Tesco Shoplifting - need help.

JReacher1

hollydays wrote: »

Let's not distract. This is the question.
Where did you read this.

Why must he have read it anywhere?

hollydays

hollydays wrote: »

Let's not distract. This is the question.
Where did you read this.

Where did you read this-or did you make it up?
Because it's not correct .

Nick_C

hollydays wrote: »

in particular , this bit:
"
Innocent people get arrested all the time. As long as the people arresting you - normally the Police - have reasonable grounds to suspect you are committing an indictable offence, there is nothing you can do about it."
Where did you read this?

Section 24A of PACE

hollydays

Nick_C wrote: »

Section 24A of PACE

You said this ". Innocent people get arrested all the time. As long as the people arresting you - normally the Police - have reasonable grounds to suspect you are committing an indictable offence, there is nothing you can do about it."



Ah so how do you explain this? Poundland.
( http://www.gtstewart.co.uk/poundland-assaults-charges-vulnerable-woman-thrown-croydon-magistrates/. )

GT Stewart’s Leigh Webber represented Ms S at trial yesterday at Croydon Magistrates’ Court. She stood accused of common assault, having bitten 2 security guards in an attempt to escape, after having been detained following an accepted shop-lifting episode.

Ms S accepted biting the security guards, who she said were being very heavy-handed with her. At trial, Leigh successfully argued that the security guards had used force against her and restrained her without ever intending to hand her over to police or a court. The criteria for citizens’ arrest were not made out, and the use of force was unlawful.

After hearing submissions that there was no case for Ms S to answer, the Justices dismissed the charges and Ms S was released from custody.

Ms S is now being advised in relation to a civil claim for assault and false imprisonment."

The criteria for a "citizens arrest " wasn't made out- exactly like in the ops case.
It's not to enough to have reasonable grounds( though often the so called reasonable grounds are not reasonable by legal definition)
The arrest was flawed
The same as the op.

pace does not say " there's nothing you can do.
The person here had stolen but she had been arrested in the wrong manner-legally there is a recourse for that-surprising is it?
If you don't know the law, your poor definition of reasonable grounds won't matter at all.

hollydays

Nick_C wrote: »

Oh come on. If OP had done nothing wrong he might have grounds for suing for wrongful arrest - but he did leave Tesco's with their goods without paying for them. That was probably sufficient grounds to justify an arrest - the security guard had reasonable grounds to suspect that OP was committing an act of theft.

Innocent people get arrested all the time. As long as the people arresting you - normally the Police - have reasonable grounds to suspect you are committing an indictable offence, there is nothing you can do about it.

Let's just remind you of your whole post again.

hollydays

LABMAN wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3279643/Customers-hail-shop-worker-sitting-alleged-shoplifter-make-citizen-s-arrest-police-arrive.html

You do know that people have died through having people sit on their chest?

JReacher1

hollydays wrote: »

At trial, Leigh successfully argued that the security guards had used force against her and restrained her without ever intending to hand her over to police or a court. The criteria for citizens’ arrest were not made out, and the use of force was unlawful.

I am confused how this relates to the OP as the police were called.

whiteswan

UPDATE !!

You may remember I was promised a call from the Store Manager (around 12 I was told) and the chap from CEO's office said he would call me around 4pm to ensure that I was happy with any resolution offered.

So 12 o clock came and went - no phone call - around 2pm I sent an email to ceo's office to say no phone call had been received.

At 4pm the store manager telephones me - the conversation went something like this..........

Store Manager : Hello Mr x - I am sorry this has happened - what can I do to help you ?

Me : I would like a copy of the cctv footage please.

SM : Your not having it.

Me : But I have been told that if I pay an admin fee and fill out a subject access request I am entitled to have it.

SM : Your not having it - it is private material.

Me : So you DO have the recording ?

SM : Yes.

Me : So it is not lost or damaged then ?

Phone goes down from his side.................

10 minutes later ceo's office calls back - it appears the store manager has called them and told them he wont be giving me the footage.

Ceo's office obviously not happy with him and THEY have requested the footage from him........matter now referred to the Store Director (I'm guessing this is like an area manager)

I am promised a call on Friday from this Store Director.

That is as truthful an account as I can recall - you couldn't make this stuff up.

So there's my update - i'm still trying to make sense of it myself.

Apparently the cctv footage has now resurfaced.

Dave

JReacher1

Why do you want the CCTV footage?

I don't see what you're going to do with it.

The accusation of theft has been withdrawn and the police didn't arrest you. Why do you need to see footage of you shopping at Tesco?

Also I'm not sure you're actually talking with the CEO's office. A store manager would not refuse a request from the CEO unless they have a death wish. The fact they have escalated this to the area manager would indicate your request to the CEO has been forwarded to a standard low level customer services operator who has no authority to force the shop manager to provide the footage.

whiteswan

JReacher1 wrote: »

Why do you want the CCTV footage?

I don't see what you're going to do with it.

The accusation of theft has been withdrawn and the police didn't arrest you. Why do you need to see footage of you shopping at Tesco?

Also I'm not sure you're actually talking with the CEO's office. A store manager would not refuse a request from the CEO unless they have a death wish. The fact they have escalated this to the area manager would indicate your request to the CEO has been forwarded to a standard low level customer services operator who has no authority to force the shop manager to provide the footage.

Hi

I would like the cctv footage as it proves that there was no attempt at concealment - remember the Security guy told the Police Officer that I had placed the magazines inside my jacket - the cctv proves I didn't.

Its my right to request it - don't really have to explain to anybody why I want it - I would like a copy of it just in case it goes "missing" again.

The email attatchment says they are from the CEO's office - and the telephone number on the email says the CEO's office - so perhaps I am safe in assuming that they are coming from there............but maybe you know different ?

Nobody has to exert any "authority" over the store manager to provide the footage.......he has no option but to release it - subject access request ?

Dave