Ok it just sounds like someone just said...a bunch of toy cops on a power trip. They should be fired, but I dont know if they will be put on trial. If Wal-Mart wants to use an agressive tactic for shoplifters, they should train their security better. With that being said, I have no problem with employees pursuing a guy if they want to. I would not do it unless that guy was still clearly in the store cuz I value my safety more than a pair of sunglasses. Stores should not tell the employees to go chase a suspect, but leaving it up to that person. I knew someone that worked undercover security at a big retail store. The person told me that they could not confront someone just casually shopping in the store even if they were suspected of shoplifting. This is because unless they were heading toward the door, they were not technically shoplifting while still inside the store(Im not too sure about the details of this). But what they would do is that if they had time, they could call security to be at the door waiting for the suspect. If not, try to get the suspect before he reaches the door. He personally never followed them outside the store because he was too concerned about his own safety. So IF the guy shoplifted....I can't really see myself getting upset about what happened. It was a tragic accident. My mom has been held up at gun point and robbed before so you guys can probably see why I wouldnt care about the outcome of this guy. I know not the same thing, but ever since then I have had no sympathy for any theives, armed robbers, or even shoplifters. They take a risk when they do these things. Most importantly, this will hopefully make Wal-Mart give better training to their Security. Most are sensible, but I guess these werent. Maybe this situation will even better if it deters more people from shoplifting. So i can see why some of you guys are getting worked up about this, but I cant. Also have you ever thought that in the struggle, the toy cops were assulted themselves and were fearing the guys size and their own safety. Even then stupid move on their part, but just something to consider for those guys that are damning the security guards to prison.
A patient with lung cancer goes in for chemo. The dr. prescribes the wrong dosage of chemo which the pharmacist/pharmacy tech do not catch on the order, and the nurse ignorantly gives the dose to the patient. The patient dies. It's not the nurse's, pharmacy staff, or dr's fault the patient died - it's the patient's for having lung cancer in the first place - he shouldn't have been a smoker; he knew it can cause lung cancer. Because as you know, if you bring it on yourself, no one else should be faulted...
Although I do not completely agree with Trader, the weakest arguments are when you take the other persons argument and put it in a completely different situation.
Supposedly wal-mart doesn't like to settle out of court and prefers to fully litigate. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. They will be taking a big hit for this for sure. The lawyers will rip apart their security training and the eyewitness accounts will definitely hurt. I wonder how much they will support their security staff if they need legal help
And none of them say anything about his reactions to the toy cops. They just say that he resisted, and thats it.
It seems your standard is that once one person takes action, nothing done after that is anyone but the originator's fault. Well, by this standard, this is all Sam Walton's fault. After all, if Mr. Walton had not started Walmart, no one would have shoplifted from there, and no one would have died. Or perhaps we should blame the Founding Fathers. If they hadn't set up this economic structure, Walton wouldn't have started Walmart, and this guy wouldn't have tried to shoplift from there.
Hmm. What about this? My point is, I don't think there would be 20+ eyewitness accounts taking the side of the dead man had the security guards been threatened by him.
This still does not talk about the chase and the apprehension, just the aftermath. I am not condoning what they did, just throwing an idea out there that they MIGHT have had a legit reason for being so aggressive.
Bingo. Glad to see another poster is capable of seeing through the sensationalism and demagoguery being put forth from the pro-shoplifter crowd. In general, we as humans are predisposed to have our judgment clouded by impressionable events. Trial lawyers make fortunes by taking advantage of these predispositions. When an emotionally scarring event takes place, critical details leading up to the event are discarded, critical thought takes a vacation, and emotions rule the day. These emotions lead to poor decision making. The eye-witnesses would surely be subject to these psychological processes given that they saw a man die. As such, their testimony is questionable, at best. I would posit that the majority of posters in this thread are having their thought process clouded by emotion. You gents need to think critically about the situation, its root causes, and people's motivations.
I watch COPS alot, and from their reaction, if they have to chase someone, they get pissed, the "toy cops" could have felt the same, but they should have eased up.
Absolutely not. The jist of the argument is that simply because person A was in the wrong to begin with does not make any resulting possible crimes against him necessarily somehow justified. It's not that difficult - it's an analogy.
There is NO excuse for having someone pinned to the ground with their hands behind their back preventing them from breathing. I don't care if he had cold cocked the security guards, much less shoplifted some diapers. There is no legit reason for the excessive force they used. A man died. I'm not understanding how any one can sit here and say with a straight face that having a man pinned to the ground with his arms behind his back preventing him from breathing might be acceptable. He died directly because of their actions.
Trader, I do not agree with you when you said that the man deserved to die or anything. Just that the toy cops just did their job, however badly they did it. Also I would be EXTREMELY surprised if the toy cops get a criminal conviction or anything close to that out of this. They should at best be fired for using poor judgement.
I'm still trying to understand how anyone with any sense of humanity can say he brought this on himself and feel ok about it. It's not ok..... Reasonable force, as the law allows, was not exercised. This was neither reasonable, nor humane. It was excessive, unjustified, and negligent. Because this man committed a crime does not automatically make him subject to punishment that is outside the law, and up to the discretion of some yahoos at a retail store. What tune would you be singing if this happened to a friend of yours? A relative? Would you still discount all the eyewitness accounts? Would you still claim he "brought it on himself?" Could you attend his funeral, and state to his loved ones that he brought it on himself?
Like I said, they were badly trained. And if they knew that the guy was not breathing or would not be able to breathe in that position they would have moved him. But they didnt, so bad training and bad judgement.
No, you need to realize that not everything is black and white. He should not have been stealing regardless of the situation. If he needed diapers, there are people and places that will help him. No excuse. If he got caught, he shouldnt have resisted nor run away. No excuse. Even with those two things going against him, there is absolutely NO reason to keep a shirtless man pressed against the scalding ground. The cement here in Houston IN THE MIDDLE OF AUGUST is unbelievably hot. If the dude is cuffed, pick his big ass up and sit him down somewhere. It isnt very easy to get off of your ass with your hands cuffed behind your back. If he is screaming for his life, obviously it meant something. He didnt kill anyone, he tried to steal some diapers. It isnt the end of the world and surely doesnt warrant being held down in that fashion. It goes without saying that it should not have risked his life, much less taken it. Your opinion is just that, your opinion. Just because the Condickheadador says something doesnt make it gospel. If you want to whine, b****, and be condescending, go back to your D&D. I cordially invite you and your parrot to stay there. Most of us stay here in The Hangout to keep away from your antics and bull****.
The guy was Handcuffed and laying face down on the pavement the struggle was over there safety was no longer an issue.The guard kept his foot pushed down on the suspect's neck while another pushed the weight of his entire body into him with his knee directly into his back. Refusing to let the guy head up thats unreasonable force .They should go to Jail.
