to those two morons who followed me in shoppers drugmart and banning me for 6 months because i made them look REAL stupid when they stopped me out side of the store, thinking i stole shit when im innocent. even by proving to you fucks by showing you inside my purse. you need to find a new career. floor stalking isn’t something you should be proud of. maybe you can move on up to flipping burgers at mcdonalds. than they acuality whipped out they’re camera phone and snaped a picture of my face, and THAN had the nerve to ask me to sign my name on your stupid fucking form. fuck you losers. get a life. even for having the WORST possible job as a floor walker, your even pathetic at that. next time you waste time and follow someone, make sure they acuality steal. eat shit fuckbags.
— innocent
This article appears in May 14-20, 2009.
Guilty.
Call the head office like I did when a gray haired store employee followed me around every time I went into the west end mall location. He is gone from there now.
Maybe you shouldn’t steal shit.
I need to see a shrink. I get way too worked up over other people’s spelling and grammar fuck-ups.
Nice use of CAPITAL letters.
you’ll understand WHAN you’re older.
I admit it doesn’t sound like we’re getting the full story here, but the OP said she didn’t steal, so why not just give her the benefit of the doubt instead of jumping on her back? These puffed-up mall cops looking for some excitement on the job do exist. Maybe if her spelling was better, you’d be more inclined to believe her innocence, hmmm people? Even if she WAS guilty, I somehow doubt that having her photo snapped by an employee’s personal camera phone is part of the usual protocol. Then again, OP, I don’t understand why you’d be required to sign something if they didn’t find anything. Unless maybe you had second thoughts when you realized they were following you & dropped the item you intended to steal but didnt realize they saw you do it?
The bitch is legit but I’m with thebeardedonion on this one; something scary about such barely functional illiteracy.
The security at Shoppers Drug Mart is second to no other retailer and they’re quite proud of themselves. Why shouldn’t they be? You fucked around in the store long enough without buying anything so you appeared suspicious and judging by your reaction, spelling, grammar, etc you’re just the right demographic they target and rightly so. If you stole nothing and they insisted you sign some document I would have told them to go fuck their hand but again, your youth and inexperience is showing in this bitch. Perhaps you’ve grown up a little over this experience. If you try hard I’ll bet it won’t happen again…. If this little yahoo pissed you off just wait until your first experience with customs. hahaha
O god, the dreaded word…customs…UGH!
“store long enough without buying anything so you appeared suspicious” this does not grant anyone, including the Police the power of detain and search.
Personally OP, I would not have signed ANYTHING, I would have waited for the police (if I was innocent) and then demanded an apology from the store manager with some form of compensation for the false (and public) accusation.
Floor walkers do not have the right to search you (on or off property) with out your explicit permission. They can on;y follow you and point you out to the cops.
I can attest to this I worked at a Shoppers Drug Mart and got fired for buying a can of Pringles on my own cash, It was the early morning shift. They are security nut’s. It sucked though cause I actually liked the job. ran out of the store crying actually it suckeddd
Ah, but DER?, generally speaking, the people who are innocent don’t mind being followed. Also, there’s an old adage in the retail biz: “kill them with kindness”. The way this bitch sounds is how the people who have something to hide react.
Since when has one been obligated to buy something in a store in order not to appear suspicious? Since when has literacy or lack of it had anything to do with criminality? Since when has trampling on the rights of the young and inexperienced been tied to growing up? Honestly WTF?
Being falsely accused of a crime sucks at any age; anyone who doesn’t think so is trying to defend the indefensible.
As far as the pics are concerned, I had a quick glimpse into the security office of a national chain once and the wall was COVERED with head shots. Retailers aren’t diligent about nailing shoplifters without a reason. BTW, the good shoplifters are the ones who don’t fit any profile.
I do not enjoy being followed andor accosted by Security, now or at any age. While in my youth I was certainly not innocent…quite the opposite, but my thirties are quite lawful and law-abiding….but if some security loser laid a hand on me in an attempt to detain me, well that would be a very unfortunate action on their part.
lovehatehalifax is absolutely right, this persons civil liberties have been violated (innocent or not in fact) and if I were them I would be contacting legal representation.
lovehatehalifax asks, “Since when has one been obligated to buy something in a store in order not to appear suspicious”
Ever since retailers began investing in their own security.
lovehatehalifax asks, “Since when has literacy or lack of it had anything to do with criminality”
Ever since the first loitering charge was laid… right underneath the no loitering sign.
lovehatehalifax asks, “Since when has trampling on the rights of the young and inexperienced been tied to growing up”
Ever since just before Eve got her first period.
Realize while window shopping that you’re on private property and can be asked to leave with or without “just” cause. Grow up for a second and imagine yourself the shop owner watching a young lady fuck around (with the make-up?) in your store. You can file a complaint, OP, and you can make your story pubic as is your right and exactly what you’ve done here but why not just take steps to ensure this doesn’t happen again? No money? No shopping. Simple. Oh, and read it before you sign it. You may feel more inclined, as is your right, to tell them to fuck off next time.
The only legal concern I would have here is if the girl was a minor. Is it legal to photograph a minor without parental permission for ANY reason, internal administration or not? If there’s a legal leg to stand on, that’s got to be it and I’d chance a guess that you have the right to demand your photo be removed from their records/wall/whatever. You could also present them with a contract rescinding whatever it was you agreed to if you’d like to make a stink about it. However, I think the OP should just take my advice and stay out of the store if she has no intention to purchase.
Guilty AND stupid.
One more thing, a minor cannot enter into a legally binding contract without consent. If the OP is a minor whatever she signed is useless.
Kay, if the judicial System was operated in accordance to your opinion…George Orwell would even be afraid.
You can be asked to leave the premises of private property but they do not have the legal right to detain nor search you…also:
“lovehatehalifax asks, “Since when has literacy or lack of it had anything to do with criminality”
Ever since the first loitering charge was laid”
Just makes no fucking sense at all…
There is a very important principal fact that must be proven (in court) for someone to be judged guilty of any crime..it is called Mens Rhea and basically it means they must prove what your intent was(fact)…and browsing a stores wares without purchasing is not against the law(fact)…in any western nation. Loitering laws are used to remove or deter individuals from remaining on the property for durations greater than 20 minutes (that is the legally binding minimum – fact).
If the OP did not have any unpaid merchandise discovered on her person (by the POLICE) than the store has violated her civil liberties. They have anyway if it occurred in the way described by the OP…but if she had stolen merchandise on her…good luck finding a judge willing to ignore that.
AccostedDetained: Illegal (unless she was acting in the threatening way or was deemed an immediate threat.
Searched (by anyone other than a police officer): Illegal
Picture Taken for the purposes of displaying and identifying the subject as a criminal or guilty of an UNPROVEN crime: Illegal
Coerced Under Duress to sign any form, document or contract: Illegal
Call a layer OP or the Dalhousie Legal Aid Services…your liberties have been flagrantly violated. FACT
ah, you left the punchline out. No wonder you’re confused, DER!
“Since when has literacy or lack of it had anything to do with criminality”
Ever since the first loitering charge was laid… right underneath the no loitering sign.
Did you catch that? Here, I’ll say it again… right underneath the no loitering sign.
George Orwell… whatever that means since there’s no mention of Big Brother here. Best be looking in the direction of Darwin, DER.
Lighten up. This is a classic case of didn’t get caught THIS TIME. Those “floor walkers” know what they’re doing and they’re very good at it. I’m with the mugger on this one.
They didn’t lay hands on her and drag her into the store, hold her down and snap her pic. This bitch would be completely different if they did.
FACT.. you need to lighten up DER. You only have half the FACTS no matter how you read this bitch.
Incorrect Kay…regardless of what the OP is or isn’t guilty of, the floor walkers broke the law (to a degree, she did willfully allow the search). I will never “lighten up” when it comes to civil liberties…even the guilty are deserving of these basic rights. I am not saying she was innocent of a crime or that the security boffins had no right to ask that she leave the store…but the things they did do wrong can result in some fairly serious criminal charges against them and the store in question.
Oh and no I wasn’t wrong in saying the following sentence makes no sense: “Ever since the first loitering charge was laid… right underneath the no loitering sign.” Kay…so the charge was laid under the sign??
Fuck even your attempts at humor are dysfunctional Kay…seriously step away from the keyboard, take your head out of your ass and go see the real world beyond the crusty computer chair you have ensconced yourself on for the past 20 odd years.
Anybody in any store can only ask you to do one thing: and that’s to leave. Here are a few tips in dealing with security guards.
– You do not have to comply if they ask you to go anywhere (ie. a back room or security room), you do not have to comply if they ask you to stay in the store, the only thing you have to comply with is to leave the store.
– If they do detain you without arresting you, then its illegal. If they forcible detain you without arresting you, then you stay in public view, try and call the police and then you have the right to press charges against them.
– If they arrest you (they really can’t unless you have done something really really bad, ie not shoplifting), then stay in public and you can press charges if the law was broken.
– They cannot search you in any manner, unless you consent to it.
– Some places try to check your bags and receipts before you leave the store, if you do not consent then you are legally allowed to leave the property. If they get upset then the same rules apply.
Did you show them your reciept? That’s excessively harsh. I have a feeling you gave them lip or something…and by the way, you could report them for taking your picture without permission, that’s abuse of power.
Actually OPR, you missed something: if someone is suspected of shoplifting and the an item contains a security tag, that gives anyone from the respective store (be it an employee or security official) the right to detain that particular person on lawful suspicion, as long as the security tag has activated the alarm. If most of the above was true, someone like a bank employee would have no power over or right over someone who is writing a fraudulent cheque in front of them. A retailer also has the right to enact a “business liberty” to protect it’s stock against theft.
P.S. I read the bitch before reading the comments. I’m taking sides with (DER?) here.
Here’s something to chew on. Nobody gives a fuck if you are dragged out in the street by your scuzzy hair and beaten half to death. You are a fucking liar. Whining doesn’t make you innocent.
DER and others, it’s time to read the Criminal Code. Anyone has the right to arrest anyone found committing an offence. As part of an arrest procedure, the person has to read their rights and can be searched. If the arrest is made by someone who is not a peace officer, then the arrested person must be turned over to a peace officer as soon as practical.
http://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/yj-jj/r…
As for the OP, I wasn’t there so I cannot comment. She may have just been window shopping or she may have been shoplifting and put the items away when she noticed she was being followed or she could have been fucking around and making it appear she was shoplifting.
Under the Protection of Property Act a person can be banned from a premise and can be photographed, minor or otherwise. All the Youth Justice Act (or whatever it is called these days) is that names and photographs of offender cannot be made public unless ordered by the court.
Loitering is a summary offence kay. Shoplifting is a criminal act. Understand the difference?
What the hell not purchasing and store security have in common is beyond me. Surely security is about catching actual thieves and not about harassing tire-kickers.
Yes part of growing up is learning that life is unfair, but this shouldn’t include the deprivation of one’s inalienable rights including that of the presumption of innocence… at least in Canada. Try moving to Brazil where the Police do “clean up” the streets in the manner suggested by the mugger; that would seem to suit you better kay.
Floor walkers and rent-a-cops (at least the ones who take their job seriously) are in my experience usually failed cop wannabes, keen to exercise authority to inflate their own sense of importance. So without any training (at least I don’t think it’s a requirement in N.S.) they determine the demographic of “shoplifter”, persons of suspicion, probably the young, poor looking, maybe ethnic and you want us to rely on their judgement? Clearly the security in this instance obviously didn’t know what they were doing and weren’t very good at their job or else there wouldn’t even be a bitch.
kay, your attempts to defend the indefensible remind me of Dick Cheney trying to defend torture; laughable in a scary kind of way.
Bro Tim: “Under the Protection of Property Act a person can be banned from a premise and can be photographed, minor or otherwise.” This requires irrefutable proof of guilt.
A Citizen’s Arrest is a very delicate and legally dangerous thing to attempt as the onus of proof still lies with the accuser and if there is no definitive proof…than the arresting citizen can be charged with unlawful confinement.
Floor walkers do not have the right to detain anyone under the guise of “suspicion” whatsoever…short of the security tags setting off alarms or on-camera proof of theft. Even then…they are not allowed to restrain you unless you can be deemed a threat. They can follow you and point you out to the cops…that’s it. I worked Security for several years and believe me when I say that every security employer will strongly advisedirect a ‘No Contact’ rule unless you feel the offender is a physical threat.
I made no mention of the Young Offender Act…or yes whatever it is called these day (ineffectual non-sense mostly) and any private property owner can bar you from the premises but they cannot photograph you and put it up on a wall of “Shoplifters” unless of course the person is convicted of the crime (it’s defamation and slander if they have not).
Read the description carefully, it is worded in a way to very specifically state:
START OFFICIAL
494. (1) Any one may arrest without warrant
(a) a person whom he finds committing an indictable offence; or
(b) a person who, on reasonable grounds, he believes
(i) has committed a criminal offence, and
(ii) is escaping from and freshly pursued by persons who have lawful authority to arrest that person.
(2) Any one who is
(a) the owner or a person in lawful possession of property, or
(b) a person authorized by the owner or by a person in lawful possession of property,
may arrest without warrant a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence on or in relation to that property.
END OFFICIAL
Should it be found that the person (like the OP for instance) is not in possession of the suspected stolen property or guilty of the suspected crime, you are in fairly deep trouble…reasonable grounds is not subjective, and no…loitering without purchasing is most certainly not reasonable grounds. The fact that she consented to the search, they found nothing, strongly implies this person was innocent. If this was to go to court with this info as the only “evidence”…those guys are up the proverbial feces creek.
Fuck this, I’m watching the Penguins.
Dino you’re into hockey too?
Shit, girl, lets go get some 8 packs!
Leave it to a lawyer to find fault in my advice and then try an insult my intelligence or worse, my motive, when I say, “No money? No shopping. Simple.” Whatever. You’re just another asshole anyway, DER? Get a clue about your handle, would ya?
Pound that bitch’s face into the pavement next time she’s caught stealing. It’s people like her that make my toothpaste cost .5 cents more per family sized tube. Nobody gives a shit. She deserves no human rights for such a lame bitch.
I can’t see the OP bitching unless store security really did screw up, but for what it’s worth, the laws and regulations concerning what store security (uniformed guards and plainclothes floorwalkers) can and cannot do is crystal clear.
First thing to be aware of, if you’re shopping in a store, you’re on private property. The store owner is giving you permission to be in that store, and he or she can revoke that permission any time they wish. A security guard or floorwalker, acting under authorization of the store owner, is NOT just another civilian – someone already pointed out Section 494 of the CCC to that effect. They *can* arrest your ass, and if you want to run away, they can use reasonable force to keep that from happening.
A properly instructed and trained uniformed guard or floorwalker, when they accost you outside the store, and ask you to come back inside (prior to arresting you if you choose not to voluntarily), has observed you take something inside the store and pass the cash registers with it. Plain and simple. They should never be guessing. They’ll keep eyes on you from the time they see you secrete the item until the moment you leave.
It’s worth pointing out that shoplifting is theft. There is no such crime as shoplifting. It’s called theft on the books. If you steal then you’re a thief.
With regards to Protection of Property and taking pictures, the business can do what it likes when it comes to informing its employees about who is banned from its premises. I’ll agree, you can’t label the people as thieves unless they’re convicted of the offense, but you can take the pictures. If you think it’s illegal, go and talk to NSLC and tell them so…when they ban people they take photos.
People are the biggest liars in the world. If you tell a lie big enough and loud enough, retards WILL believe it. Stomp the shit out her and get your gum back.
How about you pound your own face into the pavement, you fucking idiot troll.
Cause I’m not a whining theiving dirtball, that’s why not. Chomp on my gonads baby, you deserve nothing but the best in nuts.
The whole story isn’t coming out here. I’m guessing, though I could be wrong, that OP’s reaction to said floorwalkers was what got her PPAed (protection of property act) for 6.
“No money? No shopping. Simple.” Hmmm…I don’t see where you typed that Kay…I only see your ridiculous assumptions, poor advice and less than nonsensical humor.
For the record I am not a lawyer, but I do know the law…and taking someones picture for the purposes of labeling that person as guilty of an unproven crime is quite contrary to the law (or for using it in any other manner beyond “fair use”) as I stated on earlier posts.
Taking a picture of someone is not illegal, it is what one does with said picture. You put it up on a wall under a heading of SHOPLIFTER or other sundry criminal implication and that person has not been convicted of the accusation in court…that’s defamation and slander, cut and dry.
Anyone making an arrest naturally should have ample and valid reasons for doing so…but Realist in Dartmouth, that is not always the case and they still cannot physically detain you unless you have committed something beyond a misdemeanor. Especially in cases like this, you cannot accost on suspicion, there must irrefutable just cause or it becomes an Unlawful Confinement liability to the employerstore owner.
DER, there is no such thing as a misdemeanor in Canada – we have only summary offences and indictable offences. Theft under $5000 is a hybrid offence, meaning it can be treated either as a summary or an indictable – it’s up to the prosecutor.
In any case, I made it clear that the only safe arrest is when there is no suspicion – you clearly saw the person take the item, and you maintained constant surveillance until the person passes the registers (ideally they’re out through the doors), so that you know for a fact they still have the item and did not pay for it.
Section 494(2) has to do with “arrest by owner, etc., of property”. Etc includes security guards. In the case of any criminal offence, summary or indictable, involving the owner’s property, the owner or his authorized reps may make an arrest.
Section 25 of the Code makes it crystal clear that reasonable force may be used in making an arrest. It’s immaterial as to who is making the arrest.
As to detention, this is common sense. You’re allowed to arrest a shoplifter, and you’re allowed to use reasonable force to effect the arrest and keep them arrested until you turn the thief over to the cops as soon as possible. So, yes, you can detain them…it would sort of defeat the purpose if you could not.
NOTE: reasonable force is just that, reasonable. However, when’s all said and done if you have the right to make an arrest you can use as much force as you need. Otherwise you’d have the ridiculous situation where thieves are allowed to walk away by security guards or police because they put up too much resistance…
I’m up for it Fat, as long as it’s Dos Equis. Fuck, who am I kidding. I’m not that interesting.
I was a regular customer at shoppers drug mart, and their floor walker tackled me outside when i wasn’t even resisting pulling my arm behind my back so hard that two witnesess called 911 saying a women was being beaten by her boyfriend!, then i finally got on my feet when this older lady followed me in with the security guard to make sure i was alright. When we got to the back he lierally grabbed my purses and my bag away from me without consent, and happened two pairs of shoes, which were bought from shoppers previously, but he said i stole them. not true. Even my sunglasses he said i stole, which you could clearly see were used, the police returned those to me, even an open pack of medicine was seized. I’tually really upset about this and wondering if he had the right to tackle me and grab my bags and search them in such a manner….infact im almost haunted by the expierience
Then when I finall left without being charged of course, i rea;lized i didn’t have my wallet, and he found it of course, but went on to call my boyfriend cause his ID was in it………..
They have no right to detain you without just cause. It is a really touchey area – if they held you at the store and cant prove they had just cause to hold you there (i.e. they witnessed you place something on your person and then left the premesis) then it is false imprisonment.
Also, you are more than welcome to put what you want in your purse,pocket, hat, bag etc in the store. It ONLY becomes shoplifting once you leave the store – that is why they follow people around. Sometimes I put expensive items in my pocket just for shits only to remove them before leaving the store – maybe they will falsly imprison me and I can sue…LOL
One funny story however – my 70 year old aunt got followed around a dollerama by a plain clothes security one time until she turned around and said “I have enough money in my chequing account to buy this god damned store so frig off…”… I mean really, not super funny but coming from a little 70 year old senior it’s pretty ballsy…