Attacked by security guard - police blaming me!
Discussion
In our local Asda (council through and through me) everything that goes through the self service checkouts shows up on a master screen which you can see as you walk into the area.
I'm assuming this data is kept as well as CCTV coverage so in the event of and dispute you shouldn't really need a receipt although it would certainly save time and hassle.
Mojooo said:
I noticed Sainsburys have changed their self service tills and it always gives a receipt - before it gave a choice.
What I have noticed, the ASDA tills now say 'Thanks, thats scanned' before you even had the item halfway to the bag, every bloody item 'Thanks, that's scanned!, drives me mad.Bloody stupid !!!!!
Gary C said:
What I have noticed, the ASDA tills now say 'Thanks, thats scanned' before you even had the item halfway to the bag, every bloody item 'Thanks, that's scanned!, drives me mad.
Bloody stupid !!!!!
That's because some inbred scrote with nothing better to do with their day goes around turning the barcode scanner beep off and you get queues of crusties standing there repeatedly trying to scan items that have scanned, until it says "Place item in the bagging area" or it summons help.Bloody stupid !!!!!
That way if the barcode scanner isn't beeping they still know it's gone through.
janesmith1950 said:
rm, the security guard isn't on trial for assault. He doesn't need to justify his actions.
You need to read back through the thread you must have forgot some of the points raised. The security guard does have to justify himself. He has to show he had proper cause to interfere with Milkrounds liberty and he has to show that he followed the proper proceedure for interfering with his liberty.
Those matters have been dabated in the thread in depth.Please go back and read them.
kestral said:
You need to read back through the thread you must have forgot some of the points raised.
The security guard does have to justify himself. He has to show he had proper cause to interfere with Milkrounds liberty and he has to show that he followed the proper proceedure for interfering with his liberty.
Those matters have been dabated in the thread in depth.Please go back and read them.
I have read them. The point remains. If the OP wishes to use a defence of self defence he has to overcome the prosecution allegation that the use of force was either unnecessary and/ or excessive. The security guard does have to justify himself. He has to show he had proper cause to interfere with Milkrounds liberty and he has to show that he followed the proper proceedure for interfering with his liberty.
Those matters have been dabated in the thread in depth.Please go back and read them.
The security guard is a witness (I presume) and not on trial. He does not have to justify why he was doing what he was doing.
Put it another way.
The SG could have been acting maliciously and have attempted to apprehend the OP because he knows him and doesn't like him. Totally outwith any employed or civilian 'powers'. If the OP then assaults the SG because he's annoyed by his actions, it's still perfectly possible he could be found guilty of assault, should the court find it was a disproportionate response.
My understanding of the law and this thread is that the OP relies on self defence. To paraphrase, the court must be persuaded the he believed in that moment he was in immediate danger and then that his response to that belief was proportionate.
Edited by janesmith1950 on Friday 22 November 18:18
kestral said:
Those matters have been dabated in the thread in depth.Please go back and read them.
You are avin a larf - aren't you?I am up to 81 pages, at 40 posts per page that is, er, um, 'ang on, 3,240 posts.
You really think think we are going to go back through 3,200 odd posts on some point of detail?
The Mad Monk said:
You are avin a larf - aren't you?
I am up to 81 pages, at 40 posts per page that is, er, um, 'ang on, 3,240 posts.
You really think think we are going to go back through 3,200 odd posts on some point of detail?
You would if you were really into your tills and receiptsI am up to 81 pages, at 40 posts per page that is, er, um, 'ang on, 3,240 posts.
You really think think we are going to go back through 3,200 odd posts on some point of detail?
jakesmith said:
Got to laugh at the net result of having a no nonsense I know me rights approach. Look at how much grief has been caused. Was the security guard professional? No. Was it worth all this hassle so far to stand your ground?
There is a lengthy legal precedent, going back to 1789, whereby a defendant can claim self-defense against an agent of a supermarket, if that act is deemed a defense against tyranny, a defense of liberty. Without liberty, man is a syncope.My understanding, is that there is no legal requirement to be given a receipt in a shop.
A quick Google seems to support this ...
Under UK law, there is no obligation for retailers to provide a receipt to customers, meaning there are also no rules protecting the quality of a receipt.
... so therefore, the security guard had no right to demand to see a receipt.
If he also, as described in the original post, grabbed hold of the OP partner, who had up to that time no involvement in the incident, isn't that in itself assault?
Looking at the video, I see the OP spending most of the time backing away, hardly the behaviour of someone looking for a fight, in fact, quite the opposite.
A quick Google seems to support this ...
Under UK law, there is no obligation for retailers to provide a receipt to customers, meaning there are also no rules protecting the quality of a receipt.
... so therefore, the security guard had no right to demand to see a receipt.
If he also, as described in the original post, grabbed hold of the OP partner, who had up to that time no involvement in the incident, isn't that in itself assault?
Looking at the video, I see the OP spending most of the time backing away, hardly the behaviour of someone looking for a fight, in fact, quite the opposite.
mph999 said:
My understanding, is that there is no legal requirement to be given a receipt in a shop.
A quick Google seems to support this ...
Under UK law, there is no obligation for retailers to provide a receipt to customers, meaning there are also no rules protecting the quality of a receipt.
... so therefore, the security guard had no right to demand to see a receipt.
If he also, as described in the original post, grabbed hold of the OP partner, who had up to that time no involvement in the incident, isn't that in itself assault?
Looking at the video, I see the OP spending most of the time backing away, hardly the behaviour of someone looking for a fight, in fact, quite the opposite.
Unless the OP, while backing away, is letting the guard know all about his ooman rights and how he will in no uncertain terms be providing any proof of purchase. A quick Google seems to support this ...
Under UK law, there is no obligation for retailers to provide a receipt to customers, meaning there are also no rules protecting the quality of a receipt.
... so therefore, the security guard had no right to demand to see a receipt.
If he also, as described in the original post, grabbed hold of the OP partner, who had up to that time no involvement in the incident, isn't that in itself assault?
Looking at the video, I see the OP spending most of the time backing away, hardly the behaviour of someone looking for a fight, in fact, quite the opposite.
The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Alpinestars said:
garyhun said:
Unless the OP, while backing away, is letting the guard know all about his ooman rights and how he will in no uncertain terms be providing any proof of purchase.
The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Irrelevant. The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Backing away saying ‘come on and have some’ would not be classified as passive in my mind for example.
I’m not saying that’s what happened, just that you cannot be sure what’s going on from a silent video.
garyhun said:
Alpinestars said:
garyhun said:
Unless the OP, while backing away, is letting the guard know all about his ooman rights and how he will in no uncertain terms be providing any proof of purchase.
The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Irrelevant. The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Backing away saying ‘come on and have some’ would not be classified as passive in my mind for example.
I’m not saying that’s what happened, just that you cannot be sure what’s going on from a silent video.
I’ve seen many videos of ‘altercations’ where the one backing away was the one screaming obscenities and demanding that the other person ‘come at them’ for a fight.
Again, I believe Milkrounds version of events, but all that matters is who else believes it.
Having watched the car park video, I’m quite surprised Milkround didn’t just sprint off. If a security guard was behaving like he was about to aggressively grab hold of me, I would have just ran off like a big girl
I can’t run that far, but I can run quite fast for a couple of hundred metres or so, and most security guards don’t appear capable of running...
garyhun said:
Alpinestars said:
garyhun said:
Unless the OP, while backing away, is letting the guard know all about his ooman rights and how he will in no uncertain terms be providing any proof of purchase.
The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Irrelevant. The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Backing away saying ‘come on and have some’ would not be classified as passive in my mind for example.
I’m not saying that’s what happened, just that you cannot be sure what’s going on from a silent video.
Alpinestars said:
garyhun said:
Alpinestars said:
garyhun said:
Unless the OP, while backing away, is letting the guard know all about his ooman rights and how he will in no uncertain terms be providing any proof of purchase.
The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Irrelevant. The physical actions don’t always tell the full story.
Backing away saying ‘come on and have some’ would not be classified as passive in my mind for example.
I’m not saying that’s what happened, just that you cannot be sure what’s going on from a silent video.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff