Disabled veteran in wheel chair get locked up for screaming at walmart clerk

[countryboy]

The Police were actually far more patient than they needed to be. The guy was being an ass and brought the incident on himself.

They were polite. They were professional. I don't think there were any procedural violations on their part.

It is in fact Walmart policy that if someone is purchasing alcohol and has another person with him who appears to be under the age of 40, the other person is also required to show ID. I actually saw a similar incident a few days ago in which a guy was buying alcohol and the clerk asked for both his ID and that of his wife. When the guy asked why, it was explained to him that it was the corporate policy. Fortunately the guy did not get belligerent like this clown and the whole thing was resolved in about 30 seconds.

If Oklahoma has a "must identify" statute, and it appears they do, the guy violated the law and did in fact obstruct the officers in the performance of their duty.

It was all his fault. No sympathy.

So wait, if you are grocery shopping with your kids, you can't buy beer at Walmart? I doubt that's true. I've been shopping at Walmart for a very long time, and this has never happened to me. I call

[gamewell45]

That may well be, but if people always voluntarily abrogate their own rights so as not to make a fuss, they will eventually find that they don't have any.

He made a fuss and all it did was get him pepper sprayed. If he had complied and used the mechanism in place (the courts), he could have upheld his rights and quite possibly given redress on his issue monetarily.

Bottom line is short term the police can make your life miserable whether or not they are right or wrong so IMO it's better to comply. At least that's what I would have done.

[Dr. Who]

He made a fuss and all it did was get him pepper sprayed. If he had complied and used the mechanism in place (the courts), he could have upheld his rights and quite possibly given redress on his issue monetarily.

Bottom line is short term the police can make your life miserable whether or not they are right or wrong so IMO it's better to comply. At least that's what I would have done.

It costs money to go to court and what would he get for it? He wasn't out of pocket for not purchasing alcohol. Walmart would probably give him $500 for his trouble and possibly some coupons (nuisance value), but it would cost him more in legal fees and court costs to pursue it.

Of course now, given the police department's treatment of him, I'm sure that it is worth his while to sue both Walmart and the police department, particularly if his existing injuries were exacerbated (i.e. both his anxiety issues, which he mentioned to the police and his physical injuries), not to mention that this all played out in front of his children who can now claim emotional damage.

Given that he is a disabled veteran, he will have the sympathy of the jury, because his lawyer will play up his sacrifices for his country and the fact that he has a young family who were traumatized.

[Peter1469]

Actually, it's only the buyer's ID that they require. No doubt the corporate policy has been miscommunicated or misinterpreted during training.

If the clerk can't understand policy, let's not put additional burdens on them.

[Dr. Who]

If the clerk can't understand policy, let's not put additional burdens on them.

It may not be just the clerk, but the store manager as well.

[Lummy]

Try this. USPS window clerk explaining to a customer a misreading of one digit in a mail reference number of some kind: "That's not a number, it's a zero."

[Captdon]

First time I've heard about anyone but the buyer having to show id.

[Peter1469]

First time I've heard about anyone but the buyer having to show id.

They do that here if it looks like someone is buying for another person. It has to be blatant.

Example" 15 year old kid stands up front in the store, asked a 30 year old male to get him a case of Nat-Lite and gives him a $20.

The store clerk should be asking for the kid's ID. And suggesting that he try better beer.

[gamewell45]

It costs money to go to court and what would he get for it? He wasn't out of pocket for not purchasing alcohol. Walmart would probably give him $500 for his trouble and possibly some coupons (nuisance value), but it would cost him more in legal fees and court costs to pursue it.

Of course now, given the police department's treatment of him, I'm sure that it is worth his while to sue both Walmart and the police department, particularly if his existing injuries were exacerbated (i.e. both his anxiety issues, which he mentioned to the police and his physical injuries), not to mention that this all played out in front of his children who can now claim emotional damage.

Given that he is a disabled veteran, he will have the sympathy of the jury, because his lawyer will play up his sacrifices for his country and the fact that he has a young family who were traumatized.

Granted as you say it would perhaps cost him money, but instead of the possible $500 and some coupons now he's suffering injuries (I understand he's paralyzed from the waist down) which could be permanent; is it worth it to go through that suffering he and his family went through as opposed to complying?

I think one has to weight what you stand to gain as opposed to what you stand to lose. IMO in this case the gentleman lost big time. If he's permanently paralyzed no amount of money will ever equal having full or even partial use of your legs.

[Dr. Who]

Granted as you say it would perhaps cost him money, but instead of the possible $500 and some coupons now he's suffering injuries (I understand he's paralyzed from the waist down) which could be permanent; is it worth it to go through that suffering he and his family went through as opposed to complying?

I think one has to weight what you stand to gain as opposed to what you stand to lose. IMO in this case the gentleman lost big time. If he's permanently paralyzed no amount of money will ever equal having full or even partial use of your legs.

If the gentleman is suffering from anxiety issues, well let's just say some degree of PTSD, he may well lack the emotional stability to put these things into perspective. That's something that the officers should have been able to pick up on. It's not all that unusual in vets or in fact in most people who have recently sustained extreme physical trauma.