Illegal search?

[rajagra]

Insaniac, if what you were saying were true, shoplifters could act with impunity. And there would be a lot more of them. Shopkeepers in most states do have a right to detain customers for a short period of time during which they can *request* to do a search, and decide if they want to place the customer under citizens arrest and/or call the police to take it from there.
k2clones was offering practical advice as much as legal, and I agree with what he suggests.
I would do one other thing though. Before deciding whether to allow the search, politely ask why they want to do it. They might have good reason to be suspicious. But if they are just trying it on and doing random searches they might make a stupid claim (e.g. "our staff saw you put something in your bag") in which case you can prove them to be liars and demand a grovelling apology.

 

[oc_in_fw]

I worked in retail management and have to say, what the hell are they thinking? We were told never to stop shoplifters, and if held up at the register, just give them the damn money. Insurance covers monetary loss, not loss of life.

 

[oc_in_fw]

if you haven't done anything wrong, it's easier to just open the bag and show your receipt.

Thinking like that is why the police are becoming more intrusive in our lives, and why legislation like the Patriot Act (oh, the irony of that name) can get passed.

 

[Go West Young Man]

Good lord folks, you'd actually cause a scene because a store security guard asked to check your bags?
A store has the right to make sure they don't get stolen from.

 

[CoyoteKyle]

My girlfriend worked at Toys/Babies R Us as a manager for about a year. She basically said the only thing you can do if you suspect someone is shoplifting is ask them if they need help and, more or less, make your presence known. You can't follow them around and you can't accuse them of anything unless you see it plainly. Even though they would come in to her store with empty bags, not make a purchase, and leave with full bags.
And they don't have the magnetic detector strips on much, if anything. I always thought it was crazy, but thats just how it is. Here, anyways.

 

[auk1124]

I think the only correct answer to this question is that it depends on what the standards for shopkeeper detention / unlawful detainer are in whatever jurisdiction one happens to find themselves in. Any merchant curious about the rules in their area would best be served by checking with a local attorney.

 

[dpmtherrien]

Hey, they asked her, and she complied.

That's the end of it. No harm, no foul.

 

[Insaniac99]

Good lord folks, you'd actually cause a scene because a store security guard asked to check your bags?
A store has the right to make sure they don't get stolen from.

I value my privacy and don't like being treated like a criminal for choosing to patronize a store. If someone wants to search me on my exit, I will politely refuse and walk away. If they make any more fuss than that, I will never step foot in that place again and will encourage my friends to follow my example.

My ancestors paid too much for me to just throw away the rights they earned for me and I value all of them too much to do so anyway.

 

[Blix]

Good lord folks, you'd actually cause a scene because a store security guard asked to check your bags?
A store has the right to make sure they don't get stolen from.

Hey, they asked her, and she complied.

That's the end of it. No harm, no foul.

Exactly.

 

[73mountaineer]

The only correct answer is that it depends on the laws in your state and/or municipality. In some areas, store employees can detain you, in others, they cannot.

Also, as a former law enforcement officer, I can tell you that this, as stated earlier in this thread, is 100% incorrect:

As former law enforcement the answer is...it's private property and when you enter it you are subject to their rules. They can do whatever they want.

Not only can they not do whatever they want, they can be arrested for battery, assault, or a range of other potential "crimes against persons" if they overstep the authority given to them by statute, or what may be deemed reasonable in a court of law. For example, the law may allow them to detain a suspected shoplifter, but not to handcuff that person or subject them to an intrusive (e.g. strip) search. Yes, Mr. Shopkeeper, Ms. X did apparently attempt to steal that undergarment, but now you are under arrest for sexual assault, please place your hands behind your back....

 

[Go West Young Man]

I value my privacy and don't like being treated like a criminal for choosing to patronize a store. If someone wants to search me on my exit, I will politely refuse and walk away. If they make any more fuss than that, I will never step foot in that place again and will encourage my friends to follow my example.

My ancestors paid too much for me to just throw away the rights they earned for me and I value all of them too much to do so anyway.

Really? I think you're overstating your case. Constitutional law is based on the 'slippery slope' theory - if you allow X, next thing you know Y will start happening.
Letting a store glance in your bag if they have a reasonable suspicion that you've shoplifted isn't going to somehow snowball into any significant erosion of your personal liberties.

 

[Thebigspendur]

Retail stores are very mindful of bad press and they don't accost patrons on a whim. They have security people roving through the store and get reports from employees and have very sophisticated cameras that can zoom in and really see details. If they stop someone it's because they have seen the theft happen and probably have the tapes to back it up. A store has every right to detain you until the police arrive-that's not an arrest and if you run and they chase and you are injured sure go ahead and sue them. What jury do you think will side with a shoplifter unless they went way over bounds.

A shopkeeper is entitled to protect his mdse. He just has to balance the method he uses to do this in a reasonable manner. To go by what some of the posters here are saying is tantamount to being able to shoplift with impunity and if you are stopped you just thumb your nose at security and walk away with the mdse. That's ridiculous.

 

[rajagra]

From some web browsing it does seem to be true that shops in the U.S. are terrified of accusing people of shoplifting. I read of one guy boasting that bought an item, hid the receipt deep in his wallet, went back to the shop and pretended to shoplift the item. When 'caught' he pretended he couldn't find the receipt, the police were called and he waited a while before finally 'discovering' the receipt. Result? Over $74,000 payout. No doubt ably assisted by a no-win-no-fee lawyer.

What a messed up system. How anyone can think the shops are the bad guys in this I don't know.

 

[DamnFineBob]

Good lord folks, you'd actually cause a scene because a store security guard asked to check your bags?
A store has the right to make sure they don't get stolen from.

Absolutely! I'm not fond of having to consent to a search in order to win back my freedom from a retail outlet I should have never entered in the first place.

If they had seen me shoplifting, and possibly gotten it on tape, they would have the police on the phone by the time I exit, I'd imagine.

 

[Insaniac99]

Really? I think you're overstating your case. Constitutional law is based on the 'slippery slope' theory - if you allow X, next thing you know Y will start happening.
Letting a store glance in your bag if they have a reasonable suspicion that you've shoplifted isn't going to somehow snowball into any significant erosion of your personal liberties.

How many stores have you been where they check every so many people who leaves? They have no reason to suspect that person of shoplifting, and for one to accuse me of such by insisting on searching my person means I will not go to their shop again, I support local brick and mortar stores only if I like them; I get better service and selection from any online shop and it would not inconvenience me at all to never again step inside a B&M shop that accused me of theft without reason.

 

[Go West Young Man]

Absolutely! I'm not fond of having to consent to a search in order to win back my freedom from a retail outlet I should have never entered in the first place.

If they had seen me shoplifting, and possibly gotten it on tape, they would have the police on the phone by the time I exit, I'd imagine.

That's a nice theory, but I doubt that the police would appreciate being called every single time someone was suspected of shoplifting -which has to be dozens of times a day. In practice what would happen would be that Security asks to check your bags. If you're clean you just keep walking, but if they find something THEN police are called.

You of course are free to refuse to open your bags, in which case you've made the choice to waste the rest of your day sitting in a back office just to prove a point.

 

[Go West Young Man]

How many stores have you been where they check every so many people who leaves? They have no reason to suspect that person of shoplifting, and for one to accuse me of such by insisting on searching my person means I will not go to their shop again,.

They wouldn't try to search you unless there was some suspicion of wrongdoing. These aren't random searches like at a border crossing, this is a case of someone in the store saw something that led them to believe the person in question may have shoplifted.

 

[Blue Raccoon]

they asked her and she allowed them... so what's her gripe? it's not like they told her to bend over and spread cheeks!

 

[eastomjac]

She should have refused, and made them call the police and had some documentation.

+1000,and then she would of had a record of her right being violated and strong ground for a lawsuit,which would probably have been settled out of court.i dont mind them looking in my buggy if ,IF the alarm goes off but futher search will involve the police and lawers.

 

[Go West Young Man]

+1000,and then she would of had a record of her right being violated and strong ground for a lawsuit,which would probably have been settled out of court.i dont mind them looking in my buggy if ,IF the alarm goes off but futher search will involve the police and lawers.

Or they would have showed a security tape showing that they at least had grounds to ask the question, and she would have wasted an entire day in security offices and police stations.