"Your Papers, Please", Ohio Man Arrested for Refusing to Show Receipt at Circuit City

[willard 0]

Your link to the Ohio Revised Code is irrelevent. He was not charged with a crime under the ORC.

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

And that is what he did, and that is when the CC folk crossed the line. But they still didn't violate any of his rights by asking to see his receipt.

Of course they didn't violate any rights by making a request - however they treated it as a demand and tried to force him to comply. You agree that there was absolutely nothing wrong in what the author did in refusing to show his receipt?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[willard 0]

Quote

You agree that there was absolutely nothing wrong in what the author did in refusing to show his receipt?

Yep. The store was within it's rights to ask, he was within his rights to refuse.

He will probably sue CC. Whether or not he has a case strong enough to stand up in court is for the lawyers to decide. My feeling is he does not. His refusal to show his receipt (even though not required by law, as far as we know) and getting into a vehicle waiting just outside the exit may be considered by a judge or jury to be enough to cause reasonable suspicion. But that is for a judge or jury to decide.

The citation he was issued has nothing to do with what went on in the store and everything to do with the way he interacted with the police officer. What exactly went on is something we don't know.

People have rights. Many people, this kid is obviously one of them, don't understand that with those rights comes the responsibility to exercise them wisely. He was well within his rights to not show his receipt, but it wouldn't have hurt him a bit to do so. He should not have been surprised at the reactions of the store personel.

[airdvr 198]

Quote

Quote

And that is what he did, and that is when the CC folk crossed the line. But they still didn't violate any of his rights by asking to see his receipt.

Of course they didn't violate any rights by making a request - however they treated it as a demand and tried to force him to comply. You agree that there was absolutely nothing wrong in what the author did in refusing to show his receipt?

No. The store has a right to see your receipt. He actually violated the store's right to see it. They're not doing a search, rather a verification which is within their rights.

I'm pretty sure that the door monkey wasn't properly trained in what to do in the event someone refuses. I've seen it time and again. You give someone some power and they feel an obligation to excercise it above and beyond where the fence is built. His actions were consistent with dealing with a "known" shoplifter and that wasn't the case here.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[gmanpilot 0]

Quote

He was well within his rights to not show his receipt, but it wouldn't have hurt him a bit to do so. He should not have been surprised at the reactions of the store personel.

Sure he should have been surprised, as would I. If the nimrod tries to physically prevent me from leaving with no legal justification, I get to physically defend myself against unlawfull detention/assault. Good times!

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

[Armour666 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

After he called 911 he had an obligation, moraly if not legally, to cooperate with the officer sent. He did not do this and was cited. Whether that citation holds up is yet to be seen.

He did cooperate within the boundaries of the law. We are not required to hand over paper to an officer. Be it a DL, passport or birth certificate. I went 12 years without a DL. Should I be arrested if not able to hand over a DL if requested to do so?
The charge against him is a trumped up general purpose charge. The cop has nothing and is only wasting the taxpayers money. Any smart prosecutor would run far away from this one.

You have a law degree? Where from?
As my post stated, he also had a MORAL obligation to cooperate. He was, after all, the one who called the police, why would he NOT cooperate???

He did coperate and the cop agred with him that the CC staf had no right to detaine him. He coperated by identifying himself with what was requiered by law. Just because he didn't not produce physical identification which is no requiered bu Ohio law how is that not coperating ?

SO this one time at band camp.....

"Of all the things I've lost I miss my mind the most."

[gmanpilot 0]

Quote

No. The store has a right to see your receipt.

No they do not. The merchandise and the receipt are his property the second he pays for it and he can do with it what he wishes. The only right the store has at that point is to ask him to leave and not come back.

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

He was well within his rights to not show his receipt, but it wouldn't have hurt him a bit to do so. He should not have been surprised at the reactions of the store personel.

Sure he should have been surprised, as would I. If the nimrod tries to physically prevent me from leaving with no legal justification, I get to physically defend myself against unlawfull detention/assault. Good times!

Oh, really? You'd look pretty silly when that "nimrod" body slams you onto the ground.

[SpeedRacer 1]

"Nimrod"???

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[kallend 1,635]

Quote

Quote

Quote

And that is what he did, and that is when the CC folk crossed the line. But they still didn't violate any of his rights by asking to see his receipt.

Of course they didn't violate any rights by making a request - however they treated it as a demand and tried to force him to comply. You agree that there was absolutely nothing wrong in what the author did in refusing to show his receipt?

No. The store has a right to see your receipt. He actually violated the store's right to see it. They're not doing a search, rather a verification which is within their rights.

Nonsense. They already saw it, and then gave it to him. It's now his, as is the merchandize.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

Quote

Quote

He was well within his rights to not show his receipt, but it wouldn't have hurt him a bit to do so. He should not have been surprised at the reactions of the store personel.

Sure he should have been surprised, as would I. If the nimrod tries to physically prevent me from leaving with no legal justification, I get to physically defend myself against unlawfull detention/assault. Good times!

Oh, really? You'd look pretty silly when that "nimrod" body slams you onto the ground.

Excellent! They have the right to do to you anything that you can't prevent them from doing?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[freethefly 6]

Quote

You still haven't answered my question.
Which of his rights were violated in the store when they asked to see his receipt? It can't be too hard to figure out, right? I mean, after all, you do know your rights, correct?

Okay Georgie, maybe it is a comprehension problem on your behalf as I believe that I have answered your question. You want to know what rights have been violated? I believe it was an attempt to search personal property withouut reasonable cause. Once the transaction of full payment has been made the goods purchased becomes the sole property of the person making the payment.
If a store asked to pat you down would you allow that? I see it as the same as asking to inspect my purchase for stolen property.
I know the law in the state inwhich I live and now I know a lot more about the law in Ohio after reading the codes. I suggest that you do the same.

Quote

It is not the obligation of the store to know his personal policies. He came onto their property. Invited there or not it is their policies he must follow, not vice-versa.

How is it his obligation to seek out the stores policy towards unwarranted search? Do you walk into a store and immediatly ask for their policies? If a store wants me to be aware that I may be searched they need to hang a sign at the entrance informing me beforehand. Not while I am leaving after patronizing their establishment.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

You still haven't answered my question.
Which of his rights were violated in the store when they asked to see his receipt? It can't be too hard to figure out, right? I mean, after all, you do know your rights, correct?

Okay Georgie, maybe it is a comprehension problem on your behalf as I believe that I have answered your question. You want to know what rights have been violated? I believe it was an attempt to search personal property withouut reasonable cause. Once the transaction of full payment has been made the goods purchased becomes the sole property of the person making the payment.
If a store asked to pat you down would you allow that? I see it as the same as asking to inspect my purchase for stolen property.
I know the law in the state inwhich I live and now I know a lot more about the law in Ohio after reading the codes. I suggest that you do the same.

Quote

It is not the obligation of the store to know his personal policies. He came onto their property. Invited there or not it is their policies he must follow, not vice-versa.

How is it his obligation to seek out the stores policy towards unwarranted search? Do you walk into a store and immediatly ask for their policies? If a store wants me to be aware that I may be searched they need to hang a sign at the entrance informing me beforehand. Not while I am leaving after patronizing their establishment.

Great. That's all the world needs is another self-educated lawyer.
FYI, they didn't attempt or even ask to do a search. They only asked to see his receipt. According to the kids own article they didn't even ask to look in his bag, only to examine his receipt. Nothing about that violated his rights until they stopped him from leaving the parking lot.

BTW, since you callled me Georgie does that mean you are female? I only ask because it's really kinda strange that a man would call me that.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

And that is what he did, and that is when the CC folk crossed the line. But they still didn't violate any of his rights by asking to see his receipt.

Of course they didn't violate any rights by making a request - however they treated it as a demand and tried to force him to comply. You agree that there was absolutely nothing wrong in what the author did in refusing to show his receipt?

No. The store has a right to see your receipt. He actually violated the store's right to see it. They're not doing a search, rather a verification which is within their rights.

Nonsense. They already saw it, and then gave it to him. It's now his, as is the merchandize.

If the store layout were such that each checkout line exited through it's own doorway to the outside then you are absolutly right. There would be no reason to check for a receipt even if the cashier were crooked.
But stores aren't like that. The checkout lines exit into a common area with usually one exit to the outside. It makes sense that a store put someone there to double check people as they leave to make sure they did indeed pay for what they are carrying. After all, that is their last chance to catch a thief before they leave the store. Whether that thief is working alone or with a crooked cashier is moot. The store has a right to prevent theft and this is a very reasonable measure.

[freethefly 6]

Quote

BTW, since you callled me Georgie does that mean you are female? I only ask because it's really kinda strange that a man would call me that.

Sarcasm eludes you.

Quote

Great. That's all the world needs is another self-educated lawyer.

You've never studied the laws in your state and other states?
You don't need a law degree to be well aware of the laws that dictate your life.

Quote

FYI, they didn't attempt or even ask to do a search. They only asked to see his receipt. According to the kids own article they didn't even ask to look in his bag, only to examine his receipt.

And the next action would had been to look inside the bag to compare items on the receipt with those in the bag. Otherwise, merely looking at a receipt would had been pointless and a waste of time.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[willard 0]

Quote

You've never studied the laws in your state and other states?
You don't need a law degree to be well aware of the laws that dictate your life.

Well, obviously you do since you gave a link to the ORC and the kid wasn't even cited under that code.

Quote

And the next action would had been to look inside the bag to compare items on the receipt with those in the bag. Otherwise, merely looking at a receipt would had been pointless and a waste of time.

That's a poor assumption. How many times have you actually had your bags checked and searched when leaving a store that asks to see your receipt?

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

According to the kids own article they didn't even ask to look in his bag, only to examine his receipt. Nothing about that violated his rights until they stopped him from leaving the parking lot.

I'm not quite sure what your angle on this is. they could 'ask' him to bend over and take it up the ass and they wouldn't have violated his rights, it's always going to be when they try and force him to comply that the issues start, right?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[gmanpilot 0]

"Nimrod"???

3. not capitalized, slang : IDIOT, JERK

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

[willard 0]

Quote

Excellent! They have the right to do to you anything that you can't prevent them from doing?

Nice interpretation. Have you been hanging around Kallend?

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

Quote

Excellent! They have the right to do to you anything that you can't prevent them from doing?

Nice interpretation. Have you been hanging around Kallend?

Nah, just a joke. I know that wasn't what you were saying.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

According to the kids own article they didn't even ask to look in his bag, only to examine his receipt. Nothing about that violated his rights until they stopped him from leaving the parking lot.

I'm not quite sure what your angle on this is. they could 'ask' him to bend over and take it up the ass and they wouldn't have violated his rights, it's always going to be when they try and force him to comply that the issues start, right?

Now you're catching on! However, I suspect that if a store had a habit of asking it's patrons to bend over and take it up the ass then they wouldn't have much of a customer base.

[billvon 2,406]

>I suspect that if a store had a habit of asking it's patrons to bend over
>and take it up the ass then they wouldn't have much of a customer base.

This is america. If such a store offered their goods for a few cents cheaper than nearby stores, everyone would patronize the more-invasive store. Indeed, the stores that were more polite/respectful to their customers would quickly go out of business. Capitalism in action.

[Zipp0 1]

I've got it. How about I wear a sign on my chest that says "This patron does not consent to searches by store employees and any attempt at unlawful detention will be met with appropriate force."

There. They have their signs, I have mine.

(wipes hands together signifying a completed job, well done)

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[jakee 1,257]

What happens if the sign clashes with your shoes?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

I've got it. How about I wear a sign on my chest that says "This patron does not consent to searches by store employees and any attempt at unlawful detention will be met with appropriate force."

There. They have their signs, I have mine.

(wipes hands together signifying a completed job, well done)

How about you stay the fuck out of thier store if you dont like thier policies??

How hard is that??