Attacked by security guard - police blaming me!

[Red 4]

Petrus1983 said:

What - like airport security do every minute of the day?

Airport security checks are very different to being searched by store security.

Likewise ports and other designated areas that rely on legislation/ conditions of carriage.

Security staff at supermarkets have no powers to search. Nil. Nada. None.

[Petrus1983]

I agree Red4 - but at the same time keep thinking that if Milkround could have just said “can we go somewhere a little quieter” - even if the sg was being a complete dhead then this would have been easily forgotten about a while ago. But like I’ve said before I also hope he doesn’t end up with a criminal conviction over something as silly as this.

[milkround]

Petrus1983 said:

I agree Red4 - but at the same time keep thinking that if Milkround could have just said “can we go somewhere a little quieter” - even if the sg was being a complete dhead then this would have been easily forgotten about a while ago. But like I’ve said before I also hope he doesn’t end up with a criminal conviction over something as silly as this.

Totes agree again. With some hindsight he probably only wanted me to go to the self service til. So about a 20m walk each way. I just didn't know that at the time. When he said 'come with me' I didn't know where he wanted me to go. So for about a minutes time and 40metres walking all this could have been avoided. Which is daft - I just didn't know it at the time.

I'm off the opinion that if I truly did assault someone I should be convicted and punished. I just truly don't feel like I did. What's gonna be is out of my hands really. And I won't let it upset me too much. Let's say worst case scanario for me. I'm locked up in prison for 6 months and I lose my job and am unemployable. I'll sell my stuff, fly to thailand and teach scuba diving (which I've done before). Coming home every 6 months to drive trucks on the agency for a couple of months to top up the cash. Rinse and repeat. It's not for everyone - but to me it seems really really really attractive. I won't have a mortgage or a 2l diesel BMW but I'd still be happy.

[Petrus1983]

Knowing very little about the law I’d consider a custodial sentence beyond crazy.

[Petrus1983]

milkround said:

It's not for everyone - but to me it seems really really really attractive.

You might have to go back and hit him harder

[Drew106]

Petrus1983 said:

milkround said:

It's not for everyone - but to me it seems really really really attractive.

You might have to go back and hit him harder

I was thinking the same!
Maybe you should go to Thailand anyway OP - sounds like that might be your calling!

[MYOB]

I wish you luck. I got a criminal conviction for shouting at my ex wife for a second under extreme provocation. It was also caught on CCTV.

I got convicted because she "felt threatened".

[anonymous-user]

Nice pharmacy tangent.

What matters is reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is a low threshold. It's what information decisions are being made upon at the time they're being made that is important. Not what is known after the fact.

It's perfectly possible to be honestly mistaken with someone with some form of disability.

[milkround]

Drew106 said:

Petrus1983 said:

milkround said:

It's not for everyone - but to me it seems really really really attractive.

You might have to go back and hit him harder

I was thinking the same!
Maybe you should go to Thailand anyway OP - sounds like that might be your calling!

Err after leaving the PhD I was out there riding motorbikes in Asia. I couldn't have been happier. Amazing weather, food, people... Got a flat on the bike in the mountains and the locals pulled over and took me to a mechanic. £2 to fix it. They wouldn't take a penny for the lift. But Beth got offered an 'amazing' job opportunity so flew home and asked me to come back early. I should have still been out there. I came back early at her requiest and realized I needed to look for an adult job but drove trucks again just to fill the bank back up. The job turned out to be nothing like it was described so she left that hospital job and is doing community stuff now. I realised just how much I hate driving trucks and have vowed to never sit in one again.

So I'm back in England. Rather than helping me, the locals stole my brand new bike. Rather than chilling and letting people be I have security guards chasing me around because they wanted to see some paperwork. Rather than the police smiling and pocketing the money I have them demanding I admit guilt for something I feel like I didn't do. Britain is a dump imo. Asia is far from perfect - but I prefer it.

I'd go back in a heartbeat. But I'm in love with a girl and she wants to be here. The truth is if she told me she was leaving me for another bloke when she gets home tonight I'd have the flights booked. I'd sell my car, take the insurance payout for the bike, sell my tools, sell my computers and expensive cameras and see how long I could go on for £30k ish.

Instead, I'm going to the magistrates and arguing over which way I left a supermarket and if it's reasonable to arrest someone because you think they left the wrong way. Feels like a bit of a joke tbh.

[carinaman]

janesmith1950 said:

This might have been asked earlier, apologies if so- OP, do you have a criminal record?

I'm not sure that's relevant. It wouldn't be divulged in Court before or during a trial. The law doesn't allow the police to detain and search people on the off chance just because they have previous convictions either.

[Red 4]

Petrus1983 said:

Knowing very little about the law I’d consider a custodial sentence beyond crazy.

Never going to happen ...

[longblackcoat]

carinaman said:

janesmith1950 said:

This might have been asked earlier, apologies if so- OP, do you have a criminal record?

I'm not sure that's relevant. It wouldn't be divulged in Court before or during a trial. The law doesn't allow the police to detain and search people on the off chance just because they have previous convictions either.

It's entirely relevant to the sentencing though, assuming (as is likely) that OP is found guilty.

If he has a clean record (is "of good character") and comes across well, albeit perhaps as a bit misguided in his actions rather than as an actively bad lad, then he'll probably end up with a fine (plus compensation to the SG), maybe some form of community service. Incredibly unlikely that he'd end up with custodial though, given OP's ability to turn the most trivial of molehills into K2, I'd rule nothing out.

[carinaman]

longblackcoat said:

Incredibly unlikely that he'd end up with custodial though, given OP's ability to turn the most trivial of molehills into K2, I'd rule nothing out.

I've never met anybody that does that. And none of them have ever worn a uniform or held Public Office. And none of them are currently serving a custodial sentence.

[Greendubber]

La Liga said:

Nice pharmacy tangent.

What matters is reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is a low threshold. It's what information decisions are being made upon at the time they're being made that is important. Not what is known after the fact.

It's perfectly possible to be honestly mistaken with someone with some form of disability.

Yep, no one was saying a security guard would be checking medication, I doubt they would even bother checking anyone with a little pharmacy bag that's ordinary stapled/sealed up.

As previously mentioned, it's not a fair comparison to make.

[milkround]

Greendubber said:

La Liga said:

Nice pharmacy tangent.

What matters is reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is a low threshold. It's what information decisions are being made upon at the time they're being made that is important. Not what is known after the fact.

It's perfectly possible to be honestly mistaken with someone with some form of disability.

Yep, no one was saying a security guard would be checking medication, I doubt they would even bother checking anyone with a little pharmacy bag that's ordinary stapled/sealed up.

As previously mentioned, it's not a fair comparison to make.

It's an entirely fair comparison. If you are to say simply walking out from a way which is not the tils is grounds enough to arrest someone. Then you have to question why they would walk out that way. One option is they had been stealing. Another is they had been to the pharmacy, the cafe or timpsons to get a key cut. Or perhaps realised they'd left their wallet in their car and were walking out to get it.

And someone certainly was saying a security guard would be checking medicine. He went as far as saying the pharmacy put labels on the boxes and bagged meds to assist the security guard doing so.

It's not overly relevant to me as I didn't walk out the wrong way. But it's a ludicrous jump to say even if someone did do so a reasonable person would believe they were committing an indictable offense. IMO.

[Codotuk]

I had an experience today which made me think of this thread today.

I went to a shop today on the motorbike. I pulled up outside started taking gloves off, got to the shutter looked inside saw movement the guy was 8ft away before I managed to get helmet off so took 1 step inside stood still and continued to take helmet off after saying hello and sorry about taking so long with helmet whilst still getting the strap off.

He says something about being a prick for walking into his shop with helmet on! I’ve managed to get helmet off turned to look at him and then notice he’s shaking and has a hammer in his hand!! He then starts telling me about he used to be a bouncer and a prick walked up to him with a helmet on........... he still hadn’t put the hammer down at this point - even though we established that I wasn’t going to rob him.

So I picked my stuff up and turned around and left.

I got home and called the shop and apologised for not stopping for a chat but, there was a prick with a hammer acting like a prick. In my experience you don’t argue with a prick with a hammer Etc etc don’t know why or how but he ended up saying “what did you want me to do with it - stick it up my arse” which I agreed it was the best place for it whilst laughing at him and hung up.

Unbelievable behaviour.

[eldar]

What sort of shop?

[anonymous-user]

milkround said:

Greendubber said:

La Liga said:

Nice pharmacy tangent.

What matters is reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is a low threshold. It's what information decisions are being made upon at the time they're being made that is important. Not what is known after the fact.

It's perfectly possible to be honestly mistaken with someone with some form of disability.

Yep, no one was saying a security guard would be checking medication, I doubt they would even bother checking anyone with a little pharmacy bag that's ordinary stapled/sealed up.

As previously mentioned, it's not a fair comparison to make.

It's an entirely fair comparison. If you are to say simply walking out from a way which is not the tils is grounds enough to arrest someone. Then you have to question why they would walk out that way. One option is they had been stealing. Another is they had been to the pharmacy, the cafe or timpsons to get a key cut. Or perhaps realised they'd left their wallet in their car and were walking out to get it.

And someone certainly was saying a security guard would be checking medicine. He went as far as saying the pharmacy put labels on the boxes and bagged meds to assist the security guard doing so.

It's not overly relevant to me as I didn't walk out the wrong way. But it's a ludicrous jump to say even if someone did do so a reasonable person would believe they were committing an indictable offense. IMO.

I don't think you appreciate what a low threshold RGS is along with placing too much emphasis on what is known in hindsight, vs what information was available at the time.

Whatever formed the basis of the SG talking to you - the route out of the store etc, along with the not producing the receipt and walking off sounds like RGS to me.

[Greendubber]

La Liga said:

milkround said:

Greendubber said:

La Liga said:

Nice pharmacy tangent.

What matters is reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is a low threshold. It's what information decisions are being made upon at the time they're being made that is important. Not what is known after the fact.

It's perfectly possible to be honestly mistaken with someone with some form of disability.

Yep, no one was saying a security guard would be checking medication, I doubt they would even bother checking anyone with a little pharmacy bag that's ordinary stapled/sealed up.

As previously mentioned, it's not a fair comparison to make.

It's an entirely fair comparison. If you are to say simply walking out from a way which is not the tils is grounds enough to arrest someone. Then you have to question why they would walk out that way. One option is they had been stealing. Another is they had been to the pharmacy, the cafe or timpsons to get a key cut. Or perhaps realised they'd left their wallet in their car and were walking out to get it.

And someone certainly was saying a security guard would be checking medicine. He went as far as saying the pharmacy put labels on the boxes and bagged meds to assist the security guard doing so.

It's not overly relevant to me as I didn't walk out the wrong way. But it's a ludicrous jump to say even if someone did do so a reasonable person would believe they were committing an indictable offense. IMO.

I don't think you appreciate what a low threshold RGS is along with placing too much emphasis on what is known in hindsight, vs what information was available at the time.

Whatever formed the basis of the SG talking to you - the route out of the store etc, along with the not producing the receipt and walking off sounds like RGS to me.

Yep.

Start getting uppity with someone, refuse to give any kind of reasonable response and that ups the game. Simply walking from a pharmacy, returning to get a wallet, walking out of a shop etc isn't reasonable grounds to arrest anyone.

Starting an argument, when holding goods, without showing a receipt will raise suspicion and a security guard might reasonably form the opinion items have been stolen.

The best thing to do in that situation is not come across all Freeman of the land and just act like an adult.

[anonymous-user]

carinaman said:

janesmith1950 said:

This might have been asked earlier, apologies if so- OP, do you have a criminal record?

I'm not sure that's relevant. It wouldn't be divulged in Court before or during a trial. The law doesn't allow the police to detain and search people on the off chance just because they have previous convictions either.

Erm, it can be disclosed if relevant.