Walmart greeter, 69, roughed up by customer (Retired Marine hits back; Video)

Your on the store's property, the alarm goes off even falsely, you refuse to stop and show a receipt. Great way to show what big guys you are, then you get to spend the next couple of hours explaining the whole thing nicely to the LEO. Or if you don't want to explain it nicely to the LEO then you get to explain it nicely to the Judge.

Smart like rutabaga.

The kid? Where did you get the idea it was a kid. The article refers to him as a man. Your take on this astounds me.

Did the marine push the man, or did the man back away because he didn’t want to give up the clipboard? I still marvel at your ability to interpret this in the most favorable light for the person who took the clipboard. You find the marine at fault, and the man just being taken advantage of at that point.

What more can I say? Perhaps the marine should have said, “Hey... like I’m sorry I challenged you... can I please have my clipboard back? Please forgive me will ya. I was so out of line to challenge you once the alarm went off.” Good grief.

Once the man took the clipboard, he was at fault. Once he accosted the employee rather than comply, he was the guilty party.

What do you think the job of the greeter is, if an alarm goes off when a person exits? Of course the guy is going to ask the customer to take a look. Big deal. One short look in the bag checked against the receipt and the customer would be on his way.

Instead he become physical. And taking that clipboard was assault. You cannot touch another person, period.

I work in a retail store that has those scanners and they go off all the time—many times when no one is even near them!

I will also tell you that Thom Mcan shoes set them off in other stores even if they are deactivated at the purchasing store. Something about the magnet they use...

So, no, the devices are not flawless, and at my company we have been told not to stop or pursue anyone who refuses to come back when they go off.

Store employees, security or otherwise, may not control my actions w/o my permission,

You of course are INCORRECT. In common law and statutory law (for some/many states) Merchant or Shopkeeper's Privilege is fairly well established and they may control you for short periods, assuming they have reasonable cause. It's not always black or white (giving myself wiggle room)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shopkeeper%27s_privilege

At some establishments those alarms do seem to have a lot of false negatives. Generally a short glance back at the staff will let you know if you need to stop or not. Generally they just wave you on.

Boy! You need to read what you write BEFORE you post. Whew!

Just for the record, my son is a combat (0311) Marine with 2 Iraq tours, a tour in Africa and a tour in Cuba. Kicking doors and kicking ass - I know he would not have done this.

That said, the younger man was at fault for grabbing the clipboard. At that point, charges MAY have been possible, as he only grabbed the clipboard.

The greeter (knowingly or deliberately) escalated the situation by
1) Following the man inside
2) Jumping the man and shoving the man into the pylon. At that point the greeter can have assault charges filed on him.

I have no idea of what was said, very likely it has some bearing.

The man then lands a glancing blow to the greeters head, (now it is assault) who in turn, struck the man hard enough “he would have been knocked out” Assault again.

I had hoped to avoid this comment -
If the man who grabbed the clipboard had a knife or gun, the greeter would be dead.

I don't know about you, but a minimum wage job is not worth my life, or even being injured.

The greeter could have (and I believe should have)
1) Stayed outside and waited for Security
2) Stayed outside and taken down the license number of the car - oops, that is his primary job, eh?
3) Calmly walked back inside and asked for his clipboard.

It is easy to get in a fight and get hurt, or hurt someone else.

It is even harder to be a MAN and try to deescalate the situation.

Like I said earlier, the greeter was likely an old school Marine.

And as a manager I would have canned him on the spot. Well, we would have to the office and in front of at least one witness, fired him for cause.

Not because of the customer, but I would not want to pay for a dead or injured employee, or even an injured (other) customer.

Two typos are enough for you to remark upon it?

You must be the busiest man on the internet. And the most important.

Why don’t you share the real reason you have a problem with my post?

Just plain silly. You know what you need to do? You need to read what you write and then decide if it even matters BEFORE you post. Your mother may have never told you this...but not every thought that springs into your head needs to be shared with others. If the best you can do is cry over two typos then you’ve already lost.

On the other hand, if you are a mentally normal human adult, you understand there is no reason NOT to show a receipt...

Of course, there's always the signs that are posted..."We reserve the right..."

I think I understand why jackibutterfly is stalking me and attempting to correct my posts. I hurt his feelings pretty badly with my brutal use of logic in another thread a few days ago. So my mistake that consisted of two typos was just the opportunity he was waiting for to pounce and secure victory. The sad thing is he’s been tracking me for days and just now got his opportunity.

Hey jack...since you and I are friends now, I think I’ll check every future post you make for grammar...since it is so important to you and all. Thanks for the lookout, friend. I’ll be sure and return the favor 6 fold.

In discussion with my wife, I believe I know why we (or at least me) sees this is such different terms.

I live Anchorage, AK. Alaska is not just a “Shall Issue” state, there is no permit requirement to carry a weapon concealed. None, period.

The only rational attitude I can have is that everyone I meet, talk to or interact with has in their possession the means to either kill me or injure me gravely. Period.

Robert Heinlein once famously said - "An armed society is a polite society." There have been several shootings here where an argument turned deadly because one or more of the folks involved were armed. The shooters went to jail of course, but that is little comfort to a widow.

I also carry and that is a termendous responsibility - both to my family and to other citizens here. Hence, the effort to ignore, walk away, deescalate as the rational response to childish or stupid behavior on the part of others.

At this stage, I guess we can agree to disagree. Good night.

If you're attempting to say your son would allow someone to walk off with store merchandise without challenging the individual I'm sorry you harbor that misconception. Lets review.

1. Exiting customer triggers alarm system
2. Greeter challenges customer
3. Customer ignores greeter and goes to his car
4. Greeter does not pursue, but documents vehicle license number
5. Customer becomes incensed, runs at greeter, rips clipboard with documentation out of his hands, and goes back into store
6. Customer attempts to rip license documentation off the clipboard

Your son wouldn't have done this?

This is what transpired to this point. The customer is clearly exhibiting a high level of antisocial behavior here. The greeter has done absolutely nothing wrong.

Despite this unwarranted physical display by the customer you term it as "knowingly or deliberately escalating the situation" for the greeter to go back into the store. That displays an incredible lack of understanding IMO.

You seem to be aware of the agitated state of the customer, but think the greeter is the real problem here. How you came to that conclusion truly baffles me, but you have.

The greeter has just had his clipboard ripped out of his hands by a furious customer clearly out of control and exhibiting a propensity to turn violent. The customer has run back inside. What reasonable conclusion should the greeter come to?

1. This guy won't cause any trouble inside if I stay outside?
2. This guy is acting very irrational and could very easily harm other employees, customers, or damage store property?

I'm thinking option two here. You've already made you opinion known.

If option two above is the more rational view, what next?

1. Stand outside and let others fend for themselves, possibly being blind sided or otherwise seriously injured?
2. Go back inside and try to help out?

Once again I'm thinking option 2 here, and once again you've made your opinion known.

Look where the vehicle was parked. It was as close to the exit as possible. Employees could easily come to the conclusion this guy had planned all along to rip the store off. The behavior seemed to indicate this.

The greeter saw the customer trying to destroy the license documentation and he tried to recover it. He didn't want this guy to be able to cause more trouble and possibly run off before the license info could be documented again.

He took hold of the clipboard, the customer resisted and the greeter put his shoulder into him to pry it away. It was his property. He had every right to, and every reason to. He did not seek to strike the individual to recover the clipboard.

Several times here you have sought to demean the 69 year old marine, by stating he was probably on old school Marine. The last time you did it, you attempted to explain what a real man does, as if this greeter wasn't a real man. I take exception to that. That's offensive to me and I'm not even a Marine.

By trying to explain what the greeter did wrong, you have in effect exonerated the violent customer. The customer who was clearly out of control may just as easily as not have exited the store to strike the greeter if he had not ventured inside the store to confront him there.

In my past experience, when you allow a guy to think you won't go physical on them, its a open invitation for them to go physical on you with little chance you'll decide to stand up for yourself then.

The greeter displayed just the right amount of force needed to reclaim his property. It was the right thing to do.

Then you bring lethal force into this. Okay great, you carry. While I approve of that, it leads me to wonder what the hell your true motive was bringing that up. Were you privately thinking, if that greeter had treated me that way I would have opened up on him? I know you also mentioned minumum wages and this not being something you would do for that amount of pay. And thus I can only observe that this greeter showed more manhood than you would have.

It's evidently your opinion that an express line should be opened up so people who wish to steal from local stores can do it without being inconvenienced.

I say no to that.

I think your son would have gone back inside and dealt with this individual. I also think it would have become physical at some point no matter how hard he tried to resolve the situation peacefully.

Once again, from my past experience, if you try to defuse the situation that can be seen as weakness, and inspire an attack in and of itself. You just don't know. Second guessing the greeter is shamefull IMO.

The perp could have de-escalated...

1. when initially approached
2. when he chose to run at the greeter instead of drive off
3. when he was confronted inside and the clipboard became an issue
4. once the greeter tried to take the clipboard back
5. after the clipboard was taken away from him

The perp was held and handed off to the local police. They determined his demeaner required that he be place into custody.

I think their opinion is more reasoned than your misguided criticizing of the greeter is.

The greeter deserves a commendation for his actions in this matter.

Probably exactly what went down here.

There is no duty to show a receipt.

Not exactly. Under Florida law the security alarm is sufficient probable cause to detain the party. FS 812.015(3) You may choose not to show the receipt but then you can be held pending arrival of the police.

The charges here are indeed for striking the greeter. And OMG, that's the local store.

Today's story is the perp is claiming self defense.

Not in Florida. The Legislature has deemed the alarm system to be sufficient probable cause to make the stop reasonable, not unreasonable. And if you did resist and could not prove a receipt for everything on your person, you’d face a first degree misdemeanor charge.

Where did I say resist? I have firmly stated, “not comply”.

I also indicated I routnely insure my receipt matches the contents of my purchase. Personal responsibility.

I said "if you resist," don't get huffy. Read the statute. Isn't knowing the law part of personal responsibility too? That's why I looked it up, wondering what gave the store the authority to stop you.

Probable cause for whom? A store proprietor or a peace officer?

Probable cause for whom? A store proprietor or a peace officer?

Both. FS 812.015

(3)(a) A law enforcement officer, a merchant, a farmer, or a transit agency's employee or agent, who has probable cause to believe that a retail theft, farm theft, a transit fare evasion, or trespass, or unlawful use or attempted use of any antishoplifting or inventory control device countermeasure, has been committed by a person and, in the case of retail or farm theft, that the property can be recovered by taking the offender into custody may, for the purpose of attempting to effect such recovery or for prosecution, take the offender into custody and detain the offender in a reasonable manner for a reasonable length of time. In the case of a farmer, taking into custody shall be effectuated only on property owned or leased by the farmer. In the event the merchant, merchant's employee, farmer, or a transit agency's employee or agent takes the person into custody, a law enforcement officer shall be called to the scene immediately after the person has been taken into custody.
(b) The activation of an antishoplifting or inventory control device as a result of a person exiting an establishment or a protected area within an establishment shall constitute reasonable cause for the detention of the person so exiting by the owner or operator of the establishment or by an agent or employee of the owner or operator, provided sufficient notice has been posted to advise the patrons that such a device is being utilized. Each such detention shall be made only in a reasonable manner and only for a reasonable period of time sufficient for any inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the activation of the device.
(c) The taking into custody and detention by a law enforcement officer, merchant, merchant's employee, farmer, or a transit agency's employee or agent, if done in compliance with all the requirements of this subsection, shall not render such law enforcement officer, merchant, merchant's employee, farmer, or a transit agency's employee or agent, criminally or civilly liable for false arrest, false imprisonment, or unlawful detention.

[emphasis added]Note also in the definition part of that statute

(1)(h) "Antishoplifting or inventory control device" means a mechanism or other device designed and operated for the purpose of detecting the removal from a mercantile establishment or similar enclosure, or from a protected area within such an enclosure, of specially marked or tagged merchandise. The term includes any electronic or digital imaging or any video recording or other film used for security purposes and the cash register tape or other record made of the register receipt.

thus, even a video tape of you doing something innocent yet suspicious looking is sufficient to stop you and you have little or no recourse.

Why didn’t the numbnut just stop and show his receipt?

Maybe because we're TIRED of being treated like criminals? Maybe because once the payment is received it's HIS property to do with as he sees fit?

Receipt checks are disgusting.