on between being told to leave and having his arm grabbed?
Wait for the full report.
I am sure we will see this innocent guy didn't simply walk in the store, pick up three phones, take them to the cashier, attempt to pay cash and was out-of-the-blue refused service asked to leave, and the officer just jumped in roughly to forcefully remove this quiet innocent SOB (Son of Barrack) from the store.
We always fuss about media bias and lack of facts when reporting on all things political, and rightfully so. I suggest we also view media reports on situations like this with the same critical eye.
As long as the store did not discriminate based on race, religion, creed, etc it had every right to refuse service for any other reason. It may be bad customer service, but nothing criminal to refuse to serve the man.
Once the cashier asked the man to leave and he didn’t that became trespassing and it is perfectly legal in Texas to remove a trespasser by force. The security guard acted injudiciously but not illegally when he grabbed the man.
Personally I have two concerns here. First is that the off-duty cop’s first instinct was to manhandle an unruly customer which I have to figure is learned behavior from his time on the force. Second it worries me that the DA feels he can charge assault on a public servant even though the off duty cop was acting in a private capacity, as though mere membership in the police club makes you more important that the rest of the population.
I normally don’t call out people on here, but you’re comment is the stupidest comment I’ve seen in a long time.
The business is PRIVATE property and can refuse to business with anyone for any reason and can demand that anyone leave their private property at anytime for any reason. Refusal to leave someone else’s private property is trespassing and is a crime. If the person is wrongfully ordered off the premises (for say like being black or gay) then the person has civil recourse against the company. However, the person is still required to leave the property or face criminal prosecution.
So you’re telling us that you advocate someone coming to your house (private property) and refusing to leave as acceptable behavior and you should not have any recourse to remove the person? How stupid is that???
The cop in TX is still a cop whether on or off duty 24/7. Most likely he was working security in full uniform as well since that is standard practice in TX. He has every right to escort this thug off of the premises, even if by force under TX law. In fact, under TX law, the cop had every right to arrest the thug for trespassing if he refused to leave. The cop was giving the thug a chance to leave rather than go to jail.
Next time, try reading the law and understanding the fact rather than posting something as idiotic as your last rant.
Oh - I guess - by your remarks - you MUST have been there and seen it go down.
DO enlighten us more -
Or do you just KNOW everything?
Your post subtracted from the total sum of human knowledge.
I think once he is asked to leave he is trespassing and subject to arrest. If so, the security guard/off duty officer had the legal right to remove him and/or make an arrest. I don’t believe that would be assault and/or battery.
I see you are taking your lumps with this post.
And some here DO see some logic in what you posted.
Me? I’ll pick on this remark.
“but once he laid his hands on him without cause....”
Without Cause. Some have already pointed out that the Security Guard DID have cause.
Only the video knows the truth.
Yeah, right after they prosecute all the airlines for refusing to take cash for cocktails during flights.