WalMart Shoplifting

[Tractors4u]

I worked at Wal Mart for 3 years when I was in college. That was from 1987 to 1990. Even then the attitude about shoplifting was amazing. Only assistant managers or the store manager could stop a shoplifter and they had to be past the last cash register. Once I I saw a guy stuff something into his jacket. I tell the assistant manager. He says "I didn't see it happen so I can't do anything." "Look you can see the bulge". His reply was, "Well we don't want to offend anyone". I said "yeah you are right, we want them to shop lift with us again." Every few months the district manager would come by with employees from another store to test our loss prevention abilities. These guys would see how much they could steal before getting caught. The best one was when one of then bought a pack of gum and then picked up the biggest TV he could carry. He put the receipt for the gum between his lips and then walk to the garden center door where an employee held the door open for him. No one is going to take a slobbery receipt out of someones mouth. Their goal was to get the most dollars. Another trick was to get carbide tipped circular saw blades and put them in an ice chest, I mean fill the ice chest up, and when they got to the register they would pull the bar code off of the chest and hand it to the cashier.

 

[Soundguy]

Don't stop now.. I was just starting to make a good list!

soundguy

I worked at Wal Mart for 3 years when I was in college. That was from 1987 to 1990. Even then the attitude about shoplifting was amazing. Only assistant managers or the store manager could stop a shoplifter and they had to be past the last cash register. Once I I saw a guy stuff something into his jacket. I tell the assistant manager. He says "I didn't see it happen so I can't do anything." "Look you can see the bulge". His reply was, "Well we don't want to offend anyone". I said "yeah you are right, we want them to shop lift with us again." Every few months the district manager would come by with employees from another store to test our loss prevention abilities. These guys would see how much they could steal before getting caught. The best one was when one of then bought a pack of gum and then picked up the biggest TV he could carry. He put the receipt for the gum between his lips and then walk to the garden center door where an employee held the door open for him. No one is going to take a slobbery receipt out of someones mouth. Their goal was to get the most dollars. Another trick was to get carbide tipped circular saw blades and put them in an ice chest, I mean fill the ice chest up, and when they got to the register they would pull the bar code off of the chest and hand it to the cashier.

 

[Tractors4u]

Don't stop now.. I was just starting to make a good list!

soundguy

If you hear an employee say to a cashier "Have you seen Bob?", Bob means bottom of buggy. It means that the shopper has some on the bottom of the cart that they haven't removed to have rung up.

 

[Podunkadunk]

More! More!

If you hear an employee say to a cashier "Have you seen Bob?", Bob means bottom of buggy. It means that the shopper has some on the bottom of the cart that they haven't removed to have rung up.

 

[Wayne County Hose]

With all the FAT, LAZY people we have here in Florida, all it takes is $4.00 per year and your good to go to P off the normal folks.
There are way too many people abusing this system as it is
Now go figure..
I am against it totally If you can walk normal and all of these ( SYSTEM SUCKERS ) are very able to walk.. We should fine them for abusing a good thing for the people that really need it.........
Put your foot down NOW!!!!!
Jim

Ahhh, yes....the great state of Florida. Known up here as "God's waiting room."
Hey Mr Jimi, quit sugar coating everything and let us know how you really feel.

 

[Tractors4u]

More! More!

OK, here is one more. One of the things that the assistant managers told us was that if they saw a shoplifter take something and if they lost visual contact with the suspect for just one second, they were not supposed to persue them. Why? Because according to the managers this had happened and the defense attornies used the arguement, "If you lost sight of them then how did you know that they didn't put it back?" I don't know if this was official Wal Mart Policy at the time or word of mouth that had spread around or just our store manager's policy. I do know that they were very soft on shop lifters when I worked there, but that was 20 years ago. They were also very lenient on their return policy.

 

[Skyco]

That is exactly why SC passed the law about concealing merchandise. Doesn't matter if you put it back, doesn't matter if you say you were going to pay. Concealing merchandise is a crime here. If they have you on video for example, concealing it, you've already broken the law, even if you sense you've been observed and put it back.

 

[Bird]

That is exactly why SC passed the law about concealing merchandise. Doesn't matter if you put it back, doesn't matter if you say you were going to pay. Concealing merchandise is a crime here. If they have you on video for example, concealing it, you've already broken the law, even if you sense you've been observed and put it back.

When you say "Concealing merchandise is a crime here", I'm not at all sure that's exactly true. You'll notice that the statute you quoted is titled in part "presumptions" and it goes on to say it's "permissible to infer" that the person intended to convert it to his own use; i.e., steal it. I think you'll find that such persons are charged with theft or attempted theft; not concealment of the merchandise.

In other words, it's not actually illegal to conceal the merchandise; only to steal it or attempt to steal it, and it can be "presumed" that the concealment was with the intent to steal it. Presumptions in law are subject to rebuttal; although it can sometimes be very difficult to rebut some of them.

 

[Skyco]

I only posted part of SC law there is more-

SECTION 16-13-105. Definitions as to shoplifting and similar offenses.

When used in Sections 16-13-110, 16-13-120 and 16-13-140 the terms listed below shall have the following meanings:

(1) "Conceal" means to hide merchandise on the person or among the belongings of a person so that, although there may be some notice of its presence, it is not visible through ordinary observation.

(2) "Full retail value" means the merchant's stated or advertised price of merchandise.

(3) "Merchandise" means any goods, chattels, foodstuffs or wares of any type and description, regardless of value.

(4) "Merchant" means an owner or operator of any retail mercantile establishment or any agent, employee, lessee, consignee, officer, director, franchisee or independent contractor of the owner or operator.

(5) "Store or other retail mercantile establishment" means a place where merchandise is displayed, held, stored or sold or offered to the public for sale.

SECTION 16-13-110. Shoplifting.

(A) A person is guilty of shoplifting if he:

(1) takes possession of, carries away, transfers from one person to another or from one area of a store or other retail mercantile establishment to another area, or causes to be carried away or transferred any merchandise displayed, held, stored, or offered for sale by any store or other retail mercantile establishment with the intention of depriving the merchant of the possession, use, or benefit of the merchandise without paying the full retail value;

(2) alters, transfers, or removes any label, price tag marking, indicia of value, or any other markings which aid in determining value affixed to any merchandise displayed, held, stored, or offered for sale in a store or other retail mercantile establishment and attempts to purchase the merchandise personally or in consort with another at less than the full retail value with the intention of depriving the merchant of the full retail value of the merchandise;

(3) transfers any merchandise displayed, held, stored, or offered for sale by any store or other retail mercantile establishment from the container in which it is displayed to any other container with intent to deprive the merchant of the full retail value.

(B) A person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a:

(1) misdemeanor triable in magistrate's court and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than thirty days if the value of the shoplifted merchandise is one thousand dollars or less;

(2) felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, if the value of the shoplifted merchandise is more than one thousand dollars but less than five thousand dollars;

(3) felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned not more than ten years if the value of the shoplifted merchandise is five thousand dollars or more.

SECTION 16-13-111. Reports of shoplifting convictions.

A first offense shoplifting prosecution or second offense resulting in a conviction shall be reported by the magistrate or city recorder hearing the case to the Communications and Records Division of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division which shall keep a record of such conviction so that any law enforcement agency can inquire into whether or not a defendant has a prior record.

SECTION 16-13-120. Shoplifting; presumptions from concealment of unpurchased goods.

It is permissible to infer that any person wilfully concealing unpurchased goods or merchandise of any store or other mercantile establishment either on the premises or outside the premises of the store has concealed the article with the intention of converting it to his own use without paying the purchase price thereof within the meaning of Section 16-13-110. It is also permissible to infer that the finding of the unpurchased goods or merchandise concealed upon the person or among the belongings of the person is evidence of wilful concealment. If the person conceals or causes to be concealed the unpurchased goods or merchandise upon the person or among the belongings of another, it is also permissible to infer that the person so concealing such goods wilfully concealed them with the intention of converting them to his own use without paying the purchase price thereof within the meaning of Section 16-13-110.

SECTION 16-13-130. Sections 16-13-110 and 16-13-120 are cumulative.

The offense created by Section 16-13-110 and the inferences provided in Section 16-13-120 are not exclusive and are in addition to previously existing offenses and those rights and presumptions as were heretofore provided by law.

SECTION 16-13-140. Defense to action for delay to investigate ownership of merchandise.

In any action brought by reason of having been delayed by a merchant or merchant's employee or agent on or near the premises of a mercantile establishment for the purpose of investigation concerning the ownership of any merchandise, it shall be a defense to such action if: (1) The person was delayed in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable time to permit such investigation, and (2) reasonable cause existed to believe that the person delayed had committed the crime of shoplifting.

 

[MikeD74T]

I know I'm just being a radical jerk, but I refuse to show or hand over my receipt at a Walmart exit. I paid for the merchandise and they are entitled to watch me from the register to the door. If they want to look in my bags they must call the police & accuse me of shoplifting. Honest Americans give up too many rights today without considering why they have any. MikeD74T

 

[Bird]

I know I'm just being a radical jerk

I really don't like having to stop and show my receipt at the door at Sam's Club, nor do I want to be stopped to show the receipt at Walmart. However, when you talk about honest Americans giving up rights, how about the rights of the owners of businesses. I figure it's their "right" to check the receipts if they want to, and if you don't like it, it's your "right" to go elsewhere.

So, yeah, I may not like it, but I can handle it without being a jerk.

 

[jdbower]

I'd just use my right to shop elsewhere if they did something I didn't like, in fact around here the WalMarts aren't all that clean so I shop at Target where the quality of the store and the merchandise are a bit better. I put up with the receipt examination at Costco because all the warehouse stores around here do it and I can't live without 50 gallon drums of mayo. Amusingly the Costco here doesn't check to make sure every item in the cart is on the receipt, they check to make sure everything on the receipt is in the cart. It seems like they're more concerned that I dropped something on the way out than that I could be shoplifting! Fundamentally it's their store and their rules so the onus is on me to find alternatives if it bothers me, and with so much available online it's pretty easy these days.

 

[LMTC]

I know I'm just being a radical jerk, but I refuse to show or hand over my receipt at a Walmart exit. I paid for the merchandise and they are entitled to watch me from the register to the door. If they want to look in my bags they must call the police & accuse me of shoplifting. Honest Americans give up too many rights today without considering why they have any. MikeD74T

And where in the Constitution is the right to not show a receipt? Don't like it, don't shop there. The business (which is really people, whether it is a sole prop, partnership, or corp., it's owned by people) likely owns the property, and short of violating the law can pretty much make policy as they choose. I fail to see how being required to show a receipt at the door violates a Consitutional right...and the remark about Americans giving up too many rights seems to imply a Constitutional right. If I misunderstood, please feel free to clarify where you think the right to not show a receipt upon leaving a retail store comes from.

 

[MikeD74T]

I have a Constitutional right to unreasonable search. Walmart takes my money & packages my merchandise, meaning it's no longer theirs including the receipt. I don't give the elderly checkers a hard time, when they ask to see my receipt I just say no thank you & keep walking. Granted the management could refuse me reentry to their store but they don't. As for business man's rights Sam's Club, has a membership clause that gives them the right to surveille my purchases - Walmart does not and as previously stated they can watch me walk from the register to the door. MikeD74T

 

[dooleysm]

There's the idea of personal property at issue here I think. Yes, you are on their property, but just because it's private property doesn't mean that the owner has his own sovereign nation and can make laws as he sees fit.

What if a walmart employee came up to you on the street and asked to see the contents of your walmart bag and a receipt to prove that you own it. They don't have any special authority to compel you to prove your ownership of merchandise, regardless of where they ask you, on their property or someone else's.

That said, I think it's a pretty fair request, and if I had a problem with it, I would stop shopping there.

 

[Bird]

I have a Constitutional right to unreasonable search.

First off, I think you meant a right to avoid unreasonable searches, not have a right TO them.

But, nope, you do NOT have a Constitutional right to avoid them at Walmart. The Constitution only prohibits unreasonable searches by or for the government. So it has nothing to do with whether Walmart or any other private individual or company conducts any kind of search.

Now, in addition to that, the words are "unreasonable searches"; reasonable searches ARE allowed, even by the police. And IF the Constitution applied to the current discussion; i.e., Walmart, which it certainly does not, many of us, and quite likely the courts, would NOT consider what Walmart is doing to be "unreasonable".

 

[MikeD74T]

Bird, You're right about "avoid", I'm a little brain dead today. As for "unreasonable", how could anyone think it reasonable that WalMart needs to challenge every customer to determine whether they might have stolen something between their register & the door. Removing merchandise from that area would be more reasonable. I know of no other store in New Hampshire that feels the need to challenge every customer ( not counting Sam's Club which is WalMart anyway). Maybe the Texas motto, Friendly" serves WalMart better than NH's "Live Free or Die".MikeD74t

 

[jdbower]

"Reasonable" is open to interpretation. Are they searching your things or their cart and bags (after all, you didn't pay for the bags they're just letting you use them)? In fact, they stop searching once you present evidence that it's your stuff. To me this implies that they believe that the loss of revenue from customers who don't like this enough to shop elsewhere is less than the amount of lost revenue from the shoplifters this catches or deters. Since they're not losing your revenue they probably don't care too much about you, if, on the other hand, you talked to the manager and told him what your issue was and then went to another store to shop until they made changes they may care more. It may be more expensive or less convenient, but I know I couldn't in good conscious shop at a place if I had a moral objection to their policies - principles have a price.

 

[Bird]

how could anyone think it reasonable that WalMart needs to challenge every customer to determine whether they might have stolen something between their register & the door.

Mike, maybe they do things differently up there than down here. I've been in Walmarts just about all over the country except in the northeast, and I've never known of an instance in which they challenged anyone except when a customer is going out with something fairly valuable and too big to be bagged; i.e., things such as TVs, microwave ovens, etc. While I'm sure it's probably happened, I've never personally known of them to check anything in a bag.

Of course, I'm certainly not saying that everything Walmart does is "reasonable"; only that you aren't protected by the Constitution from their "searches".

I've been known to be a bit of a "jerk" with a few of their other policies myself. After having been a regular customer in quite a few Walmarts, there was one (and only one) in which the cashier would ask to see my drivers license about every third time I was in there. No other Walmart had ever asked for other ID when I used a credit card. So I just wondered why, since it only happened occasionally, never when buying anything that cost more than a few dollars. So I sent an e-mail to Walmart's headquarters and a day or two later a fellow who identified himself as the manager of that store called me. He first told me they "always" asked when a credit card was used; a very obvious lie and I told him so. Then he told me they had to do it on every 5th customer; another lie. A couple of days later, a different fellow called and also identified himself as the manager of that store. He told me the computer randomly selected people to ask for ID. So the next time a cashier asked to see my drivers license, I said, "No" and walked out, leaving the merchanise sitting there (I hadn't yet scanned my credit card). No one in that store has ever asked to see ID since.

But then a brand new Walmart opened closer to our house, and lo and behold, the second fellow who called from the other store became the manager in the new store. So, sure enough, about the 3rd or 4th time I was in there, the cashier asked to see my drivers license. I told her, "Call your manager." So I got to meet him in person, and was never again asked for other ID.

And then Walmart started selling beer and wine. And they had a policy requiring ID of anyone who purchased any alcoholic beverage. Now I'll be 68 before this month's over, so I asked a couple of cashiers if they really thought I could be under 21. And when they told me of the policy requiring ID of everyone, I told them it must be tough to have to work for a boss who thinks you're too much of an idiot to know that I'm over 21. The policy now is to require ID of anyone who appears to the cashier to be under 40.

 

[dooleysm]

Bird, you said, "Of course, I'm certainly not saying that everything Walmart does is "reasonable"; only that you aren't protected by the Constitution from their "searches"."

I know that neither one of us is a lawyer, but I believe think that I'm in no way compelled by any law to submit to a 'search' by a Wal-Mart employee, regardless of where I am standing (in their store, on their property, or elsewhere). If you come over to my house, do I have the right to demand you empty your pockets for me to see? I don't think I do. I can ask you to, and if you refuse the best I can do is ask you to leave and then if you don't, have you arrested for tresspassing.

Again, I'm not lawyer, but this is my take on the situation.