🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <CGnGoy.85r@cbnews.cb.att.com> ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kaml
et) writes:
>In article <CGn82K.1rD@cbnews.cb.att.com> tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lest
er) writes:
>>>Spangler was resisting the Meijer rent-a-cops when they broke his neck.  I
>>
[resisting stuff munched]
>
>
>Well, citizens can make an arrest for a misdemeanor committed in
>their presence.
>
>So a store cop who sees you commit a misdemeanor (or felony) can
>arrest you, and can use sufficient force to overcome your resistance
>to that arrest.
>
>If you start to leave the store cop can restrain you.
>
>If you later are found guilty of the charge for which you were
>arrested, you will probably lose a false arrest suit.
>

I just did some research on this subject. Here's the deal:
Indeed, there is a case for false imprisonment. There have been cases when
a detainment of only a few minutes has been an instance of false imprisonment.

But, a statute in the Ohio revised Code states that a merchant can detain
a person if thye think that there is a reason to believe that shoplifting
has occurred, and that the detention can last long enough in order to make
some type of investigation.

The two principles are held in tension between each other.

>If you are not found guilty, then it's up to a court to determine
>if it's a false arrest, and you have a good chance of winning.
>

Actually, a jury would decide in that situation. More often than not the
decision goes in favor of the store, unless unreasonable circumstances
occurred - i.e.- hours of time, etc.

>If you ask the store cop to call a real cop, and the store cop sign
>a written complaint stating he saw you commit a specified
>misdemeanor in his presence, the real cop can take you into custody.
>In general, for a felony the real cop will not arrest you for a
>misdemeanor not committed in his presence, but if a store cop
>arrests you, the real cop can take you into custody.  There's really
>a difference.  If you file a false arrest charge, it's not the real
>cop who did the arresting.
>
>So you may not want to call a real cop since you may end up in the
>pokey, and can think about a lawsuit but is that really the best
>thing at the moment?
>
>
>In the Spangler case, he was awarded a few million dollars because
>of at least three separate reasons:
>
> 1. He was paralyzed.   That alone might have been  enough.
>
> 2. He never stole anything.  He brought in old batteries to see
>    if Miejers carried the same batteries.  They didn't.  So he
>    put the old batteries back in his pocket and was stopped leaving
>    the store and told he was shoplifting the batteries (that
>    Meijers didn't even carry.)
>
> 3. At the time, the Meijer store cops were taught to use, and did
>    use "Pain Compliance" to stop people from leaving.
>
>    What's pain compliance?  If someone starts to leave, hurt him;
>    inflict pain, to prevent him from leaving.
>
>    In Spangler's case, it left him paralyzed.  I recall he was a
>    short, non-athletic 50-ish man, and the two store cops were
>    young, strong, tall, muscular types.  Surprise!
>
>This was all documented in the Columbus Dispatch at that time,
>which is why it might be a good idea to contact them with this
>latest information.

I appears that Spangler's case went outside of the bounds of reasonable
detainment and use of force.
-- 
             *** Michael Conners - THE Ohio State University ***
		     **	Compare and Contrast: **
	Carter Administration			Clinton Administration
- Elvis dead				- Barbra Streisand all too lively