Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Use of Force in Wal-Mart LP Homicide Case

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Bill Warnock
    Senior Member

  • Bill Warnock
    replied
    Mr. Security, "K" is to be used in kitchens to extinguish grease fires. In the Washington DC area we have had several grease fires that have destroyed homes and restaurants and the buildings they occupied.
    Watching HGTV on evening, they demonstrated a real upscale hooded gas range containing an extinguishing system.
    In my inspection/survey work for the US Courts, I cited the lack of "K" as a security deficiency in that a fire, not properly controlled with correct equipment, could render a courthouse unusable for a period of time or render the structure unhabitable thereby affecting the court's mission.
    That is a security core issue, anything that affects your business, company or government agency to accomplish its mission is, by its very nature, a security concern.
    Glad the survey was and is of help. Remember, you have the responsibility to keep it current and add your own twists and truns that best suit your mission statement.
    Thanks again and enjoy the day,
    Bill

    Leave a comment:

  • Mr. Security
    Senior Member

  • Mr. Security
    replied
    While we?re thanking Mr. Warnock, thanks for the security consultation survey that you sent me. I had it spiral-bound at Staples for easy reference. I have already applied one of the suggestions in this publication. I installed 2 convex mirrors on the inside of the trunk lid of my wife's car. She was skeptical at first about the need to apply your suggestion. However, after I finished the installation, she loved it. Now she can easily see someone coming up behind her whenever she is focused on putting groceries in the trunk. Just wanted you to know how valuable this information source has been.

    I do have one question. I am familiar with fire classes A-D. But what is "K?"

    Leave a comment:

  • Bill Warnock
    Senior Member

  • Bill Warnock
    replied
    Thank you. As I try to tell anyone who will listen, when your superior tells you to do something or stay put, do it! When I was in the Air Force, stationed overseas, we had a serious problem. My sergeant told us to stay put. My hut mate had his face blown off and it landed all over me. I'm not sure what I did, but staying put wasn't one of them. I got knifed and my sergeant got shot. Every morning when I shave, I'm reminded of that event. The doctor told me, "You're a lucky bastard, 1/4 inch more and it would have been through your heart."
    Either in security or law enforcement, remember your training, do what you are told. If your leadership is taken out, then improvise.
    Remember the ten commandments of security and law enforcement or the ten deadly sins.
    Our job is to serve and protect. We may not get a lot of money for what we do, but as long as we do it, we must do it to the best of our ability.
    Above all, we must be true to ourselves and remember others. If a person is in danger of being injured or killed, get off your backside and assist to the best of your ability.
    Enjoy the day,
    Bill

    Leave a comment:

  • Mr. Security
    Senior Member

  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Originally posted by Bill Warnock
    Thanks for asking. On May 23, I will turn 70-years young.
    Enjoy the day,
    Bill
    I'm only in my forties, but sometimes I feel like 70-years old. Congratulations on your young spirit and for staying safe all those years in a dangerous profession.

    Leave a comment:

  • Bill Warnock
    Senior Member

  • Bill Warnock
    replied
    Thanks for asking. On May 23, I will turn 70-years young.
    Enjoy the day,
    Bill

    Leave a comment:

  • Mr. Security
    Senior Member

  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Originally posted by Bill Warnock
    The term "expert" was referring to military inspectors general, "An out-of-town SOB with a briefcase." Circa, 1955. The same definition was used in the Sheriff's academy in 1970.
    Enjoy the day,
    Bill
    How old are you anyhow, Bill?

    Leave a comment:

  • Bill Warnock
    Senior Member

  • Bill Warnock
    replied
    The term "expert" was referring to military inspectors general, "An out-of-town SOB with a briefcase." Circa, 1955. The same definition was used in the Sheriff's academy in 1970.
    Enjoy the day,
    Bill

    Leave a comment:

  • Mr. Security
    Senior Member

  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Originally posted by wilrobnson
    Mr. S, have you ever taught in a LEO academy? I seem to recall a Cpl. in Alaska using the exact same phrase! I've never heard it again, until just now!

    That's a "negative." I forget where I originally heard it.

    Leave a comment:

  • N. A. Corbier
    Senior Member

  • N. A. Corbier
    replied
    Originally posted by wilrobnson
    Mr. S, have you ever taught in a LEO academy? I seem to recall a Cpl. in Alaska using the exact same phrase! I've never heard it again, until just now!

    For the life of me, I've heard it, but I have no idea where. I think its one of those OLD SCHOOL LEO phrases.

    Leave a comment:

  • Guest
    Guest

  • OccamsRazor
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Mr. Security
    Yea, Ex as in has been and Spurt, a drip under pressure.
    Mr. S, have you ever taught in a LEO academy? I seem to recall a Cpl. in Alaska using the exact same phrase! I've never heard it again, until just now!

    Leave a comment:

  • Mr. Security
    Senior Member

  • Mr. Security
    replied
    Originally posted by jmaccauley
    First of all, we all know what an expert is...
    Yea, Ex as in has been and Spurt, a drip under pressure.

    Originally posted by jmaccauley
    It is usually someone who is retained for the express purpose of assisting in a lawsuit...... In other words, the expert provides his/her opinion and thats all.
    Strange how that opinion changes depending on who is paying the tab -- prosecution or defense. That's like asking a pharmaceutical company to fund a research study into whether vitamin supplements have any value medicinally. Wonder what the outcome will be??

    Leave a comment:

  • astorms
    Junior Member

  • astorms
    replied
    Wal-Mart LP Homicide

    Here in Canada, our Criminal Code of Canada section 494 gives 'any person' the right to apprehend without warrant, a person he finds comitting an criminal offense. Our Criminal Code also lays out use of force in preventing an offense from being committed, or continuing. It is also the responsibility of the person preventing an offense from being committed, to use as much force as 'reasonably' necessary, and that use of excessive force causing grievous bodily harm/injury or death will be deemed to be unlawful.

    This leaves a large margin for interpretation, as each situation in unique. In Canada, Loss Prevention associates are not necessarily licensed, and in most cases, are not. They usually have little training other than what they receive on the job (sound familiar?).

    In the case of this Wal-Mart homicide, the LP associate 'may' have thought that the right course of action would be to chase the 'perp' out the door, into the parking lot, make a tackle, scuffle for 30 LONG minutes, and then finally gain enough control to arrest the man. All for $94!!! Where was the 'prevention' part of LP? This was obviously a situation that could have been intervened at the counter, as the card had to have been activated by an associate. An obvious case of fraud.

    As far as use of force goes, the LP had no idea what he was doing!! It is a given, that even the most seasoned and traind LEO gets tunnel vision, adrenalin rush and rapid breathing during a pursuit or arrest. However, they are aware of what they are doing, and the condition of their 'perp'. This LPO most likely had no training in PPCT, pain compliance, distraction techniques or even proper arrest procedures. If he had, he would not have been wrestling with this guy for 30 min.

    In a perfect situation, he would have let the guy go. Review the tapes, get the police involved and arrest later. Although i hate the term 'observe and report', maybe this LPO should have chosen this course of action.

    Leave a comment:

  • Guest
    Guest

  • Guest
    Guest replied
    It will be interesting to see how this one turns out. I think the family will get something out of the civil case...but no criminal charges for the LP.

    Leave a comment:

  • jmaccauley
    Member

  • jmaccauley
    replied
    First of all, we all know what an expert is. It is usually someone who is retained for the express purpose of assisting in a lawsuit. It is usually someone who has little actual experience in the field, but is an acknowledged authority based on academic or journalistic accomplishments. In other words, the expert provides his/her opinion and thats all. Secondly, security faces the same problem that police officers face when dealing with subjects under the influence of unknown substances. Sudden Death Syndrome is not limited to the police custody. I do agree, however, that if security or loss prevention officers are required to pysical intervene, they must be trained and the employer must be accountable to provide or monitor that training.

    Leave a comment:

  • N. A. Corbier
    Senior Member

  • N. A. Corbier
    replied
    Originally posted by Houston Chronicle
    "A shoplifter is a thief, no question, but the penalty for that is not the death penalty," said John H. Christman, a retail-security expert.

    Christman said retail loss-prevention employees are not licensed law enforcement officers, so they should not be able to use a degree of force that could cause serious injury or death.

    After three shoplifting suspects in the Detroit area were killed in similar incidents in 2001, the Michigan Legislature passed laws increasing minimum training standards for security guards and requiring concealed-weapon permits for armed guards. The law also prohibits felons from working as security guards.

    "Our position in Michigan was that security guards were to observe and report, and that's it," said lobbyist Phil Hoffman, a former Michigan state senator who sponsored the 2001 legislation. "We wanted security guards to leave the apprehension to law enforcement."
    So, we have two things here.

    1. This Christman person believes that deadly force should be reserved only for law enforcement officers - violating the civil rights of every security officer/guard/person in all 50 states (Right to defend self or other with deadly force) Why do you need a gun if you aren't authorized to use deadly force?

    2. Michigan Lobbyist Phil Hoffman believes that all apprehensions should be by law enforcement, and security should observe and report. Is this lobbist going to introduce legislation to protect companies from vicarious liability from inaction of its employees resulting in injury/death of persons on the property, material loss by the client, and other measurable breaches of contract?

    I have always had issue with lobbists who attempt to use legislation to ensure a security company's "proper place," usually backed by the largest warm body companies.

    Leave a comment:

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X