Assaulted by Tesco store security

Tesco_Hater

I'm most certainly not a lawyer, but as a layman all bets were off as soon as he laid hands on me.

smcaul

unholyangel wrote: »

I think the point - from a psychological point of view - is that you attached the word "black" as a descriptive term to that guy but yet simply referred to the others as "the other guy" and "a THIRD security guard". You put emphasis on the fact he's black and referred to the other 2 in a general manner.

You could have called him aggressive, idiot etc but you chose to point out his difference in appearance (which isnt really relevant) instead of pointing out the difference in his body language/actions/reactions (which would be relevant).

No i'm not saying you're racist. I think UK is far too PC. But i dont see the need to single one person out on the grounds of something they cant control.

Ha ha, love it, so when/if the OP goes to the police to report an assault and the officer says "so who assaulted you sir" "can you describe them", yes officer, he was very aggressive, rude and obnoxious, "yes sir, but what did he look like" oh officer I could not possibly comment, that would be racist, politically incorrect and I fully understand the assailant has no control over the colour of his skin!!

Get over the use of the word black, it was used as a way of describing someone, was not used in any way shape or form as an offensive term by the OP.

vikingaero

Tesco_Hater wrote: »

Oh !!!! off. Physically assaulting me is not reasonable force; it was completely unnecessary. The colour of his skin is of no consequence; it was his unnecessary aggressiveness and attitude I took objection to. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Whatever happened to the customer is always right? How many times must those damn alarms go off during a day; I surmise that the majority are because the checkout numpties have forgotten to take the security tag off.

Why should I even bother responding to someone asking a stupid question about whether I'd bought something electrical. More like a consumer survey than a security question. Maybe he should start by telling me who he is for a start. Just because their anti-theft technology does not work properly shouldn't make me be treated like a thief.

Until such time as his friend put a hand on me I was quite happy to have a conversation in transit. After being unnecessarily assaulted that went out of the window. The black guy needs retraining, and if I decide to make a complaint that is how I shall identify him - its the most obvious identifying aspect whereas my perception of thuggishness would be seen as subjective.

From a third party point of view: From your posting you seem to have a chip on your shoulder and bleat on about your rights - the customer is always right etc etc. You could have chosen to be civil and got everything over in a nano-second. Yet you chose to behave in the manner that you did and aggravated the situation.

unholyangel

smcaul wrote: »

Ha ha, love it, so when/if the OP goes to the police to report an assault and the officer says "so who assaulted you sir" "can you describe them", yes officer, he was very aggressive, rude and obnoxious, "yes sir, but what did he look like" oh officer I could not possibly comment, that would be racist, politically incorrect and I fully understand the assailant has no control over the colour of his skin!!

Get over the use of the word black, it was used as a way of describing someone, was not used in any way shape or form as an offensive term by the OP.

My point was if it purely was just a descriptive term, he would have been equally descriptive with the other 2.

I also said UK is far too PC and neither did i say he was being racist....in fact i even pointed out i wasnt saying he was racist.......

If you're going to put words in my mouth, please make sure they're not contradicted by what i myself have said, ty.

trippy_zippy

Request the car park cctv recordings and the main door recordings (this will show if you were the only person leaving or entering the door at the time and if you were the only person pulled up by the security.)
There are loads of illegal immagrints working in the sceurity business now adays , probably due to them being cheaper to to the than ex cons. The private security bussiness has always been full of criminals, both running the business and working as guards but now its awash with illegal immagrints due to them willing to work for peanuts.
I would not leave this. I would have demanded the police there and then.

vikingaero

trippy_zippy wrote: »

Request the car park cctv recordings and the main door recordings (this will show if you were the only person leaving or entering the door at the time and if you were the only person pulled up by the security.)
There are loads of illegal immagrints working in the sceurity business now adays , probably due to them being cheaper to to the than ex cons. The private security bussiness has always been full of criminals, both running the business and working as guards but now its awash with illegal immagrints due to them willing to work for peanuts.
I would not leave this. I would have demanded the police there and then.

Erm, right. Tesco's won't allow security guards to work unless they've received and passed SIA training.

trippy_zippy

vikingaero wrote: »

Erm, right. Tesco's won't allow security guards to work unless they've received and passed SIA training.

But if the company that supplies the guard says they have passed the training then what then?
Its not so long that ove 10,000 illegals were discovered working for government buildings all over UK is it?

MT90

Vomityspice wrote: »

Won't the force be unlawful as the OP did not have stolen goods?????

You can't grab hold of someone because of a suspicion. Common law arrest would require observation of the offence, which presumably couldn't have happen?

Therefore I still believe there is potentially a battery offence committed.

Just my opinion, happy to be corrected, criminal law is not my specific area of legal expertise!

Cross wires, When I say 'there is no question' I mean its beyond doubt that battery was committed. (taking the facts to be true).

You're right, with regards to security guards, although it is technically a criminal offence, it tends to be left to civil. False imprisonment is another common issue security guards get confused with regards to their none existent powers.

trippy_zippy

vikingaero wrote: »

Erm, right. Tesco's won't allow security guards to work unless they've received and passed SIA training.

All the illegals identified working at government building were not employed directly by the government but via sub-contractors (just like tesco) so I would have imagined that the companies supplying them had said they had passed the necc checks.
Even gordon brown was gaurded by an illegal guard not so long ago

notjustanyone

Why pick the username Tesco Hater? Your beef isn't with Tesco

Would 'I hate Black Security Guards' not have been more apt for you? :cool:

Maybe the abuse team would have man handled you out of here then too and given you the chance for another whinging thread :rotfl: