Shop Lifter Awarded 2.1 Million.

[JBP55]

Walmart said she shoplifted; jury awards her $2.1 million

 

[El Pozzinator]

So the machine froze. If she walked out with items she didn’t pay for (which weren’t expressly gifted to her by the store managers), that’s stealing. So they file charges. The law says arrest (in reality probably a summons, which might be classified as an arrest without taking the “arrestee” into custody), so she was “arrested”. The criminal case was dismissed, the company petitioned for a settlement to avoid a civil suit (recouping its cost for lost inventory and the associated manpower expenses). She counter-sues, and is awarded over 100,000x the damages sought initially?

I’ll never understand legal math, where 2+2=42,796.35 plus court costs and commission.

 

[Old School]

So the machine froze. If she walked out with items she didn’t pay for (which weren’t expressly gifted to her by the store managers), that’s stealing. So they file charges. The law says arrest (in reality probably a summons, which might be classified as an arrest without taking the “arrestee” into custody), so she was “arrested”. The criminal case was dismissed, the company petitioned for a settlement to avoid a civil suit (recouping its cost for lost inventory and the associated manpower expenses). She counter-sues, and is awarded over 100,000x the damages sought initially?

I’ll never understand legal math, where 2+2=42,796.35 plus court costs and commission.

Its new math

 

[ozarkpugs]

So the machine froze. If she walked out with items she didn’t pay for (which weren’t expressly gifted to her by the store managers), that’s stealing. So they file charges. The law says arrest (in reality probably a summons, which might be classified as an arrest without taking the “arrestee” into custody), so she was “arrested”. The criminal case was dismissed, the company petitioned for a settlement to avoid a civil suit (recouping its cost for lost inventory and the associated manpower expenses). She counter-sues, and is awarded over 100,000x the damages sought initially?

I’ll never understand legal math, where 2+2=42,796.35 plus court costs and commission.

Makes complete sense to me . All she needed was a jury full of " entitled " people like her and social justice was implemented . Better than 40 acre's and a mule for sure .

Sent from my LM-K920 using Tapatalk

 

[Jstudz220]

If you look into this story the reason she was awarded 2.1 mil is because the machine froze after she paid and didn’t provide her with a receipt. She checks her bank account and see the transaction went through so she left the store. Wal mart couldn’t provide any actual evidence of her shoplifting and according to her bank account transaction and wal marts cameras she paid for every item she walked out of the store with.

Personally I would have went to the front and explained my situation. I’m sure things would have went a lot smoother for her but hey in the long run it seems she was done wrong and got paid fat for it.

 

[Emperor]

I scratch my head every time I see a big-box store allowing customers to use the "honor system" to check themselves out, while incompetent or worse; non-give a **** employees just sit there staring into space.

I would love to see Wal-Marts shrinkage (code for stolen/lost products), per store; based on demographics.

 

[Jstudz220]

I scratch my head every time I see a big-box store allowing customers to use the "honor system" to check themselves out, while incompetent or worse; non-give a **** employees just sit there staring into space.

I would love to see Wal-Marts shrinkage (code for stolen/lost products), per store; based on demographics.

The company I work for used to loose a good bit of money from the wal mart self checkouts. The systems were updated in 2020 and now rolled out to almost every location. Shrink is almost nonexistent via the self checkout now with the new and improved system.

The original system was definitely a failure. People would scan every other item or only a couple items while loading up bags of goods and walk out undetected. The new system makes it next to impossible to put anything in a bag without being scanned.

 

[drill sgt]

It ain"t over yet because Wal-Mart is probably appeal this verdict and award... And with the lawyers approach the person that was arrested and demanded the payment of money probably did not sit well with the jury... Glad to see someone go up against Wal-mart into a court room and not be scared of by their army of lawyers.... AS far as myself using the self check out lanes it will be a cold day in hades unless Wal-mart starts paying me wages to be a employee and check out my purchases.. Have refused to step out of line and move to a self-check out register even when holding only 1 or 2 items ....... Just remember that for every self check out station means that Wal-mart has replaced a live human employee with a machine that they do not have to pay wages and benifits ...... But when the machine locks up a live human has to come and try to un-lock the machine ..................................... drill sgt.

 

[Emperor]

The company I work for used to loose a good bit of money from the wal mart self checkouts. The systems were updated in 2020 and now rolled out to almost every location. Shrink is almost nonexistent via the self checkout now with the new and improved system.

The original system was definitely a failure. People would scan every other item or only a couple items while loading up bags of goods and walk out undetected. The new system makes it next to impossible to put anything in a bag without being scanned.

Well, that new system ain't in place in Home Depot!

 

[Jstudz220]

Well, that new system ain't in place in Home Depot!

Maybe not, I wouldn’t know.

 

[Bosco]

This is a much better article - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/walmart-shoplifting-alabama-settlement-2-1-million/

Alabama has a law where the shoplifter can pay civil penalties in addition to the criminal penalties. See https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.c...nalties/petty-theft-alabama-penalties-defense

The lawsuit was about Walmart harassing innocent people to pay these fees with threats of being sued by Walmart's legal team if they do not pay. Most people just paid because they knew they couldn't take on Walmart's legal team and they'd lose more money trying to fight them. This lady decided to fight and rightfully so.

How would you feel if you were accused of shoplifting, arrested, deemed innocent, and then harassed by a giant corporation's legal team for years?

Civil Penalties​

In addition to criminal penalties, a person who commits a shoplifting theft offense can be held civilly liable under Alabama law. The offender can be ordered to:

• reimburse the store owner for the full retail value of the shoplifted property, if the property is no longer in a sellable condition,
• reimburse the store owner for up to $200 in expenses incurred in trying to recover the shoplifted property, and
• pay up to $1,000 to cover the store owner's reasonable attorney's fees and court costs in bringing the civil action.

If the shoplifter is a minor younger than 19, the parents or legal guardians are responsible for the above damages.

Walmart has "engaged in a pattern and practice of targeting Alabama citizens falsely accused of shoplifting with demands that the innocent customer immediately pay money or risk getting sued by Walmart in addition to the criminal charges already pending against them," the suit charged. "Often, as in this case, the money demanded to resolve the issue is substantially higher than the value of the merchandise allegedly stolen."

Defense attorneys for Walmart said the practice is legal. Under Alabama law, shoplifters can be ordered to reimburse a store owner for up to $200. However, some of those people may have been falsely accused.

WKRG reported that the trial featured testimony that Walmart and other major retailers routinely use such settlements in states where laws allow it, and that Walmart made hundreds of millions of dollars this way over two-year period. Defense attorneys declined to comment on the verdict to WKRG.

In a statement released Tuesday, a spokesperson for Walmart said the company plans to appeal the ruling.

"We continue to believe our associates acted appropriately. We don't believe the verdict is supported by the evidence and the damages awarded exceed what is allowed by law. We will be filing post-trial motions," the statement read in part.

 

[Fordfella]

Thanks Bosco for the post, it cleared up a lot. Thank you Lesleigh Nurse for standing up to Goliath. I hope Wal-Mart and others think twice before doing this to anyone else!!

 

[Fordfella]

Now this.

MSN

www.msn.com

Tucson Police body cam and surveillance video show fatal shooting on Nov. 29, 2021

WARNING: This video contains graphic content. Store surveillance video and police body-worn camera video of a Tucson Police officer shooting a man in a motorized wheelchair outside of a Lowe's

tucson.com

 

[Emperor]

Don't steal!

 

[Jstudz220]

Now this.

MSN

www.msn.com

Tucson Police body cam and surveillance video show fatal shooting on Nov. 29, 2021

WARNING: This video contains graphic content. Store surveillance video and police body-worn camera video of a Tucson Police officer shooting a man in a motorized wheelchair outside of a Lowe's

tucson.com

I saw this yesterday. That cop is in deep water after that.

 

[Emperor]

I saw this yesterday. That cop is in deep water after that.

Don't know about that. The guy had already doubled down on the theft by brandishing a knife. That shows intent to harm if confronted. Then he disobeys several direct orders to stop as he is heading back in the store. He flashes that pack of cigarettes and cops thinks he has and gun and he is possibly getting ready to shoot the girl at the door?!?

 

[Jstudz220]

Don't know about that. The guy had already doubled down on the theft by brandishing a knife. That shows intent to harm if confronted. Then he disobeys several direct orders to stop as he is heading back in the store. He flashes that pack of cigarettes and cops thinks he has and gun and he is possibly getting ready to shoot the girl at the door?!?

Dude seriously? 9 shots at point blank range? Did you see the video? They immediately fired him and opened an investigation. He’s screwed.

 

[RedStick7]

Don't know about that. The guy had already doubled down on the theft by brandishing a knife. That shows intent to harm if confronted. Then he disobeys several direct orders to stop as he is heading back in the store. He flashes that pack of cigarettes and cops thinks he has and gun and he is possibly getting ready to shoot the girl at the door?!?

You should find the video. It looks bad for the cop......

 

[Magdump]

It ain"t over yet because Wal-Mart is probably appeal this verdict and award... And with the lawyers approach the person that was arrested and demanded the payment of money probably did not sit well with the jury... Glad to see someone go up against Wal-mart into a court room and not be scared of by their army of lawyers.... AS far as myself using the self check out lanes it will be a cold day in hades unless Wal-mart starts paying me wages to be a employee and check out my purchases.. Have refused to step out of line and move to a self-check out register even when holding only 1 or 2 items ....... Just remember that for every self check out station means that Wal-mart has replaced a live human employee with a machine that they do not have to pay wages and benifits ...... But when the machine locks up a live human has to come and try to un-lock the machine ..................................... drill sgt.

I think if Walmart’s lawyers do anything it’ll be trying to get her to take a settlement.
They felt froggy and jumped, then got bitch slapped. There have been way worse that got lesser reward.

 

[Gerberman]

You should find the video. It looks bad for the cop......

Scenario possibility, guy in wheelchair rolls into the store and grabs a 5 year old and places knife to child’s throat to use as an escape method. Or worse, harms the child. Everyone screaming cop should have shot him. Guy was obviously unstable.