not off topic when you consider the number of times people in this subforum talk about whether showing a receipt should be allowed.

Hege, you KNEW you were in a no-win situation...if the greeter lost, you would have been a box-basher. Instead, you get bashed for posting what was felt to be verboten.

So the greeter assaulted committed the crime of simple battery against someone then sued the victim and won? Interesting tactic.

So me bumping into someone in a store is an assault?

I am glad I didnt run into him with a grocery cart. (Hegemony this is meant as a joke)

So me bumping into someone in a store is an assault?

I am glad I didnt run into him with a grocery cart. (Hegemony this is meant as a joke)

grocery card or one of those "hover-round" electric carts LOL

So the greeter assaulted committed the crime of simple battery against someone then sued the victim and won? Interesting tactic.

When assaulted, one does not then have free reign to respond in any way they choose. There are still reasonable legal limits, and this "victim" exceeded them.

If this "victim" is bothered by the assault, he is free to file his own lawsuit and seek damages.

I read the article, and I don't see that he did anything out of bounds. He pushed someone that was unlawfully attempting to detain him and unlawfully touched him (battery). Maybe being a cop was the reason he lost. As a citizen, I have no duty to warn, though it is unlikely I would have defended myself. I would have yelled and walked on most likely.

athensgaguy
I am going to have to disagree. The greater touching someone on the shoulder is not battery or an assault. What if the person, the greater was trying to get his or her attention was hard of hearing or deaf?

I read the article, and I don't see that he did anything out of bounds. He pushed someone that was unlawfully attempting to detain him and unlawfully touched him (battery). Maybe being a cop was the reason he lost. As a citizen, I have no duty to warn, though it is unlikely I would have defended myself. I would have yelled and walked on most likely.

The complaint said the greeter asked the officers for their receipts. It says Lt. McPherson complied, but Det. Freeman walked around the greeter and continued toward the door. It says the greeter asked officer Freeman to produce the receipt and he ignored him.

It said when the greeter touched him on the shoulder, he "suddenly and without any warning to plaintiff" turned on him and pushed him to the concrete floor.

Mr. Walker "struck the floor with the length of his body about five to six feet from the point of Freeman's push," it was stated.

It said officer Freeman stood over the greeter as he struck the floor.

The suit said as a result of the "physical assault" that Mr. Walker lost consciousness for a moment and defecated in his pants. It said his supervisor later allowed him to change clothing and get a clean pair of underwear.

The complaint said many members of the public came to the greeter's aid, including one "Good Samaritan" who "attempted to come between Freeman and the downed plaintiff, but Freeman pushed this person with such force as to drive him through the glass doors of the store."

the greeter was doing his job.. this scumbag cop needs to be out of a job and get his arse kicked. the cop is lucky he didnt get shot .

I definitely agree about the second part. However, I doubt the greeter's job involves touching paying customers as they exit.

well the cop shouldnt think he was so special he couldnt produce a receipt. the world doesnt revolve around him. like i said .. you strike an old man or woman around me i dont care who you know youre likely to have a nightstick shoved halfway up your butt sideways.

It depends on what the guy in the green did. Assault is the part where you threaten to commit battery. You can assault someone without touching them.

Yes, I am missing the part that deals with how you should respond to simple battery. Where is it codified?

I personally think that the 99% of police officer that are criminal give the rest a bad name, but I'm not a fan of being touched without permission, especially if that person is attempting to detain me unlawfully.

Reasonable Force

The amount of force necessary to protect oneself or one's property. Reasonable force is a term associated with defending one's person or property from a violent attack, theft, or other type of unlawful aggression. It may be used as a defense in a criminal trial or to defend oneself in a suit alleging tortious conduct. If one uses excessive force, or more than the force necessary for such protection, he or she may be considered to have forfeited the right to defense. Reasonable force is also known as legal force.

A person is generally justified in using force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm if the person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. The person is also generally justified in using such extreme force to prevent or terminate another's unlawful entry into or attack upon a dwelling, if: (1) the entry is made or attempted in a violent manner and he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent personal violence to himself or another then in the dwelling, or (2) he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling.

I'm not saying the officer was in the right here. However, the greeter certainly instigated the customer (I'm guessing that the cop was off duty or plain clothes) by unlawfully touching him. It's too bad for him that the customer turned out to be a bully.

I personally wouldn't have responded so harshly in that circumstance, but just how far do you let it go? What if they block the door? What if they try to remove my property from me? At what point do I fight back?

Touching or lightly tapping or even accidentally bumping someone is not unlawful.

When I am at store, I bump into people and people bump into me. I do not call the unlawfully touching,

Simple battery may include any form of non-consensual harmful or insulting contact, regardless of the injury caused.

It is that.

It is that.

The employee is innocent until proven guilty of simple battery.

If there was harmful or insulting contact, I would think the officer would have arrested the employee. In any case, it would be up to a judge/jury to decide if it went to trial.

That law could be interpreted in different context. There was no harm, no insulting contact, or no injury cause by the greeter.


This reminds me of another case, I heard on the news. The Disney character was charge with inappropriate touching. You can not see in those costumes very well and what he/she did was an accident. He/She was found not guilty. Do not know if He/She got is job back or just got back pay.

What the greeter did was not an accident. Further, it implied that the person exiting what shoplifting, which is insulting.

I'd pay good money to see you argue this in court.

Sure, come grab me and falsely accuse me of doing something while someone else videotapes.

(I know, I am open a can of worms here)

Dont stores have the legal right to detain you by using reasonable force if they suspect shoplifting?

I have seen where security people chase them to their car.

I have seen where some security people grabbed a person a lot harder then just lightly tapping.

If I've drive after drinking, I've driven under the influence regardless of whether I've been convicted of such.

If I touch someone without their permission in a gesture intended to imply that they are shoplifting, I've performed something that falls under the definition of simple battery, regardless of whether I'm eventually convicted. I would personally guess that convictions for simple battery are few and far between.

athensgaguy, I doubt there are even many arrests for simple battery for receipt checks. I actually disagree with all receipt check policies. . . My point was not whether the employee was guilty of a crime or not but the officer's actions.

Yes, I realize that people who commit criminal offenses are not always arrested and/or charged; however, if there was a crime of simple battery as you implied, the police officer (in addition to defending himself) should have arrested the employee. Otherwise, it appears to me that the officer is simply retaliating against the employee for a perceived injustice or slight.

It is the role of the criminal justice system to determine the appropriate punishment, not the police.

I completely agree with your statements here.

The point I was trying to make is that I wouldn't expect the police, or anyone else, to respond in a reasonable way if grabbed by a greeter. It's unlikely that you could successfully press charges for simple battery, but that doesn't make it ok for the greeter to do it, and it doesn't mean the greeter isn't going to get beaten up for grabbing the wrong person, even though that is an out of line response.

In this particular case it seems odd that the greeter wasn't arrested, because there are infinite cases of officers lying about "resisting arrest" and "assaulting a police officer".

You just contradicted yourself. First you say you "completely agree" that it's for the justice system to sort it out, not the individuals or police. Then, very next sentence, you say that you wouldn't expect anybody to react reasonably in such a circumstance. Which is it?

Most people actually do have self-control and won't beat anybody up. Those that don't deserve whatever punishment they get for not having it, whether it be civil penalties and/or criminal charges.

Couple other points: In this particular case...

1) The greeter didn't "grab" anybody. You're exaggerating the initial contact.

2) The officer's response would still fall under "excessive force" even if the greeter did literally grab him.

I wonder if the officer didn't lie about resisting arrest or assaulting a police officer due to too many witnesses?

Touching or lightly tapping or even accidentally bumping someone is not unlawful.

When I am at store, I bump into people and people bump into me. I do not call the unlawfully touching,