Incident involving store security

[jmo2003bu]

A friend of mine (and no, that's not code for me) was at a local retail outlet on the north side of Indy recently looking at pens. He didn't find what he wanted and left the store. As he exited, a man approached him from his right, grabbed him by the shirt and threw him against a wall and another man handcuffed him. They proceeded to take him back inside to a room where they accused him of stealing a pen. Of course, after reviewing security tape it was obvious that he had not stolen anything and he was free to leave. Here is my question...can anyone tell me if those security guards were within their rights to handle him like that and, more interesting to me, would he have been within his rights to fight back? Note that they did not identify themselves in any way prior to bringing him back in the store. My reaction to that situation would have been to fight off what I would naturally believe to be an attacker and do what I felt necessary to defend myself. How would you have handled it?

 

[Denny347]

They are allowed to stop shoplifters and detain them. However, they open themselves up to civil litigation by getting it wrong. Fighting will only make things worse. You start fighting, they fight back and call 911. We respond to a shoplifter resisting and show up to take you into custody as needed. Your friend needs to sue them.

 

[RGriff69]

The security "officers" did not identify themselves. I would fight back against someone throwing me up against a wall and TRYING to handcuff me.

 

[Pyriel]

This sounds like a case of kidnapping to me, I'm sure that even police officers would have handled the situation differently...An unknown unidentified attacker ascends upon you using physical force, you have every right to defend yourself by any means necessary. Honestly I hope that your friend filed a police report and complaint with the store owner, because if those security guards were to try that with myself or a lot of other people, they would find themselves in a less than favorable situation and more than likely critical condition.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Shopkeepers rights. They can detain you for two hours if they reasonably believe theft has occurred. Note setting off a door buzzer or refusing to show a reciept is not enough for them to detain absent other factors. Now if they really went hands on and slammed him he may have a lawsuit. Just be aware these places have great video, do if the slamming is overstated out won't go well.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

This sounds like a case of kidnapping to me, I'm sure that even police officers would have handled the situation differently...An unknown unidentified attacker ascends upon you using physical force, you have every right to defend yourself by any means necessary. Honestly I hope that your friend filed a police report and complaint with the store owner, because if those security guards were to try that with myself or a lot of other people, they would find themselves in a less than favorable situation and more than likely critical condition.

Kidnapping in Indiana requires a ransom demand. Criminal confinement or battery would be the most likely to apply, depending on the facts.

 

[Sylvain]

The security "officers" did not identify themselves. I would fight back against someone throwing me up against a wall and TRYING to handcuff me.

The store would have to call an ambulance for "officers down" if im attacked by some random people in a store.

 

[indytechnerd]

They are allowed to stop shoplifters and detain them.

Shopkeepers rights. They can detain you for two hours if they reasonably believe theft has occurred.

Can you guys point me to the relevant code for this? I've always been told that once he exited, only PD can stop and detain. I'd also like to know how assertive they can be in their detention, e.g. wall slamming and handcuffs.

 

[Sylvain]

Can you guys point me to the relevant code for this? I've always been told that once he exited, only PD can stop and detain. I'd also like to know how assertive they can be in their detention, e.g. wall slamming and handcuffs.

A security officer in Indy told me that they dont carry handcuffs since they are not allowed to make arrests like the local PD is.

 

[Rookie]

I would love to see this shop keepers rights thing. You have all of ten seconds to either prove I took something or to call the police. At eleven seconds, I'm walking out the door.

 

[jmo2003bu]

A security officer in Indy told me that they dont carry handcuffs since they are not allowed to make arrests like the local PD is.

I have heard the same thing...which is another reason this incident surprised me. I understand the need to be able to detain someone suspected of theft but handcuffing them takes it to another level in my book.

 

[DocGlock86]

I worked LP for a quick minute and I would never go right to a forceful detainment. I'd identify myself, ask the person to come with me, AND then depending on the response that would set the course for my next actions.

Then again I where I worked they were very cautious on what we could and couldn't do. Pretty much unless the item was extremely expensive we could verbally try to stop them but if they ran we just let it go. Worked for me because I didn't want to get an arse kicking over a CD or DVD (the normal stolen goods).

 

[Rookie]

Years ago, I worked security at target, and we carried cuffs. In the hundreds of people I caught, I cuffed one. It was also stressed to us to be 100% sure that the person was guilty. We had to witness the theft with our own eyes and we couldn't lose sight of them for a second until they walked out the door. If we weren't positive, we were to let them go. If we were wrong, it was instant termination, and easy pay day for the falsely accused.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Can you guys point me to the relevant code for this? I've always been told that once he exited, only PD can stop and detain. I'd also like to know how assertive they can be in their detention, e.g. wall slamming and handcuffs.

35-33-1-4
Theft, felony, citizen's arrest...pled down, conversion, misd

 

[indytechnerd]

35-33-1-4
Theft, felony, citizen's arrest...pled down, conversion, misd

IC 35-33-1-4
Any person
Sec. 4. (a) Any person may arrest any other person if:
(1) the other person committed a felony in his presence;
(2) a felony has been committed and he has probable cause to believe that the other person has committed that felony; or
(3) a misdemeanor involving a breach of peace is being committed in his presence and the arrest is necessary to prevent the continuance of the breach of peace.
(b) A person making an arrest under this section shall, as soon as practical, notify a law enforcement officer and deliver custody of the person arrested to a law enforcement officer.
(c) The law enforcement officer may process the arrested person as if the officer had arrested him. The officer who receives or processes a person arrested by another under this section is not liable for false arrest or false imprisonment.
As added by Acts 1981, P.L.298, SEC.2. Amended by Acts 1982, P.L.204, SEC.7.

I'm assuming (a)(1) and (2) are the applicable parts. What about (b), can someone clear up 'as soon as practical'?

And if they're wrong? Do I get to turn around and cuff them for battery and crim. confinement? What if it's my kid? What if they're wrong and I go all Jason Bourne on them because they slammed me against a wall? Am I covered under "no duty to retreat" since it's 2 on 1?

Thanks for taking my call, I'll hang up and listen to your response.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Other than the felony arrest powers that every citizen has, as already posted, shop keepers enjoy added authority. They can carry handcuffs if they want, some stores still do. That decision is made by corporate policy, not IC code.

IC 35-33-6-2
Probable cause; detention; procedure; statements by juveniles
Sec. 2. (a) An owner or agent of a store who has probable cause to believe that a theft has occurred or is occurring on or about the store and who has probable cause to believe that a specific person has committed or is committing the theft:
(1) may:
(A) detain the person and request the person to identify himself or herself;
(B) verify the identification;
(C) determine whether the person has in the person's possession unpurchased merchandise taken from the store;
(D) inform the appropriate law enforcement officers; and
(E) inform the person's parents or others interested in the person's welfare that the person has been detained; but
(2) shall not ask the person to make a statement that acknowledges that the person committed the theft or conversion or waives any of the person's legal rights if:
(A) the person is less than eighteen (18) years of age; and
(B) the person has not been afforded an opportunity to have a meaningful consultation with his or her parent, guardian, custodian, or guardian ad litem.
(b) A statement acknowledging that a child committed theft or conversion in violation of subdivision (a)(2) cannot be admitted as evidence against the child on the issue of whether the child committed a delinquent act or a crime.
(c) The detention must:
(1) be reasonable and last only for a reasonable time; and
(2) not extend beyond the arrival of a law enforcement officer or two (2) hours, whichever first occurs.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm assuming (a)(1) and (2) are the applicable parts. What about (b), can someone clear up 'as soon as practical'?

And if they're wrong? Do I get to turn around and cuff them for battery and crim. confinement? What if it's my kid? What if they're wrong and I go all Jason Bourne on them because they slammed me against a wall? Am I covered under "no duty to retreat" since it's 2 on 1?

Thanks for taking my call, I'll hang up and listen to your response.

They can be wrong IF they had probable cause. Probable cause isn't 100% certainty. Most stores err on the side of caution, though some are poorly trained and poorly staffed and go overboard. I won't name names, but one store got such a poor reputation that IMPD stopped taking their shoplifters for them, just did a report and then let the prosecutor follow up with a warrant if they thought it appropriate.

You might find yourself in pretty hazy ground if you fight back DEPENDING ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES. A lot of factors come in to play, including was it a lawful detention, could you reasonably know they were store personnel, etc. I can't give you an if A then B, but generally speaking I would comply if the situation allowed me to and then sue the backside off them afterwards. I'd feel more "avenged" driving a new Corvette they bought me then punching some gung ho LP officer, but your an adult and have to make your own choices.

 

[indytechnerd]

And all of this has to happen AFTER the person exits the store with whatever goods, right? Otherwise, is it a theft? An example; say I go into Kroger and snag a Dr. Pepper from the little coolers by the checkout. Then, while I'm doing the bulk of my shopping, I drink the Dr. Pepper. Have I done anything illegal up to that point? Now, if I leave without paying for the DP, then I'm in a bind, but until I leave...?

 

[2A_Tom]

Other than the felony arrest powers that every citizen has, as already posted, shop keepers enjoy added authority. They can carry handcuffs if they want, some stores still do. That decision is made by corporate policy, not IC code.

IC 35-33-6-2
Probable cause; detention; procedure; statements by juveniles
Sec. 2. (a) An owner or agent of a store who has probable cause to believe that a theft has occurred or is occurring on or about the store and who has probable cause to believe that a specific person has committed or is committing the theft:
(1) may:
(A) detain the person and request the person to identify himself or herself;
(B) verify the identification;
(C) determine whether the person has in the person's possession unpurchased merchandise taken from the store;
(D) inform the appropriate law enforcement officers; and
(E) inform the person's parents or others interested in the person's welfare that the person has been detained; but
(2) shall not ask the person to make a statement that acknowledges that the person committed the theft or conversion or waives any of the person's legal rights if:
(A) the person is less than eighteen (18) years of age; and
(B) the person has not been afforded an opportunity to have a meaningful consultation with his or her parent, guardian, custodian, or guardian ad litem.
(b) A statement acknowledging that a child committed theft or conversion in violation of subdivision (a)(2) cannot be admitted as evidence against the child on the issue of whether the child committed a delinquent act or a crime.
(c) The detention must:
(1) be reasonable and last only for a reasonable time; and
(2) not extend beyond the arrival of a law enforcement officer or two (2) hours, whichever first occurs.

That does not give them the right to detain for two hours, it limits them to two hours. they have to (C) determine whether the person has in the person's possession unpurchased merchandise taken from the store;
(D) inform the appropriate law enforcement officers;.

If they call LE at 1hr 55 min and they don't arrive in 5 min you are free to go.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

...good stuff, here...