Posted on 11/30/2021 6:16:45 AM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
OBILE, Ala. (AP) — An Alabama woman who says she was falsely arrested for shoplifting at a Walmart and then threatened by the company after her case was dismissed has been awarded $2.1 million in damages.
A Mobile County jury on Monday ruled in favor of Lesleigh Nurse of Semmes, news outlets reported.
Nurse said in a lawsuit that she was stopped in November 2016 when trying to leave a Walmart with groceries she said she already paid for, according to AL.com. She said she used self-checkout but the scanning device froze. Workers didn’t accept her explanation and she was arrested for shoplifting.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
If the scanning device freezes, then you obviously have to stop what you’re doing and get some help. Customer service was probably right there.
Wow! Talk about reparations!
Expropriate the Expropriators!
I’m not sure I understand, and reading the entire article didn’t help. If the scanning device froze, how could she have paid for her goods? You pay after you have scanned everything. Is she saying it froze during payment?
If the scanning device froze how could she have paid for them?
yep- if it froze then she didn’t pay and she shoplifted/stole.
Aren’t AL juries notorious for awarding HUGE settlements?
And, yeah, get a receipt or get CS.
Somehow she was able to prove the groceries were paid for...credit card charge,.,,food stamp card ETB card etc...
Maybe the machine had taken her payment but it froze during the receipt process...
Could have been out of paper also...
“Maybe there’s more to the story”
of course it is. It’s the AP.
Actually nothing to do with the case but does anybody else think she should change her name to Naughty?
“Maybe there’s more to the story”
YEP! They tell us what’s necessary to get their desired reaction from us.
In this case, I suspect she had spray paint, alcohol, or something else that required assistance...and yes, that does ‘freeze’ the machine until the worker keys-in a code.
Walmart probably got a bit cocky, thinking they’d win regardless of the effort they put into defending themselves...but they’ll try harder on appeal, trust me.
“Checkout froze”, means that it’s all free, right? Like “lucky looting “, the doors were open, so you just take stuff you want.
I’ll bet she’d be pissed if some Dindu and Ta’quan (pun intended) guys took stuff out of her refrigerator and left out.
She might have been buying beer. It requires an attendant to verify age.
“Somehow she was able to prove the groceries were paid for...credit card charge,.,,food stamp card ETB card etc...”
Where did you see that?
What profiling! Looks like a Walmartian.
This woman has 2 chances of collecting the 2.1 million, slim and none and you can forget about slim.
“Her case was dismissed a year later, but then she received letters from a Florida law firm threatening a civil suit if she didn’t pay $200 as a settlement, according to her lawsuit. That was more than the cost of the groceries she was accused of stealing.
Nurse said Walmart instructed the law firm to send the letters — and that she wasn’t the only one receiving them.
“The defendants have engaged in a pattern and practice of falsely accusing innocent Alabama citizens of shoplifting and thereafter attempting to collect money from the innocently accused,” the suit contended.
WKRG reported that the trial featured testimony that Walmart and other major retailers routinely use such settlements in states where laws allow it, and that Walmart made hundreds of millions of dollars this way in a two-year period.
Defense attorneys for Walmart said the practice is legal in Alabama. A spokesperson told AL.com that the company will be filing motions in this case because it doesn’t “believe the verdict is supported by the evidence and the damages awarded exceed what is allowed by law.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.