Attacked by security guard - police blaming me!
Discussion
joropug said:
Out of interest, did the security guard concede that you didn't steal anything ?
Well as the Police never asked me about nicking stuff I presume they must have done. I made it abundantly clear I was not robbing and the PC said 'I'm not accusing you of shoplifting'. He said the guard just needed a suspicion to use force. And his suspicion came from me blanking him and coming from the wrong way. It's all above my head. But what isn't or is a suspicion seems dodgy to me. Using the police's logic a deaf person could be battered simply because they went to pick something up from the pharmacy after doing their shopping.
A line needs to be drawn between allowing security to stop thieves whilst at the same time protecting those who have done nothing wrong. I'd argue firmly he overstepped the mark. And I'd argue strongly I could have handled it all better. I'm sure we both would have done stuff differently with the benefit of hindsight.
Rewe said:
milkround said:
...... I'm not able to post the footage ....
What??!!??! Why not?What happened to your cast iron guarantees all the way through this thread that, whatever happened, you would post it up????
Edit: or I could just read until the end if the post!
Edited by Rewe on Sunday 19th May 22:30
milkround said:
joropug said:
Out of interest, did the security guard concede that you didn't steal anything ?
Well as the Police never asked me about nicking stuff I presume they must have done. I made it abundantly clear I was not robbing and the PC said 'I'm not accusing you of shoplifting'. He said the guard just needed a suspicion to use force. And his suspicion came from me blanking him and coming from the wrong way. It's all above my head. But what isn't or is a suspicion seems dodgy to me. Using the police's logic a deaf person could be battered simply because they went to pick something up from the pharmacy after doing their shopping.
A line needs to be drawn between allowing security to stop thieves whilst at the same time protecting those who have done nothing wrong. I'd argue firmly he overstepped the mark. And I'd argue strongly I could have handled it all better. I'm sure we both would have done stuff differently with the benefit of hindsight.
Unless they were carrying goods out of the shop, from an area without any tills and arguing with a security guard who thinks they didn't pay for them before storming off into the carpark.
Greendubber said:
I'm not so sure your comparison to a death person using the pharmacy is as relevant as you think it is.
Unless they were carrying goods out of the shop, from an area without any tills and arguing with a security guard who thinks they didn't pay for them before storming off into the carpark.
I 'm pretty sure your comparison with a death person is far more irrelevant. Unless they were carrying goods out of the shop, from an area without any tills and arguing with a security guard who thinks they didn't pay for them before storming off into the carpark.
gooner1 said:
Greendubber said:
I'm not so sure your comparison to a death person using the pharmacy is as relevant as you think it is.
Unless they were carrying goods out of the shop, from an area without any tills and arguing with a security guard who thinks they didn't pay for them before storming off into the carpark.
I 'm pretty sure your comparison with a death person is far more irrelevant. Unless they were carrying goods out of the shop, from an area without any tills and arguing with a security guard who thinks they didn't pay for them before storming off into the carpark.
Greendubber said:
I'm not so sure your comparison to a death person using the pharmacy is as relevant as you think it is.
Unless they were carrying goods out of the shop, from an area without any tills and arguing with a security guard who thinks they didn't pay for them before storming off into the carpark.
Most large supermarkets have a pharmacy. It's very common for the technician/pharmacist to suggest the customer do their shop and collect their prescription once they are done (especially if they are busy). It's one generic example of a totally normal thing someone would do which would mean they didn't come out from the tils. Unless they were carrying goods out of the shop, from an area without any tills and arguing with a security guard who thinks they didn't pay for them before storming off into the carpark.
Rightly or wrongly there are loads of times where people don't engage well with others. My extreme case of a deaf person not hearing the guard is just one. The person could have special needs, they could have anxiety problems. They could be really antisocial or they could just be a bit of a throbber. Or they might be busy and not have time to stop. As in my case they might just not like the way they were spoken too and decide to leave.
Other legitimate examples of people not coming from the right direction could be them checking the price of something. Them seeing a friend and going to say hello. Or even someone using the cafe/toilets (which are often not inline from the tils to the exit). Loads of normal reasons.
As it stands Hampshire Police are saying explicitly that coming out the wrong way and not following the guards orders are strong enough reasons for the guard to use a level of force to detain that person. More worryingly in my case they have totally ignored that I did, in fact stop and talk to the gaurd and I did walk directly from the tils. The CCTV shown to me by them proves one of these things. I'd have thought if I did in fact start arguing and storm off they'd have collected this CCTV as well. Especially as it shows which direction I walked from. Interestingly at the time of interview they had not... I wonder why that would be.
We can go around in circles about who was right and wrong. I accept I wouldn't do certain things the same way. And I also accept that shops have the right to protect their property. I think the line needs drawing somewhere and I don't agree with how it's drawn here. IMO see someone explicitly robbing = arrest them and use force. See someone who you thinks looks shifty you ask nicely but then accept you can't get physical or deprive them of their liberty. Ultimately a court will now decide. After speaking to more than one lawyer I'm feeling rather confident.
I'd be pushing for that CCTV footage.
The bit about whether you walked from the tills or "from the wrong aisle" appears pretty pivotal to your case.
Without it it's your word against the security guard.
Till receipt timings compared to the CCTV footage you've seen may help (provided the times are accurate and in sync).
Also, Mags (rightly or wrongly) may be quite sympathetic towards the guard (and his version of events, especially if there is an independent witness).
The bit about whether you walked from the tills or "from the wrong aisle" appears pretty pivotal to your case.
Without it it's your word against the security guard.
Till receipt timings compared to the CCTV footage you've seen may help (provided the times are accurate and in sync).
Also, Mags (rightly or wrongly) may be quite sympathetic towards the guard (and his version of events, especially if there is an independent witness).
milkround said:
Most large supermarkets have a pharmacy. It's very common for the technician/pharmacist to suggest the customer do their shop and collect their prescription once they are done (especially if they are busy). It's one generic example of a totally normal thing someone would do which would mean they didn't come out from the tils.
Rightly or wrongly there are loads of times where people don't engage well with others. My extreme case of a deaf person not hearing the guard is just one. The person could have special needs, they could have anxiety problems. They could be really antisocial or they could just be a bit of a throbber. Or they might be busy and not have time to stop. As in my case they might just not like the way they were spoken too and decide to leave.
Other legitimate examples of people not coming from the right direction could be them checking the price of something. Them seeing a friend and going to say hello. Or even someone using the cafe/toilets (which are often not inline from the tils to the exit). Loads of normal reasons.
...and yet when we go shopping are we greeted by security guards rolling around the foyer with customers on a regular basis? Not in my experience I'm sad to say, so I'm not all that sure your behaviour was as normal and ostensibly innocent as you'd like to believe. Still though all the best - whatever the rights or wrongs it seems a daft thing to end up with a criminal record over so I hope you get a result. Rightly or wrongly there are loads of times where people don't engage well with others. My extreme case of a deaf person not hearing the guard is just one. The person could have special needs, they could have anxiety problems. They could be really antisocial or they could just be a bit of a throbber. Or they might be busy and not have time to stop. As in my case they might just not like the way they were spoken too and decide to leave.
Other legitimate examples of people not coming from the right direction could be them checking the price of something. Them seeing a friend and going to say hello. Or even someone using the cafe/toilets (which are often not inline from the tils to the exit). Loads of normal reasons.
Roger Irrelevant said:
milkround said:
Most large supermarkets have a pharmacy. It's very common for the technician/pharmacist to suggest the customer do their shop and collect their prescription once they are done (especially if they are busy). It's one generic example of a totally normal thing someone would do which would mean they didn't come out from the tils.
Rightly or wrongly there are loads of times where people don't engage well with others. My extreme case of a deaf person not hearing the guard is just one. The person could have special needs, they could have anxiety problems. They could be really antisocial or they could just be a bit of a throbber. Or they might be busy and not have time to stop. As in my case they might just not like the way they were spoken too and decide to leave.
Other legitimate examples of people not coming from the right direction could be them checking the price of something. Them seeing a friend and going to say hello. Or even someone using the cafe/toilets (which are often not inline from the tils to the exit). Loads of normal reasons.
...and yet when we go shopping are we greeted by security guards rolling around the foyer with customers on a regular basis? Not in my experience I'm sad to say, so I'm not all that sure your behaviour was as normal and ostensibly innocent as you'd like to believe. Still though all the best - whatever the rights or wrongs it seems a daft thing to end up with a criminal record over so I hope you get a result. Rightly or wrongly there are loads of times where people don't engage well with others. My extreme case of a deaf person not hearing the guard is just one. The person could have special needs, they could have anxiety problems. They could be really antisocial or they could just be a bit of a throbber. Or they might be busy and not have time to stop. As in my case they might just not like the way they were spoken too and decide to leave.
Other legitimate examples of people not coming from the right direction could be them checking the price of something. Them seeing a friend and going to say hello. Or even someone using the cafe/toilets (which are often not inline from the tils to the exit). Loads of normal reasons.
meatballs said:
It doesn't really matter if you were purposefully tripped or if you fell. You believed you were tripped at that moment in time and that set off your fight or flight response to defend yourself.
Even if you only fell being on the floor infront of an attacker is going to change your response as it's such a vulnerable position.
^^ Hollywood awaits - with a mediocre science fiction writing career in the Z movie arena.Even if you only fell being on the floor infront of an attacker is going to change your response as it's such a vulnerable position.
Kuji said:
Also, Our local supermarket pharmacy helpfully bag up your prescription and give you a label AND a receipt, so the security guards, (who are employed to identify and catch shoplifters) can view them, if required.
Are you telling me you think it's reasonable for a security guard to demand to see peoples medication and prescriptions???. I can tell you every pharmacist I know (and there are lots of them) would themselves kick off if any security guard ever dreamt of touching someone's medication. Or asking to publically see what medication they had. It's outrageous.
milkround said:
Are you telling me you think it's reasonable for a security guard to demand to see peoples medication and prescriptions???.
I can tell you every pharmacist I know (and there are lots of them) would themselves kick off if any security guard ever dreamt of touching someone's medication. Or asking to publically see what medication they had. It's outrageous.
Yes, it's not that unreasonable. They're working in a professional capacity with a job to do, they're not going to be telling anyone what medication you have. If you don't like it, don't shop there and go somewhere else. I can tell you every pharmacist I know (and there are lots of them) would themselves kick off if any security guard ever dreamt of touching someone's medication. Or asking to publically see what medication they had. It's outrageous.
"Entitled" is the word I would use to describe this whole thread.
I popped into Sainsbury's on Friday afternoon and the normally affable security guard was taking an earful from a couple of customer's he'd stopped. "I ain't done nuffin bruv" type of words were exchanged. It made me realise why a police car had been behind me as I came into the car park.
The conversation I overheard at the checkout as I was bagging up the shopping rather suggested the had done something, trying to nick some clothes by concealing them within other clothes, and the
Perhaps the attitude the security guard got back is what they expect from everyone who has actually done something, rather than those who don't?
The conversation I overheard at the checkout as I was bagging up the shopping rather suggested the had done something, trying to nick some clothes by concealing them within other clothes, and the
Perhaps the attitude the security guard got back is what they expect from everyone who has actually done something, rather than those who don't?
milkround said:
Are you telling me you think it's reasonable for a security guard to demand to see peoples medication and prescriptions???.
What - like airport security do every minute of the day?I’m hoping you get away with this tbh as you’ve been decent enough to get 70+ pages in with not the easiest of crowds - but definitely think in the future take a large breath before responding to incidents that annoy you.
x9wfm said:
milkround said:
Are you telling me you think it's reasonable for a security guard to demand to see peoples medication and prescriptions???.
I can tell you every pharmacist I know (and there are lots of them) would themselves kick off if any security guard ever dreamt of touching someone's medication. Or asking to publically see what medication they had. It's outrageous.
Yes, it's not that unreasonable. They're working in a professional capacity with a job to do, they're not going to be telling anyone what medication you have. If you don't like it, don't shop there and go somewhere else. I can tell you every pharmacist I know (and there are lots of them) would themselves kick off if any security guard ever dreamt of touching someone's medication. Or asking to publically see what medication they had. It's outrageous.
"Entitled" is the word I would use to describe this whole thread.
https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/sites/default/f...
Here's just one bit which might interest you:
"Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services"
And:
"Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services"
Petrus1983 said:
What - like airport security do every minute of the day?
I’m hoping you get away with this tbh as you’ve been decent enough to get 70+ pages in with not the easiest of crowds - but definitely think in the future take a large breath before responding to incidents that annoy you.
Agree with me not getting into this position again. Totes disagree when it comes to pharmacies. I’m hoping you get away with this tbh as you’ve been decent enough to get 70+ pages in with not the easiest of crowds - but definitely think in the future take a large breath before responding to incidents that annoy you.
https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/sites/default/f...
If any pharmacy allowed their patients to have their drugs checked publically by a none GPHC registered individual at the exit they would be closed down and the pharmacist would likely be struck off.
The guy who mentioned it was talking about labeling and bagging as if it was there to help detect shoplifting. It's actually a legal requirement to protect patients and give guidance about medicines. Whilst at the same time giving privacy to the patient. Community pharmacies in supermarkets do not just give out antibiotics... They could have someones anti HIV meds and other stuff which that person really doesn't want waving around.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff