Skip to comments.Mike Rowe Pens Scathing Facebook Post After Liquor Store Disagreement With a Lawyer
Posted on 06/24/2014 8:04:07 PM PDT by AuditTheFed
by Jason DeWitt | Top Right News
One thing we love about Mike Rowe, the former Dirty Jobs TV host and current head of Mike Rowe Works, is that he always speaks his mind. Monday, he did so once again and took on a lawyer in doing so.
Mike hit his local liquor store last week and noticed a picture near the front of the shop: a man in a white shirt that the store was identifying as a shoplifter.
Good for you, Rowe says he told the owner, as he retold the story on a Facebook post: I wish every store in the country did this.
But then someone behind Rowe in line disagreed, saying that it wasnt right to publicly shame someone who may be innocent.
That got Mike a little fired up. He detailed the rest of the story on Facebook:
(Excerpt) Read more at facebook.com ...
Not an attorney. But it seems to me in a case like this truth, as in libel and slander, would be an absolute defense.
If the store owner has the video goods on ‘em...such as them walking out with a fifth tucked under their arm, that should be enough...no verdict required.
Catching all these on camera and yet not apprehending the responsible parties. Why?
Thieves probably do not revisit the store (even for non-theft purposes) because they have been alerted that someone knows who they are, and thus would still be liable to prosecution. I don’t think it’s a shame factor as much as a likelihood of getting caught factor.
You can get sued for anything, and you can lose if you get an incompetent or crooked lawyer, judge, jury, witness, cop, etc.
Slander and libel laws might protect you somewhat from slander and libel laws, but there are a million other ways a crooked lawyer get get you — “settling out of court”, as this lawyer mentioned, is the holy grail for scumbag lawyers (the norm).
The only way to win with honor in the court system is to play beyond their rules, and not get caught.
Because the cops don’t prioritize catching somebody who steals a $40 bottle of Scotch?
Yep. Instead of labeling them with a picture, I’d just run the video of the thief over and over in the store. That’s not slander, it’s fact. Let the shoppers draw their own conclusions.
It might also discourage other folks thinking about stealing.
In Chicago they show up 1/2 an hour after the murder.
Psychology may be a better way. Years ago, I read of a man who owned an inner city liquor store. Frequently robbed, he finally had enough, got a gun, and killed an armed robber.
After the police removed the body, he had to shut the store for the rest of the day to clean up, then got an idea.
The chalk outline, where the robber’s body had been, was still there, so he got some masking tape and white paint, and made it a permanent marking on the floor. He noted after that, that about once a month, some character would come through the door, take one look, and exit never to return. And no more robberies.
Now this set me to think about shoplifters. All there was was the outline of a body on the floor. No context. But to a potential criminal, of *any* kind, they wouldn’t know that it was of an armed robber. Could it be the outline of a shoplifter?
I wonder if it would cut down on shoplifting as well?
Always was a big fan of Mike. Now a bigger fan.
We need to post pics of lawyers along with their home addresses. Use TOR.
If they don’t actually commit the murder in person that is...
The responses on Rowe’s page include a lawyer who said exactly what you said. Truth is an absolute defense. No lawyer would take the case unless he was paid upfront and then he would know that’s all he’s going to get.
The best way to win in court is to be so broke (on paper, at least) that you're judgment-proof. :-)
Most lawyers will never take on a slander/libel suit because in the vast majority of cases it's almost impossible to document any financial harm that the "victim" has suffered.
In the case of this story, I'm not even sure that the owner of the liquor store posted the guy's name -- which makes a libel suit much more difficult. This is because the "victim" of the libel would first have to prove that HE is the one in the photo ... and the process of proving that he was the guy in the photo will do more to give him negative public exposure than the original photo did.
Same Mike Rowe who is narrator on Deadliest Catch?
I was head of store secrity for a time while attending college. Every thief we caught (shoplifter, bad check artists, stolen credit card user, vandal)and convicted got their picture posted on the wall. I overhead some customer say say “Jeez, don’t F around in here! There are 200 apprehensions on that wall!” Worked like a charm. In four years the loss rate down to less than 1%.
Most stores try to strike some balance between unfriendliness and security.
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.