Wal-mart Loss Prevention Member used excessive force and touched an "alleged" shoplifter inappropriately. Lake City Florida

" Personally, if that lady has a brother or a husband, I hope they catch the loss prevention guy out somewhere and give him a good old fashioned a*s whipping for treating a woman the way he did."

"And no, her husband never stated anything as you claim."

I thought she didn't have a husband?

Becky, or nightshade, whatever you prefer, I'm assuming your  the same person that wrote the original report because of the way you keep saying "walmarts".  It's wal-mart, or even walmart, not "walmarts". 

What's "lame" is that you accuse wal-mart of acts of violence towards you and that they led to you being temporary "paralyzed".  BS.  If anything you said was true, you would have attorney's lining up to take your case, do you honestly expect us to believe that the State attorney's office reviewed these acts of violence being committed against you and there office didn't press charges? 

Quit wasting your time (and ours) and find something productive to do.  Have a good day

This is really addressed to "Stanky" in Lake City, FL.  (I will not even comment on how he came by that name).  You "claim" to know the facts of this case which I guarantee you do not.  Yes, this lady was initially charged with "assault" against the loss prevention employee but after looking at the tape, even the state's attorney agreed she had not assaulted the loss prevention officer in any way and the charge was completely dropped.  Yes, there is an extremely good possibility of the "victim" also known as the "alleged" shoplifter filing a law suit against Wal-marts and the loss prevention employee so if you are friends with this goon, as I suspect, I would suggest you tell your friend to start begging and pleading for forgiveness for assaulting a middle aged lady who was  not violent but simply trying to defend herself from a better than 6' bald headed tattooed bully!  And no, her husband never stated anything as you claim.  Do you wish to go to court for this?  If not, I suggest you remand your statement because if not, you could legally be held liable.  I will also let you know, at the time you wrote your reply to this article, the lady in question had not been taken to court, tried nor sentenced so for you to tell the world "you" knew the absolute truth of everything that happened in this case, you are a liar.

Get your facts straight or let's go to court????  Your choice!

As a medical professional, I feel obligated to comment on "she was temporarily paralyzed from his actions."
Short of a medical condition(not trauma, as the OP suggests), there are very few instances where temporary paralysis occurs. In fact, few enough that it causes me to question the validity of the entire report.
In addition, as someone who at one point was headed down the wrong road and had a run in with loss prevention, and have sense assisted them numerous times, I can tell you that if tackling, pushing, etc was involved, than she was putting up a fight or trying to run.
News Flash: Every employee of every store has the legal authority to detain anyone they suspect of not paying for items that are taken past the checkout stands. When it comes to loss prevention, it goes a step further as that is their JOB!
Also, where exactly does it make sense to commit assault on someone who was doing their job to the best of their ability(and fully legitimately if this story is true)?
So many inconsistencies, so little time!

The shoplifter was the person creating the letter.

Well I have news for her. You cannot file a lawsuit. They were placing you under arrest. Also I very much doubt he was touching your breast. They have witnesses because of customers who would try to get revenge for being arrested. Nice try though.

Too many inconsistencies.. IF this all took place, I'm sure it would have made news if ya wanna take the time to write Ripoff Report, take it to the (1) Wal Mart HQ. (2) Chief of Police, because now you have made a libelous remark about one of his officers (3) NBC for a movie deal.

There is criteria for making these stops.. 1+2=3

Sometimes the math may be bad, but really... Threw a lady into a table, breaking the table and "temporarily paralyzing her?".. Too much wrestling or too bad of acting done.

If you're so concerned, instead of writing a "report" online, go make a difference, and follow the above noted suggestions..

I worked for walmart inc 2 times for a total of 3 years and yes they will tackle and physicly restrain you and no u cant sue them for it not cause its leagle but because 1. walmart has tons of attornys 2. They make the police and locale government money off arrests. and finaly look at this last black friday a man died and walmart stayed open. yep thats the kind of company many of these idiots defend. all in the name of low prices

I had trouble believing the first telling of this story. Real trouble. Frank brought up very interesting points. What killed all believability in this story was the response *the police officer sent was a friend of the loss prevention person*. Killed it for me. Can't believe any part of the story now. How convenient. Just happens to be a friend of the loss prevention person. I don't believe anything of the sort happened with regards to this story. What I believe, and I may be wrong, is that the poster was caught shoplifting, or the poster just has something against the loss prevention person or that particular store and made all this up (thats what I think). Please, when posting something like this, if you want people to believe you, lying or not, please read and reread what you are posting. Perhaps even have others proofread for you. I've read a lot of posts on ripoff report and this has to be one of the worst when it comes to believability. You should've just not responded to Frank's questions, you really blew it there.

the story that you tell sounds very interesting when you put your spin on it, but I would encourage you to be honest before possibly ruining other people's lives in an effort to set up a lawsuit against a big company. I did a little research and here is the real story.
the facts of this story are that the female DID steal from walmart and was stopped outside. She complied with the loss prevention "goon" and went back inside and only gave the stuff back after she found out she was going to jail. SHE then attacked him with her purse when he wanted her to empty it, (YES- SHE HIT HIM FIRST AND MANY TIMES), and only stopped after ripping his shirt, scratching his face and neck, and kicking him in the groin. she did receive medical treatment but for the heart attack she was claiming. I'm guessing that she decided to have back pain after realizing that walmart is such a big company and thought a lawsuit would be settled quickly and in her favor if she "appears" to have an injury.
She was charged with the theft, and with resisting a merchant with violence, while after looking at the video of the incident, neither the loss prevention "goon", nor the officer that arrived have been charged with anything.
By the way, the video showed the loss prevention "goon" only trying to restrain her and never striking her or grabbing her breast as she claims. and she does have a husband who does not have to look for the walmart employee to protect his wife-he witnessed the entire incident and stood by and watched and admitted that his wife was wrong at the time.

Nightshade, you have a point, however circuitously you arrived at it.

It's not unusual for 'Loss Prevention Personnel' or even sworn law enforcement officers to be in such positions as a result of their desire to exercise some kind of power over others and to be sure as many people as possible are aware of it.

Having said that, I'll withhold judgement, but based on your representation and without having heard the other side, here's my impression of your arguement:

The 'lady in question' and the 'another older gentleman', as well as the 'elderly relative that may have the beginnings of alheimerz' in your example, are relatives of yours.

Possibly the first and third are the same, and one of these may in fact be you.



I'll second Frank's questions here:

>> What happened after the paramedics arrived?
>> Why are you asking for information if two or more of you witnessed the entire incident?


And I'll add a question or two:

'Even though the loss prevention member did physically hurt her for which she had to seek medical treatment from a hospital - the loss prevention man was not charged with anything'
and the lack of formal charges doesn't necessarily mean there was no incident report recorded by the responding law enforcement officer.

If a police report was made, can you provide a case number?

If not, how about a link to a news story? In a town the size of Lake City, I'd expect something like this to show up in the local newspaper.

She's gonna be in the money. But sadly this never happens to me. And in real life seldom happens. If this is real you should be a witness. My guess is that the report is fake.

Will the Wal-Mart hater please stop? The issues you have with Wal-Mart should be with retailing in general. Stop blaming Wal-Mart for low wages and health care issues and start looking at the true parties. Health Care issues are caused by our messed up system. And the low wages are caused by people unwilling to pay a fair price for products. If you want cheap crap you get what you pay for and the people who make it and sell it get paid little. This is reality.

She's gonna be in the money. But sadly this never happens to me. And in real life seldom happens. If this is real you should be a witness. My guess is that the report is fake.

Will the Wal-Mart hater please stop? The issues you have with Wal-Mart should be with retailing in general. Stop blaming Wal-Mart for low wages and health care issues and start looking at the true parties. Health Care issues are caused by our messed up system. And the low wages are caused by people unwilling to pay a fair price for products. If you want cheap crap you get what you pay for and the people who make it and sell it get paid little. This is reality.

She's gonna be in the money. But sadly this never happens to me. And in real life seldom happens. If this is real you should be a witness. My guess is that the report is fake.

Will the Wal-Mart hater please stop? The issues you have with Wal-Mart should be with retailing in general. Stop blaming Wal-Mart for low wages and health care issues and start looking at the true parties. Health Care issues are caused by our messed up system. And the low wages are caused by people unwilling to pay a fair price for products. If you want cheap crap you get what you pay for and the people who make it and sell it get paid little. This is reality.

This story sounds a bit extreme to be true.

Did she actually shoplift?

What started the whole incident in the first place?

Why did you think your presence would help the situation? I would suspect that the Loss Prevention folk would be suspicious of anyone interfering in a shoplifting offense, considering they couldn't be sure who was involved.

How did the temporary case of paralyzation turn into a maybe-heart attack? Did the hospitals check this woman for hypochondria too?

And I wouldn't let a relative of mine in the beginning stages of altzemers go anywhere alone. Just like I wouldn't let a relative with mild narcolepsy drive a car. But hey that's me, and I am not trying to make money from bogus litigious claims.

Let's just say I had a good reason to witness what was transpiring (no I am not the lady who was accused - lol) and yes, this Wal-mart loss prevention member's supervisor was trying unsuccesfully to remove me from the area as I was honestly afraid of what might happen to this lady due to the way the loss prevention team member was acting towards her from the very start. Not only was I privy to what happened but the commotion was well heard by other private citizens and another older gentleman actually got between the loss prevention man and the lady accused of shoplifting trying to get the man off of her.

It turned out that the police officer who was called to the scene was a "friend" to the loss prevention man and stated to witnesses (including myself) that "he was friends with the loss prevention man and he was a good man with a wife and child and would not act in that manner." He "ignored" what was on the video tape and chose to ignore what myself and other witnesses told him. This is not hearsay but was told directly to me by the police officer.

The lady in question was taken to the hospital for a possible heart attack amongst the other injuries she sustained from the incident.

And no, the lady in question did not strike the loss prevention officer first but I do believe she was honestly fed up with his abuse from what I observed and I cannot honestly say if I was a female with a big burly bald headed young man forcing his way with me I would not have done worse.

Even though the loss prevention member did physically hurt her for which she had to seek medical treatment from a hospital - the loss prevention man was not charged with anything simply because of his position with the company and the fact he was "friends" to the police officer. I think this in itself is a crime and yes, I wish to know if other people have experienced any similar situations with Wal-mart employees. I've done some research on the computer and what I have seen and heard, seems like their employees need training not to be guorillas. There's a proper way to handle every incident and he definately did not use his smarts on this incident.

Let's just use an example....if you have an elderly relative that may have the beginnings of alheimerz, and let's just say your relative forgot to pay for an item in his/her buggy, would you want to be scared shitless that some goon like this would not use good sense and possibly injure this elderly person that probably wouldn't even remember what they had done or not done? No, I'm not aware of an incident like this happening "yet" but with a violent employee such as the one I seen on the loose - it's eventually going to happen. This man (loss prevention team member) you could see clearly in his face he was getting a rush from doing the way he was just as a druggy gets their high from drugs. Sure the shoplifter is obviously wrong - but does that give this man the right to act in the manner he did? If he's bold enough to do this in front of other customers and his supervisor is stupid enough to allow it - who's actually safe if they even "accuse" you of something whether you did it or not? From what I gather he only intimidated this lady because he "thought" she was a shoplifter "not" because he actually caught her. He just got a willing goat that was led to the slaughter in my book.

I do have a few questions and comments.

So, you are shopping at Walmart and you witness an incident outside the store. I infer that this occurred outside the store since you stated that the accused "went back into the store agreeabley [sic] with the loss prevention member." You then state that the Walmart employee "tackled her unnecessarily." Wow. So the accused is cooperatively going back into the store and suddenly the loss prevention officer tackles her for no apparent reason? Or did the tackling and fondling occur before the accused decided to go back into the store?

OK, you are outside the store witnessing all this. You decide to go into the store, following the accused and the Walmart employee. I've never worked in loss prevention and I have never worked for Walmart, but in every incident of this type that I am aware of, the loss prevention officer will take the accused into a private office area, out of public view, to await the police. In this Lake City incident, however, it appears that the loss prevention officer kept the suspect in a public area in the store so that there would be plenty of witnesses. Again, fascinating.

You then decide to remain on-site to continue to observe. After the police arrive, they witness this loss prevention officer push the accused over, breaking a table and leaving the victim paralyzed. What did the police do after witnessing this violent act? Did they arrest the Walmart employee? Or did they just stand there?

And then, even after the police are at the scene, you continue to stay and wait for the paramedics. Your recounting of events ends abruptly here. Did the accused have to leave in an ambulance? Was she ever placed under arrest?

You then make the statement: "If anyone has any information that might help this lady, please feel free to contact me . . . ." Why? You are a witness to this entire event. The cops witnessed the loss prevention officer commit this violent act. The paramedics can document the woman's injuries. You say there were other shoppers present witnessing these events in a public area in the store. Didn't the police take witness statements from you and all the other shoppers who observed these horrible acts? And, of course, since these events occurred in a public area, there are sure to be videotapes from the security cameras that can be used as evidence. The cops got copies of those videotapes, didn't they? So why would you need to be calling for anyone who might have "any information that might help this lady?" What additional information do you believe needs to be collected?

Then comes another of your interesting statements: "I have every intention of following up to see if Wal-marts [sic] makes this right or if they condone such lame behavior out of their employees." So, you believe this is problem for Walmart corporate policy to address? Why are you not calling the local district attorney to insist that charges be filed against the loss prevention officer? It seems to me that you may have witnessed some felonies. Yet you write as if this is all a civil, and not a criminal matter. And you also seem to think that justice will be served with more violence--hoping that the Walmart employee gets "a good old fashioned a*s whipping."

Looking forward to your reply!

I do have a few questions and comments.

So, you are shopping at Walmart and you witness an incident outside the store. I infer that this occurred outside the store since you stated that the accused "went back into the store agreeabley [sic] with the loss prevention member." You then state that the Walmart employee "tackled her unnecessarily." Wow. So the accused is cooperatively going back into the store and suddenly the loss prevention officer tackles her for no apparent reason? Or did the tackling and fondling occur before the accused decided to go back into the store?

OK, you are outside the store witnessing all this. You decide to go into the store, following the accused and the Walmart employee. I've never worked in loss prevention and I have never worked for Walmart, but in every incident of this type that I am aware of, the loss prevention officer will take the accused into a private office area, out of public view, to await the police. In this Lake City incident, however, it appears that the loss prevention officer kept the suspect in a public area in the store so that there would be plenty of witnesses. Again, fascinating.

You then decide to remain on-site to continue to observe. After the police arrive, they witness this loss prevention officer push the accused over, breaking a table and leaving the victim paralyzed. What did the police do after witnessing this violent act? Did they arrest the Walmart employee? Or did they just stand there?

And then, even after the police are at the scene, you continue to stay and wait for the paramedics. Your recounting of events ends abruptly here. Did the accused have to leave in an ambulance? Was she ever placed under arrest?

You then make the statement: "If anyone has any information that might help this lady, please feel free to contact me . . . ." Why? You are a witness to this entire event. The cops witnessed the loss prevention officer commit this violent act. The paramedics can document the woman's injuries. You say there were other shoppers present witnessing these events in a public area in the store. Didn't the police take witness statements from you and all the other shoppers who observed these horrible acts? And, of course, since these events occurred in a public area, there are sure to be videotapes from the security cameras that can be used as evidence. The cops got copies of those videotapes, didn't they? So why would you need to be calling for anyone who might have "any information that might help this lady?" What additional information do you believe needs to be collected?

Then comes another of your interesting statements: "I have every intention of following up to see if Wal-marts [sic] makes this right or if they condone such lame behavior out of their employees." So, you believe this is problem for Walmart corporate policy to address? Why are you not calling the local district attorney to insist that charges be filed against the loss prevention officer? It seems to me that you may have witnessed some felonies. Yet you write as if this is all a civil, and not a criminal matter. And you also seem to think that justice will be served with more violence--hoping that the Walmart employee gets "a good old fashioned a*s whipping."

Looking forward to your reply!