Calling all security guards

[Decoligny]

WRONG.

490.5 PC
Anyone who is: the owner or employee, lessee, cosigner, operator agent or a person authorized by the owner or by the person in lawful possession of property, may detain for investigation (a reasonable length of time), whom they have probable cause to believe is attempting to take or has unlawfully taken merchandise"


I know, because I did this stuff for a living at one point.

It say absolutely nothing about them having the authority to "detain" for any other reason but the attempt to take/unlawful taking of merchandise.

Did they think he stole the gun on his hip? If so, they should have detained him for that. But, if they tried to "detain" him for something other than what is mentioned above, they arrested him. False Arrest suit.

[Matt C]

It say absolutely nothing about them having the authority to "detain" for any other reason but the attempt to take/unlawful taking of merchandise.

Did they think he stole the gun on his hip? If so, they should have detained him for that. But, if they tried to "detain" him for something other than what is mentioned above, they arrested him. False Arrest suit.

Yeah, I know.

[pullnshoot25]

Just got off the phone with BSIS, they told me where to go to look at training manuals and the "Power To Arrest" stuff. They also showed me where to go for filing a complaint. I think that is where I shall start.

Geez.

-N8

[pullnshoot25]

Just filed a complaint with the Bureau. I can't wait to get these rat bastards!

[dfletcher]

It say absolutely nothing about them having the authority to "detain" for any other reason but the attempt to take/unlawful taking of merchandise.

Did they think he stole the gun on his hip? If so, they should have detained him for that. But, if they tried to "detain" him for something other than what is mentioned above, they arrested him. False Arrest suit.

Also, a guard may or may not be an agent or be authorized by the owner to take such actions. SO even if a person was observed stealing by a guard, they may not be permitted to detain. Guards are almost always (supposedly) informed by their employer that they are permitted to observe a person(s) and report and document what occurs, but they are in general specifically informed they are not permitted to detain.

[gun toting monkeyboy]

Again, when are we going? We should have our UOC lunch there. Mmmm... food court food... Well, it isn't bad, at least. And besides, it is a good place to go to hand out lots of pamphlets.

-Mb (who really should stick to decaf)

[Bagger]

if they see you committing A felony they can Detain you and arrest you .
"Citizens arrest ".

[CSDGuy]

if they see you committing A felony they can Detain you and arrest you .
"Citizens arrest ".

Wrong about the detain. Citizens can NOT detain. The Merchant Rule only applies in specific circumstances. Wrong about seeing the felony. If they see a misdemeanor, they can arrest for that misdemeanor. Felony arrest can be made upon reasonable cause that the person committed a felony that actually was committed...

You really should read PC 837... and here it is!

837. A private person may arrest another:
1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.
2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not
in his presence.
3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable
cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.

[ar15barrels]

** should be noted that this is pretty general for your "mall cop" type guards. Not all guards play by the same rules. The SoCal Edison guards at the Nuke plant in San Onofre roll around with Glocks and M4s and don't **** around.

Most likely DOE which are feds.
Whole different set of rules...

[CSDGuy]

The front gate guards at a nuke plant might be contract, but the guys that guard the really serious stuff at a nuke plant will likely be DoE employees and they play by a very different set of rules.

[devildog999]

The front gate guards at a nuke plant might be contract, but the guys that guard the really serious stuff at a nuke plant will likely be DoE employees and they play by a very different set of rules.

WRONG! I had a few friends back when I was in the Corps that worked for the San Onfre Nuclear Plant when they got out, they were not employed by the DoE.

[CSDGuy]

WRONG! I had a few friends back when I was in the Corps that worked for the San Onfre Nuclear Plant when they got out, they were not employed by the DoE.

I never said they were... just that they likely were. Its been a while since I've even looked into that end of the security world. Still, their authority/ROE will be VERY different from most guards.

Not that it actually applies to the OP's situation. Those folks are quite likely very much in the wrong...

[Bagger]

WHAT IS DETAINMENT?
A person who voluntarily responds to questioning and is not actually restrained (i.e., free
to go at any time) is considered to be detained

Wrong about the detain. Citizens can NOT detain. The Merchant Rule only applies in specific circumstances. Wrong about seeing the felony. If they see a misdemeanor, they can arrest for that misdemeanor. Felony arrest can be made upon reasonable cause that the person committed a felony that actually was committed...

You really should read PC 837... and here it is!

[CSDGuy]

WHAT IS DETAINMENT?
A person who voluntarily responds to questioning and is not actually restrained (i.e., free
to go at any time) is considered to be detained

I would consider that "Consentual Contact". Detention is when you're not free to go, but you're not under arrest. You may be detained for a while, but once the detention becomes too long time-wise, it becomes an arrest... and if there's no PC for an arrest...

Here's likely the whole quote:

WHAT IS DETAINMENT?

A person who voluntarily responds to questioning and is not actually restrained (i.e., free
to go at any time) is considered to be detained. A person may be detained by the police for
further questioning in an investigation, and that person is not necessarily under arrest.
The police have the authority to detain a person against his will and still not arrest that
person. Security guards do not have the authority to detain a person against their will.

The first part essentially defines consentual contact. The person is free to go at any time. When you detain someone against their will... you'd better be PD.

[dfletcher]

WHAT IS DETAINMENT?
A person who voluntarily responds to questioning and is not actually restrained (i.e., free to go at any time) is considered to be detained

Could be mistaken, but when I watch Cops the line "you're not under arrest you're only being detained" is followed by handcuffs and the line "these are for your protection and mine". It seems to me a person is, under those circumstances, either not free to go or the cop must remove the cuffs if the person says "I don't want to talk to you and I want to leave".

Perhaps one of our LE members can discuss the legal definition of being detained and whether the average security guard (one not involved in retail nor the agent of an owner) is permitted to detain.