Shoplifter who suffered skull fractures, brain damage wins $750,000 in lawsuit against store

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Omaha World Herald

By Todd Cooper

He was convicted of stealing two pairs of miniature scissors from Shopko.

But his punishment came long before his court case ended.

In November 2008, Richard “Dave” Moore suffered several skull fractures and a brain injury when he was thrown to the ground by a Shopko loss-prevention officer outside the retailer’s store at 90th and Fort Streets.

Friday afternoon, a jury of 12 Douglas County residents ordered Shopko to pay $750,000 to Moore in a civil lawsuit Moore brought alleging that Shopko employees used excessive force.

FULL story at link.


Richard Moore suffered skull fractures and a brain injury in an altercation with loss-prevention workers.

Read more: http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/shoplifter-who-suffered-skull-fractures-brain-damage-wins-in-lawsuit/article_a313f390-439d-5029-a556-300976e6623d.html

[WestSeattle2]

1. Amazing - and more fodder for those who argue for

tort reform. And this clown wasn't stealing food for his children - he was just stealing. He's a thief. The perfect poster boy for the tort reform crowd.

[Ed Suspicious]

2. We stopped cutting off the hands of thieves as a civilized people a long time ago.

President Hammurabi never won election in this country.

[yeoman6987]

3. So the theft prevention officer can administer punishment?

Your reply sounds very right wing. Do you by chance support trump? Serious question cuz your reply sounds like him.

[WestSeattle2]

4. My response sounds like common sense, not right wing. Go play.

[salib]

9. Actually, I would call it least common denominator sense.

Law enforcement is not there to punish, and should not. Period.

This was excessive force whether he stole two items or a million dollars.

The purpose of the "Shopko loss-prevention officer" is at worst to try to ensure that this person is identified and can be prosecuted. Nothing more.

Beating the crap out of him and putting him in the hospital is not part of their duties.

Of course, the guys does not look like a minority. Otherwise, he would be dead.

[cstanleytech]

18. Where in the post did WestSeattle2 say it was ok for them to beat the guy?

To be honest I am a bit for tort reform myself but I think the reform needs to be far broader than just lawsuits in court and include the maximum fines that companies have to pay because right now alot of those fines are so insignificant that companies willfully break the law because they are earning more than enough that the fines means shit to them because they will still make a profit.

[tk2kewl]

24. Tort reform is part of the billionaire and corporate agenda

everyone else takes on both the risk and responsibility and they get to keep raking it in

[MillennialDem]

69. I might be ok with Tort reform if it was capped at a percentage of net worth of a company - of

course that's not what this is about.

Cap damages at $500,000 and you'll sue a private practice doctor into bankruptcy. Shopko will just laugh and pay the fine.

[cstanleytech]

86. I agree a % of gross income before taxes is how it should and same for things like traffic tickets

because the fact is they are 100% unfair currently to the poor where as the wealthy often can just pay such a fine and not even notice it.

[yeoman6987]

15. Not at all common sense

Ending up in the hospital over two little sissors is absurd. He should have gotten millions. This store got off cheap.

[cstanleytech]

19. No, they didnt get off cheap but I dont he should have gotten that much money.

I would have awarded him one dollar plus they would pay for all medical bills, the rest I would had given to either a homeless shelter or maybe a program that helps people released from prison to try to get training and good jobs.

[closeupready]

22. Absolutely unacceptable. Their employee destroyed his quality of life.

$750,000 is VERY cheap compensation in lieu of restoring it.

$1 is 'fuck you and your quality of life, moron.'

[christx30]

23. Again, we don't know what happened

during the take down. I doubt the employee slammed him down on the ground based on nothing. The shoplifter probably resisted being stopped, and the employee overreacted to the resistance.
Once you resist in a situation like this, the thing you stole is no longer an issue, especially if you use violence.

[LiberalArkie]

29. According to the article. He was outside the store. He put his hands to his side.

One of the store cops who weight a slight 250lbs picked up the heavy 150lb man and threw the man to the ground where he suffered 2 fractures in his skull, bleeding on the brain and 2 black eyes. He went to court and had to pay $50 for shoplifting.

The Omaha courts are very friendly to business. The loss prevention officers were to notify police and not to physically restrain a suspect.

But I am sure that everyone read the article anyway as I know no one ever jumps to a conclusion about just the headlines without reading the rest of the story.

[blackspade]

55. Apparently there was a trial, so we do know what happened.

A jury made the award...

[WestSeattle2]

30. In that case, I'd very much support granting him $1

[closeupready]

32. So what.

Who cares what you'd support.

[WestSeattle2]

44. If you don't care, why did you respond?

[greiner3]

50. He didn't care about your post and was giving you a head's up.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

91. I read it as telling you it doesn't matter what you think because you can't do fuck-all about it.

And thank god for that. You seem to be lacking in empathy.

[cstanleytech]

39. I would venture that he fucked his own life when he thought it would be ok to shoplift.

The fact is though its not ok to do that so 1 dollar plus the complete expense of his medical bills with the rest going somewhere that can help people in their lives like a shelter or help former prisoners get a job is imo justice.

[azurnoir]

20. so stealing 2 pairs of mini scissors worth <$10 total merits skull fractures and brain damage

in your mind, what if the items had been worth >$10 or say >$100?

[A Simple Game]

31. Nothing like instant justice to curb crime. I don't see any reason not to

bring back lynchings. Curb crime and provide entertainment for the masses, what could go wrong?

Yes this is sarcasm.

[christx30]

7. While I agree that the loss prevention officer (LPO)

used excessive force in stopping the shoplifter, he was doing his job by stopping the shoplifter. He wasn't administering punishment.
We don't know how the detainment went down. We don't know if the LPO verbally stopped him and there was as struggle, or if the shoplifter was tackled. Stopping a crime in progress and punishing a criminal are very different things that a lot of people around here confuse. And sometimes in being stopped, the criminal may be injured or killed. If you don't want to risk it, don't commit crimes.

[WestSeattle2]

8. Well said.

[Ed Suspicious]

12. I don't think we need to stop property crime this way. If I see a guy stealing a pair of scissors,

I guess I'd get his picture, his plate number, and call the cops.

[thesquanderer]

16. I think someone hired to catch shoplifters is going to have to do more than that.

But there's a limit.

We may not know all the details, but the jury does, and determined it was excessive.

And as for calling the cops with a plate number of someone who stole scissors... I doubt they'd put out an APB.

[yeoman6987]

17. Oh wow. Did you share that belief during the police

Killing the kid allegedly stealing the mini cigars? You probably did.

[christx30]

21. LIke I said, it doesn't matter what was being stolen.

What matters is how the shoplifter is stopped, and the his reaction to being stopped. Did the shoplifter resist being detained? Did he attack the LPO? Was it a verbal altercation that escalated?
There are a lot of thieves that are stopped every day in stores all over the country, with hardly anything getting this violent.
No one has a right to steal in this country. People have the right to stop you from stealing. They have the right to protect their property. Sometimes, that protection can get violent. You can avoid it by just not stealing.

[GGJohn]

36. According to ShopCo,

they have a strict policy of not laying their hands on shoplifters, all they're allowed to do is get a description of the suspect, get a license plate number, but they're forbidden from laying their hands on them, much less injuring them.

[uppityperson]

5. I don't understand what you are saying, would you please clarify? Thank you

I don't want to assume and would prefer you to clarify, thanks.

[WestSeattle2]

6. My statement could not possibly be any clearer.

[uppityperson]

10. Yes, it could. That is why I asked.

If you do not want to clarify, I will then assume.

A skull fracture and brain damage are peachy fine consequence for stealing a couple tiny scissors? As posted upthread by another DUer
"The purpose of the "Shopko loss-prevention officer" is at worst to try to ensure that this person is identified and can be prosecuted. Nothing more.

Beating the crap out of him and putting him in the hospital is not part of their duties. "

Shame on supporting using excessive force in a minor shoplifting incident.

[WestSeattle2]

26. So you're not shaming the thief. No, of course not.

[GGJohn]

37. So you're ok with the injuries inflicted upon this man by 2 thugs? eom.

[WestSeattle2]

40. I will not lose one minute of sleep over this thief's predicament. I

also suspect that this thief no longer considers stealing to be prudent or wise.

[GGJohn]

42. Sure you're on the correct website?

You views are more in tune with the RW, not progressives.

[WestSeattle2]

43. There is an ignore button. I suggest you use it.

[GGJohn]

52. Sorry, you don't get off that easily.

I'll continue to question your bona fides.

[WestSeattle2]

58. And who exactly are you to question anyone's "bona fides"?

Are you the gate keeper at DU, keeping all thought and opinion in line with yours?

I don't march in lock step with anyone, let alone someone whose intellect and judgement I have no respect for.

[GGJohn]

68. Hardly,

I'm just a member who's questioning your bona fides.
You are free to put me on ignore, as you suggested I do.

Oh, I think my intellect and judgment are far more evolved than yours, I'm not the one who has no empathy for a petty thief getting the snot beat out of him by 2 goons.

[WestSeattle2]

70. Then we'll agree to disagree.

[GGJohn]

72. Well, I'll agree that you're a heartless human being with no soul. eom.

[WestSeattle2]

73. I have plenty of heart, even compassion and empathy - for most humans.

[GGJohn]

74. For some reason, I doubt that. eom.

[WestSeattle2]

75. I'm sure you do. Closed minds simply see what they wish to see.

[GGJohn]

76. Right back atcha. eom.

[ProfessorGAC]

95. I'm With You

And i don't agree with a lot of your recent posts. But, the POV being expressed by this poster is reprehensible.

[snooper2]

96. FYI, there is no such thing as a "soul" it's an abstract from mythology billions believe in

[blackspade]

56. That's a pretty ugly comment.

That's like saying it's ok for cops to kill speeders.

[WestSeattle2]

60. I would submit that there is a difference between stealing

and exceeding the speed limit. One can easily exceed the speed limit without realizing it; one doesn't steal anything without knowing exactly what they're doing.

Bottom line - if you steal, expect the worst. And if the worst happens, thieves will never get an ounce of sympathy from me.

[uppityperson]

61. you are fine with a security guard not following protocol but brain damaging someone for shoplifting

a minor item.

I guess you are fine with cops shooting jaywalkers too.

[WestSeattle2]

63. No, jaywalkers aren't thieves.

[uppityperson]

64. jaywalkers are law breakers, same as shoplifters.

The security guard broke protocol, did not do as he was supposed to. The jury agreed he used excessive force.

Yet you continue to say him giving this man brain damage was peachy.

Amazing.

[WestSeattle2]

65. Oh I never said it was peachy, I've said I have no sympathy

for thieves. Apparently you do, and that's your prerogative.

[uppityperson]

66. Yes, you did. And of course I've sympathy, like the jury did, for someone who was

braindamaged by a security guard using excessive force.

I will not lose one minute of sleep over this thief's predicament.

[WestSeattle2]

67. The quote you're regurgitating simply stated a total lack of

sympathy for a thief. It did not in any way imply everything was "peachy". That was you putting words into my mouth to fit your narrative.

[uppityperson]

81. Thank you for confirming so clearly you lack any sympathy for someone getting their skull fx and

brain trauma for the crime of shoplifting 2 small items.

Peachy.

[uppityperson]

59. I am shaming someone for using excessive force in a minor shoplifting incident.

No, the thief should not have shoplifted. But the security guard should not have used that force in stopping him.

Here is a query for you. Are you ok with giving someone brain damage and fracturing their skull when they shoplift something minor?

[awoke_in_2003]

47. He is saying the guy deserved what he got...

he won't admit it, though. Typical keyboard warrior.

[blackspade]

14. Just because he is a thief doesn't excuse the excessive force.

[WestSeattle2]

27. I have absolutely no sympathy for thieves. I don't care whether

they're low level losers like the perp in this case, or the CEO of Goldman Sachs. They all deserve whatever bad karma comes their way due to their own actions.

[gopiscrap]

45. Fuck that

quit labeling him a thief. In this country you are innocent until proven guilty in court of law. Beyond that, no amount of theft is justifiable to permanently harm some one.

[christx30]

53. He paid a $50 fine for the shoplifting.

He was a thief. Shouldn't have been body slammed like that, but he did commit shoplifting.

[WestSeattle2]

57. He paid a fine for shoplifting. Guilty.

If you don't want to be permanently harmed, don't steal. Things can easily spin out of control. If you're foolish enough to steal, you could very well pay a very steep price for your stupidity, as this young man has learned the hard way.

[awoke_in_2003]

48. Haven't had a hide in a while, so what the hell...

you're a fucking malicious idiot.

[uppityperson]

62. Way.

[GGJohn]

71. +10000.

I wish I could rec this.
Bravo, well done.

[awoke_in_2003]

77. I generally fly under the radar...

that is why I didn't fear the hide. My last hide was about 3 months ago, because someone really needed to hear the same truth

[GGJohn]

78. Well, I'm sure it was alerted on and it was left to stand. eom.

[awoke_in_2003]

79. I thought we got PMs

when a post has been alerted on. Maybe it is just when they are hidden.

[GGJohn]

80. Only if you're the alerter or a juror.

The only way to know if you've been alerted on is if a post is hidden, or, a juror is kind enough to post the results for you, or a juror PM's you with the results.

[closeupready]

82. Yup. Thank you.

[Dont call me Shirley]

90. + another 1.

[blackspade]

54. Excessive force by the authorities is not 'bad karma'

It is a feature of a corrupt social system.

[marym625]

92. your compassion and human decencyare overwhelming.

Heartwarming indeed! This is the kind of liberalism democrats strive for.

You're a hero in my book!

(where is that sarcasm thing?)

[electricray]

25. "He's a thief."

No, he is a human being who felt that he needed to steal something who was then forcefully and violently detained by another human being who is paid to enforce the corporate edict that human life is less valuable than company thatproperty.

If a retiree hired a private security force to stop greedy corporate executives from retroactively stealing the work the retiree did for the company during his career by using bankruptcy to get out of paying his pension, he'd be arrested for any violence his private security force used to stop that theft.

Crisis can make criminals of anyone, but unfortunately stealing to solve your crisis only ends up in violence and/or jail time if you are poor.

I don't want to excuse crime in any way, but using hired thugs to protect company property reminds me too much of Pinkertons "protecting" companies from Union organizers and I am glad that a jury pushed back on this corporate overreach.

[WestSeattle2]

28. He's a thief who miscalculated and lost.

[closeupready]

33. Because plaintiffs who win actually lose, in WestSeattle2's world.

Silliness abounds.

[GGJohn]

38. Wow!!!

You know Freeperville is down the hall and to the right, your views would be much more welcome there.

[gopiscrap]

46. I totally agree

[christx30]

49. And when companies have to raise prices

because of theft, you can't really complain. Or when companies are losing money, and have to lay people off.
And this guy wasn't in any kind of crisis. He wasn't stealing food to take care of his family. He was stealing scissors. He wanted something for nothing.

The theft prevention guys used excessive force, and they shouldn't have touched him, but I'm having a difficult time working up any sympathy for him. And you're vastly overplaying it with this "corporate edict" stuff. He stole something, he was caught. He refused to be detained by people who's job it is to protect the assets of this company. They were going to do it right and call the police.

Quick stat from Google:

It is estimated that shoplifting occurs 330 - 440 million times per year at a loss of $10-$13 billion dollars. Nationwide, that equates to 1.0-1.2 million shoplift incidents everyday at a loss rate of $19,000-$25,300 dollars stolen per minute.

[electricray]

87. So would your opinion be different if he was stealing food?

You and a few others in this thread seem to be pretty certain that this guy was just a random punk who should have known that he risked skull fracture and brain damage when he pocketed those scissors. How do you know he wasn't in crisis? Are you playing the solipsism game by imagining why YOU might steal scissors and projecting based on your own ignorance?

When I was unemployed and school supply buying time came, I was hard pressed to come up with the cash to buy the hundreds of dollars worth of stuff the school could no longer afford to provide. I managed to cobble together enough for them to get by with charity, but I had a pretty solid network in place through my Union to help me in tough times. I was in a crisis that scissors paid for by someone else would help solve, but I was lucky enough to not have to steal them to solve that crisis.

"They were going to do it right and call the police,"??? And then what, since the guy didn't stop and politely wait for his ride to jail, they decided, " F**k doing it right! Let's crack some skull!"? Either poor training or a culture that tolerated or maybe even encouraged violence took over and cruel and unusual punishment was doled out with no judge or jury necessary. Now that a jury has come to a determination that you, with your armchair understanding of the case wouldn't have come to, you're certain that justice wasn't done?

I am certain that shrinkage is a factor in pricing of merchandise, but I'd wager not as big of a factor as ridiculous executive salaries, stock buybacks, loss prevention, loss insurance, and any number of things I couldn't care less about paying for but have to anyway. I'd rather not have to unwittingly pay for someone else's scissors either but if I had the choice to buy the scissors or crack the guy's skull, I'd choose the former every time.

Incidentally, I bet the violence will have a much larger impact on the company and prices than the loss of a couple pairs of scissors.

[1monster]

88. Shrinkage. When I worked retail, there was a reconciliation process when the

big truck delivered the retail merchandise to the retail outlets.

The people unloading the merchandise would check the items off the shipping manifest when they were unloaded and noted any discrepancies between the manifest and that actually received. Then, when the shipment was completely unloaded and checked off the list, the manager would write up a discrepancy report and send it via fax to the head office. That discrepancy amount was quite significant many time. Sometimes the item described was a much more expensive than the one sent, or it simply was not in the shipment at all.

After a few years, corporate changed the way discrepancies were handled. Instead of the actual discrepancy numbers, the retail outlets were only allowed to claim a one percent discrepancy between what the manifest stated and what was actually delivered. Any amount more than the one percent was chalked up to store loss and blamed on employee and consumer theft...

Creative bookkeeping to say the least.

[GGJohn]

34. So he deserved the severe injuries that were inflicted on him?

And now one of them is a cop, wonder how many excessive use of force complaints there are against him?

[Warpy]

35. He wasn't detained until the cops came, he was assaulted

Two skull fractures seem just a little extreme for stealing something worth less than $20.

Yes, he's a common thief. That doesn't mean he deserved this level of assault.

As for being a poster child for tort reform, this case isn't it. Had he not been a thief, likely the award would be far higher. Both award amounts would be appealed and lowered on appeal to what he's out of pocket in health care expenses.

Mr. Loss Prevention should be prevented from holding any sort of security guard or law enforcement job ever again. Rage junkies don't belong in positions of authority.

[trillion]

94. You sound like the tea partiers on my local news site. They would derrive the same sociopathic

response.

[gort]

11. Wow! That is overkill for a pair of scissors

I would love to see the punishment this store dick would give to a Wall Street bankster...oh, I forgot this is America. If you're going to steal, steal billions and then tell everyone your bank is too big to fail.

[ciaobaby]

13. Gort - best post !

[Blasphemer]

41. gort for the win!.... nt

[CharlotteVale]

51. Good. But I wish he'd gotten more.

[Dont call me Shirley]

89. Welcome to Charles Dickens' America.

[trillion]

93. Good. Being a thief does not give anyone the right to completely brutalize him.

[Liberal_in_LA]

97. kick