Man dies in scuffle with security guards

The Cleveland Advocate ^ | 08/10/2005 | Jamie Nash

[eastforker]

No, his stealing is what led to his death.

[ContemptofCourt]

eastforker is just trying to justify this guy's death in any way that he can....apparently he is an ends-justifies-the-means kinda guy.

[mhking]

Ties go to the security guards...

[ContemptofCourt]

Lets see:

1. He steals

2. He is subdued and handcuffed and restrained.

3. He dies.

-----------

Looks to me like there was a rather significant step between 1 and 3.

[Have Ruck - Will Travel]

Yeah, I get that feeling too. I just wonder why?

Take care,

Ruck

[Black Tooth]

>>Wal-Mart officials say company policy states that security guards must see a suspect hide an item and walk past the registers to the front door before a minimum of two guards can confront the suspect. Next, the guard must ask the suspect to return the stolen item. If a suspect tries to flee, handcuffs can be used for restraint. Jessica Moser, a corporate spokeswoman, said that although shoplifting policies vary from store to store, under no circumstances do any of the policies allow guards to kick a suspect. "We don’t want to make a scene," Moser said. "We accompany them to a private office in the store and then fill out paperwork. Our utmost priority is the safety of the employees and the customers. If they have a weapon, we just call police. If we can stop them, then we do."<<

Is this what you are referring to? Were these armed security gurards or unarmed LP staff?

My point is, you'd have to be a complete idiot to follow this policy. "If we can stop them, then we do so" LOL! Is this after their head is blown off? How do they know who is armed and who isn't? Too funny.

[eastforker]

Why are you trying to justify that it is okay to steal and when caught you can run and fight?

[ContemptofCourt]

Why are you trying to justify that it is OK to kill someone for shoplifting?

It is not OK to steal. But last I checked, the penalty for shoplifting (a misdemeanor) was not death. Hell, in most cases the only penalty is a civil fine.

[vrwc0915]

Not a single one! The only time I ever touched a person that was not being arrested was a push with a baton in order to put distance between myself and an irate victims parent. Slamming someones head into anything is not only opening yourself for IA but poor tactics. I don't know what you are trying to get at with your comments. I despise all excessive force regardless of the person who is applying the force employment status ie government or private

[Black Tooth]

He died because he decided to steal again, it is his fault, he knew better. 6'1" and 220 # is alot to subdue, I bet he was fighting the whole way.

I can't imagine walmart is this stupid. If you were an unarmed LP employee, getting paid $10 bucks an hour, would you go after people in the parking lot and get physical with them for stealing walmart trinkets?

I'd say this was a suicidal policy for Walmart LP folks.

[eastforker]

Did you read the Texas law I cited about what owners of property. or their agent, are permitted to do to secure stolen property. If he had stopped when he was detected instead of running this incident would have never happened. If he had not run he would have been taken into custody, went in front of a judge and because of his past record probably gone to prison.

[Black Tooth]

I'll tell you what will probably happen next. Walmart will be sued by the dead suspects family.

Next, the Walmart LP guys will sue Walmart for injuries they sustained while attempting to to apprehend the suspect, and for walmarts policy, that puts them in grave danger.

[ContemptofCourt]

What you posted says that they could use force...which is called reasonable force. They do not fall within 9.42, which authorizes the use of deadly force.

Besides, it looks like they acted negligently, b/c properly restraining someone does not result in death by asphixyation.

[eastforker]

I really doubt it, not down here.

[Melas]

Yep murder. Plain and simple, murder. What's worse, this guy obviously new he was in bad shape at some point and began begging for his life. These scumbags that killed him deserve a short stay at Huntsville. They'll never get it of course, but I'll settle for 25 years of hard time.

[eastforker]

There is no such thing as excessive force, just force and deadly force. They did not use deadly force, the guy happened to die while being subdude with force, no malice and no intent to kill.

[NJ_gent]

"My point is, you'd have to be a complete idiot to follow this policy."

Those who are unable or unwilling to follow the policies set by their employers should probably seek employment elsewhere. If Loss Prevention Employees are expected under policy to detain the suspect, then detain him they should. Should they also use reasonable and approrpriate force? Sure. Whether that was the case here is something we'll be better able to judge once both sides have had a chance to tell their side in court.

[Black Tooth]

Bet me.

Happens all time, everywhere.

[Willie Green]

They weren't punishing him they were restraining him. Don't steal and you won't fry.

Yeah, yeah, yeah...

For some reason, I've had this flash vision of the classic "guy-left-out-in-the-desert-to-die".
You know, the one where he's laid out flat on his back, arms and legs stretched out and tied down to stakes, with vultures circling overhead and the desert sun beating down on him...
In comparison, THAT horrific scenario is really quite serene...
at least the dude staked down in the desert didn't have a half-dozen obese WalMart associates piled on top of him, squashing him into the hot desert sand.

[Black Tooth]

Those who are unable or unwilling to follow the policies set by their employers should probably seek employment elsewhere.

Doesn't matter my friend. If they followed *Walmarts* suicide policy, like they were suppose to, and they are injured in the process of attempting to subdue a suspect, Walmart is liable. Period, end of story.