Police Officer Preparation & Law Enforcement Resource - Archive

He was right, only to be wronged
Posted: April 6, 2008
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Mike Nichols

Dean Babcock spent almost 30 years as a cop in Delavan, so he's seen the aftermath of drunken-driving accidents. Knows, too, how much trouble underage kids can get into and how much pain they can cause after getting their hands on a bottle of rum or tequila.

Plus, he's a dad.

He was also a so-called protection specialist (a fancy name for a security guard, he says) at the Target store in Lake Geneva until getting fired for doing what any concerned adult would do.

Stopping, he says, a 16-year-old girl from taking a bottle of booze.

"They fired me for stopping a 16-year-old girl from stealing alcohol," he said Sunday.


He doesn't care all that much about the job. At 54 years old, he has a decent pension and was making only $8.50 an hour.

He just can't believe what happened.

In early March, he says, he noticed a bottle of Captain Morgan rum was missing and, after checking a surveillance video, suspected a young girl of taking it.

On March 7, he says, she showed up again and took a $45 bottle of Patrón tequila.

"She's a 100-pound girl," Dean said. "She does three or four shots of that and that will do her in."

So he did the only thing he could do. He intervened. Showed her a picture he had of her taking the Captain Morgan, got her to take the tequila out of her bag and then called her dad.

He could have simply called the police. But by the time they got there, she could have been long gone. Plus, he says, he was trying to handle it "low-key" because he knew that, technically, he'd violated a Target policy.

Only certain Target personnel, he says, are supposed to stop shoplifters. Never mind that, he says, none of them were there that day.

Dean, it seems, was not supposed to inconvenience the young thief. He wasn't supposed to do the right thing. Lower-ranking Target employees are apparently not entrusted with doing the right thing. Not that he wasn't allowed to ask a question.

"Can I help you find something?" he said he was supposed to ask.

"We cannot," he said, "accuse a guest of stealing."

Even a 16-year-old guest with a big bottle of tequila.

Even if the father of the girl, he says, appreciated what he did. And even if everyone who fears sharing the road with a high-schooler drunk on tequila would like to mail Dean Babcock a giant thank-you note right now.

He didn't get a thank-you note. Instead, he got called into an office by a Target manager who heard what happened.

"You were not supposed to make the stop," he said he was told.

"I am not going to let a 16-year-old girl walk out of here with alcohol," he said he responded.

Most stores would give a man a raise about then. Four days later, he got a pink slip.

"I was fired," he said, "for violating the policy" regarding when guests can be stopped.

Kristin Grieser, an assistant store manager for Target in Lake Geneva, confirmed that Dean was terminated and said she could not really provide details about what happened.

"We take shoplifting very seriously," she said, "but we are also very cautious in making apprehensions."

You can guess what that means.

That little girl, Dean said, "could have taken a shopping cart full and nobody would have stopped her."

Would have just wished her a nice day, I guess. And, of course, asked her if she needed help finding anything else.

Good for him for what he did.

Target "Loss Prevention" is a joke. Anyone want to think different, please let me hear it. Their "Uniformed" Security Guard at the door? Please...:rolleyes:


I would have told Target to shove it where the sun doesn't shine, and this is one of the few times, I believe he was right by going to the press.

I ilke my local Target but this is stupid.

Target has the uniformed nerds at the door, but they also have undercover LP guys too. The UC's (they call em APS) do not mess around out here. Type in "target loss prevention" into youtube and see what pops up. It's the same thing for walmart. I've seen target LP guys in knock down drag outs with people when I was working mall security. But the uniform guys are absolutely useless. I guess in this case the guy had to follow his conscious as opposed to a store policy and got fired for it. It is what it is.

Last time I took a shoplifter off their hands, loss prevention at a store you find in many malls told me that they would get fired if a shoplifter started fighting with them and they tried to protect themselves... :rolleyes:

It's true. They would always call us. The store manager or whoever would tell the person they were under arrest and if they got physical we would "assist the tenant in the apprehension of the arrested party." Only the three anchor stores were allowed to use force during an arrest. The rest always called us before the person left the store, which often times led to us standing around for fifteen minutes only to have nothing happen. Ah, twas the life of the mall ninja. I miss it so.

The guard is part of the TPS team, and according to Target policy he cannot stop or accuse anyone of stealing, only the APS (undercovers) team can stop or make arrests.
Target always goes by the book, and I know of a lot of cases when policies got *lost* in creative paperwork in order to recover hundreds $$ of stolen merchandice.

This particular guard probably had previous pink slips for "unauthorized" stops.

. Ah, twas the life of the mall ninja. I miss it so.

Never worked the mall, it was an open K-Mart plaza and the local Sav-on used to call us to assist every 15-20 minutes (no wonder they closed the So. Cal locations :rolleyes:)
Didn't pay much but I miss it.

Sometimes doing the right thing isn't doing the right thing. :rolleyes:

There are consequences with every thing we do. Good on him for stopping this girl and getting her dad involved, but since he violated store policy he should not be surprised they fired him.

Sometimes, doing the right thing comes with sacrifice.

I don't feel badly for him, nor do I take issue with Target.

I don't feel badly for him, nor do I take issue with Target.

Same here. While their policy may be stupid, it's their policy and their prerogative as a business entity to make the rules as they see fit. To not follow them, right or wrong, has consequences.

Good for him, I bet this dad gave it to her worse than what the police would have, I know my dad would have.

Good for him, I bet this dad gave it to her worse than what the police would have, I know my dad would have.

Thats a bet you would likely lose, experience has taught me.

Thats a bet you would likely lose, experience has taught me.

Daddy will probably sue right? ;)

Daddy will probably sue right? ;)

Ahh, I don't know about that, but too many parents look to place blame elsewhere and are defensive of their kids, rather than take an incident such as this as a wake up call and get serious with their kid.

Chances are, she will be in trouble again, soon and more severely.

Is it legal for a shop to provide bottle of booze to a 16-year-old ?
If he has the Knowledge that a possible under age person "got" alcohol from that store ?

Is it legal for a shop to provide bottle of booze to a 16-year-old ? No. The kid attempted to steal.



if he has the Knowledge that a possible under age person "got" alcohol from that store ?

Is that a question?

Target needs to think what would happen if that girl was knowingly allowed to walk out of the store with alcohol and ended up killing a bunch of people behind the wheel as a result. Their policy might not be enough to prevent them losing a huge lawsuit.

Target needs to think what would happen if that girl was knowingly allowed to walk out of the store with alcohol and ended up killing a bunch of people behind the wheel as a result. Their policy might not be enough to prevent them losing a huge lawsuit.

Thats a far stretch even for a Dram Shop law, but I bet Target's lawyers NEVER considered stuff like that when drafting policy. :rolleyes:;)

I worked at target years ago. I was a Sr. APS by the time I was 20, in charge of my own store. The policy's were always messed up. I remember on my 21st birthday I worked a 18 hour day to take down a group of 8 employees that were stealing. I had put well over a hundred hours in on the case documenting everything, placing cameras in area's overnight, etc. When it came time and all the APS Managers came to the store to pull these people in, all they did was interview them and make them sign promissory notes to pay for the merchandise they had been stealing. No charges filed. Thats the day I knew that the private security was not for me.

I worked at target years ago. I was a Sr. APS by the time I was 20, in charge of my own store. The policy's were always messed up. I remember on my 21st birthday I worked a 18 hour day to take down a group of 8 employees that were stealing. I had put well over a hundred hours in on the case documenting everything, placing cameras in area's overnight, etc. When it came time and all the APS Managers came to the store to pull these people in, all they did was interview them and make them sign promissory notes to pay for the merchandise they had been stealing. No charges filed. Thats the day I knew that the private security was not for me.


WOW. Were they at least terminated?

Target needs to think what would happen if that girl was knowingly allowed to walk out of the store with alcohol and ended up killing a bunch of people behind the wheel as a result. Their policy might not be enough to prevent them losing a huge lawsuit.

That is exactly what I was thinking.

This huge lawsuit, would it be against the "protection specialist" or against the shop ?

WOW. Were they at least terminated?

Yes, they were terminated. But it still made me sick at my stomach. All these places care about is making sure they get there money. At that point in time, Even though I could detain and call the police on a shoplifter, they preferred that you catch them in the act of concealment inside the store and make them dump it. They were only concerned about liability.

Thats a far stretch even for a Dram Shop law, but I bet Target's lawyers NEVER considered stuff like that when drafting policy. :rolleyes:;)

Not everyone here is a lawyer or a LEO. I bet if you came to my neck of the woods in regards to profession I could make you look pretty stupid as well. I don't know why you have such an attitude problem but you can save it for someone who cares.

Not everyone here is a lawyer or a LEO. I bet if you came to my neck of the woods in regards to profession I could make you look pretty stupid as well. I don't know why you have such an attitude problem but you can save it for someone who cares.

The only attitude is your poor one. :rolleyes:

The only attitude is your poor one. :rolleyes:

What's the matter? Not used to someone making mention when you post something condescending? Heaven knows you do it enough.

txinvestigator1, I know what you are saying that most parents will come to bat for the kid.

NOT my parents, they would have whooped my A$$ so hard I wouldn't have sat for a week maybe even two. They would then make me take responciblity for my actions and ask the judge (if I decided to take it to court, if cited or arrested) to hand out the harshest penalty that they could, to teach me a lesson.

I think that is why I turned out the way I am today and part of the reason I want to become a PO. To try and help people turn around (I know it doesn't happen that often).

Target has great LP. They just go about things the wrong way. Look at the videos online. They bum rush the shoplifters!

Where I work we follow them out of the story, tap them on the shoulder, and calmly tell them "We are with ***** Loss Prevention, You need to come back inside now." If they run, we chase, but 95% of the time they go "Ok" and follow us down to our office.

As for the "Protection Specialist" they don't do much, I was offered a job as a PS with Target but denied because I had the ndercover position available at where I currently work.

As for the "Protection Specialist" they don't do much, I was offered a job as a PS with Target but denied because I had the ndercover position available at where I currently work.

I know, those TPS guys are too busy investigating internal theft cases. :rolleyes:

Sometimes doing the right thing isn't doing the right thing. :rolleyes:

Now what the hell does that mean?! ;):D


(I think that was the reply :o)

The guard is part of the TPS team, and according to Target policy he cannot stop or accuse anyone of stealing, only the APS (undercovers) team can stop or make arrests.
Target always goes by the book, and I know of a lot of cases when policies got *lost* in creative paperwork in order to recover hundreds $$ of stolen merchandice.

This particular guard probably had previous pink slips for "unauthorized" stops.
Having worked briefly for Target security (until learning what a joke it was and how little they looked out for our safety), I can say he should have been very aware of that most basic policy and am surprised that he was surprised. Target seems to be completely liability driven.

One's options are:
1) Quit and work in different more fulfilling system
2) Put you time in and advance through the system until you can make detentions (and possibly influence the system)
3) Go with the system until you see something so bad it would be ethically/morally wrong not to intervene

AnthonyM83 wrote:


One's options are:
1) Quit and work in different more fulfilling system
2) Put you time in and advance through the system until you can make detentions (and possibly influence the system)
3) Go with the system until you see something so bad it would be ethically/morally wrong not to intervene

I worked APS Target for a year and it's job that you have to go by the book or you're history.
You also have to be dedicated and on the ball to last in this job anyway.

I could not stand Target, everything about the place bothered me and most of all their Operations manual and policy structure.

Went through the moves for a year and used the reference for a better position with another retailer who appreciated my efforts a lot more.

As far as moving through the system, everyone at Target wants to be an AP (asset protection)and until you move up to that level the waiting list is so long and filled with hyperactive kids who want to play cop that if I stayed I would still be on the list and that's about it.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yfvNElz0RHY

Note that only the APS undercovers can do the arrests and the TPS assist.

yfvNElz0RHY

Note that only the APS undercovers can do the arrests and the TPS assist.

Highway, that was a really cool video....:D

Nice!

Haha, I love my job.

That store seems pretty busy. But again, it seems that target is apprehending these guys totally backwards! We walk up, ID ourselves and tell them to come back into the story with us. If they say no, or run, then its game on.

I watch these videos and wonder, how many of these people would have VOLUNTARILY come back into the AP Office? In the 8 apprehensions I have taken part in, no one has run on us, let alone, scream, fight, etc. Ill probably get some more people tonight. See you guys later. :D

Haha, I love my job.

That store seems pretty busy. But again, it seems that target is apprehending these guys totally backwards! We walk up, ID ourselves and tell them to come back into the story with us. If they say no, or run, then its game on.

I watch these videos and wonder, how many of these people would have VOLUNTARILY come back into the AP Office? In the 8 apprehensions I have taken part in, no one has run on us, let alone, scream, fight, etc. Ill probably get some more people tonight. See you guys later. :D

Garden Grove is probably a high theft area and the Target Lp's thought it's not necessary to ID themselves with all this action going on.
They are supposed to by Target policy however.

I mean they figured, the scumbags know it's obviously not their mommy bearhugging them. :rolleyes:

Garden Grove is probably a high theft area and the Target Lp's thought it's not necessary to ID themselves with all this action going on.
They are supposed to by Target policy however.

I mean they figured, the scumbags know it's obviously not their mommy bearhugging them. :rolleyes:

True,

I have never been there, nor do I know the statistics so I am just commenting on the small experiences I have had. Then again, they work there day in and day out, I'm sure they have tried everything under the sun and found this to have the best outcome.

True,

I have never been there, nor do I know the statistics so I am just commenting on the small experiences I have had. Then again, they work there day in and day out, I'm sure they have tried everything under the sun and found this to have the best outcome.

The uniforms get quota'd on whatever piece of merchandice they help recover.
Also nobody is supposed to chase out on the sidewalk.

And when they start cutting corners like that, sidetrack from the policies, they show up to work one day, a new LP manager is in the joint and starts writing up anyone who deviates from policy, his name is "the clean up guy" :eek:

So "the clean up guy" hangs around for a couple of months, reviews the CCTV footage, fires whoever is beyond redemption, calls a few store meetings, until everyone starts following protocol and policy again.

Then they send in a new GM (general manager) and start all over from square one.
It's a hard pill to swallow for those who have recovered thousands $$ worth of merchandice just to find themselves unemployed one day.

That's what happened to that security guard. :rolleyes:

Man, if I ever made an apprehension without first telling a person they were under citizens arrest not only would I probably lose in court, I'd be fired, and probably sued. I like their style, but they should ID themselves, verbally tell them they're under CA, then, if necessary go hands on. I know APS calls local PD if they see a weapon, but what if you don't see it until the fighting starts...

I always wonder, what if they do it to someone that they mistaken to take something.


Whats going to be their defense then?


If someone comes up and jumps on me out of no where, there is going to be some serious problems both legally, and physically (if they survive)

Too much liability, no thanks

I also think some of them take the job a tad too serious. Sometimes, let them go. Is it worth getting physically hurt? If you want to fight, then I'll try to restrain them. But if they are going to try to hurt me, or kill me...then see yah later. Its not worth me getting hurt/disabled over a $40 game. Its also not worth a lawsuit while making $10 per hour.


As I said, you don't go jumping on anyone out of the blue, regardless how much an item is they just tried to steal. Those kids need a reality check...fast

E-mails take aim at Target and its Wisconsin-grown CEO
Posted: April 11, 2008

Mike Nichols
E-MAIL

Gregg Steinhafel, our local-boy-made-good, a guy who is the president and is about to become CEO of Target Corp., probably doesn't get a lot of feedback from employees back here in his home state.

Or former employees like Dean Babcock. Dean's the ex-cop who was fired from his security guard job after stopping a 16-year-old from stealing a bottle of tequila from Mr. Steinhafel's Lake Geneva store.

As I wrote earlier, Dean knew Target policies, technically, precluded him from making a stop.

But he did the right thing anyway.

Dean Babcock, outside his Lake Geneva home on Friday, was recently fired as a security guard at Target for stopping a teenager who was shoplifting a bottle of tequila.

Even the father of the 16-year-old wrote to the Lake Geneva paper praising Dean for preventing a "possibly toxic situation," and saying he "deserves a reward, not a pink slip."

He wrote that he appreciated what Dean did, and that his daughter appreciated it, too.

"The theft was deterred and a life changed in the process," wrote the girl's dad. "I can only find the positive in that."

Maybe Mr. Steinhafel, who grew up in Ozaukee County and is from the well-known Steinhafel furniture family, doesn't get a lot of feedback from regular Joe shoppers, either.

Target, after all, has about 1,500 stores and 350,000 full-time, part-time and seasonal employees, and Mr. Steinhafel surely has profits and products and a flagging stock price to worry about. This is a company with annual revenue of $59 billion. Mr. Steinhafel himself earns more than some small countries, and more power to him.

Dean, in the meantime, made $8.50 an hour.

So who cares, maybe?

A lot of people. I've received about 70 e-mails from people, many of whom were once big fans of Target. And they have suggestions.

"I have a great suggestion," wrote one reader from South Carolina by the name of Al.

"Have the police in Lake Geneva wake up the manager and the assistant manager of the Target store EVERY time they have a teenager killed in a traffic accident" that is alcohol-related around there. "The police should take them to the scene of the accident and let them assist in the removal of the body . . . Maybe if they view enough bodies, they might appreciate what Mr. Babcock did . . . "

It's not a bad idea. But you have to suspect this isn't really about the local managers.

They probably fired Dean because they assumed, if they didn't, their bosses would fire them, too.

I got a call back from two spokeswomen at Target late Friday who said Dean actually wasn't fired for stopping the shoplifter.

He was, they said, fired for violating policies against, for instance, taking a guest into a closed office. And, they said, for not calling a supervisor who could have helped offer what they call "guest assistance."

Or, they said, he could have called law enforcement.

Dean responded Friday that he had been informed his job was not to call police, and that anyway the girl could have been gone by the time they arrived. The bit about the closed office, he said, was never mentioned when he was fired - although, for what it's worth, there's a video camera in there.

"They fired me," he said, "for violating the policy that prohibited me from making the stop."

Bottom line: Target is playing hardball now, and Dean won't be getting an apology.

Not from any Target managers or spokeswomen anyway.

Not that anyone really expected one.

Maybe that's why one reader, Tom Shirley, a Wauwatosa guy and big Target shopper, sent his e-mail right to the biggest boss of all, right to the CEO's office that Gregg Steinhafel is just about to move into.

"Until Mr. Babcock is rehired with a BIG apology," wrote Shirley, "I have chosen to terminate my relationship with Target."

He never heard back from company leaders, just got a perfunctory response from something called "Guest Relations" that did little more than thank him for sharing his thoughts. So he shared another.

"Firing Mr. Babcock is a moral disgrace," he wrote back.

Nobody down in the ranks is going to agree, of course.

But wouldn't it be nice if somebody smart like Gregg Steinhafel, somebody who doesn't have to be afraid of getting fired, did something simple.

Like saying Dean Babcock is the only one who was mistreated here.

Like saying Dean Babcock was only trying to do what's right.

E-mail mnichols@journalsentinel.com

I always wonder, what if they do it to someone that they mistaken to take something.


If you don't have a confirmation that all aspects of the crime have been committed, you don't make the stop. Ever. Ever. Yes, I wrote ever twice. That's how important it is. LP and security (should know:rolleyes:) that they're not police officers. They cannot detain for investigation. Ever. Ever. They can make a citizens arrest for a misdemeanor they personally viewed or a felony where enough PC has been established (risky thing to do, though).

If they don't see EVERY element of a misdemeanor, they can't do a thing. Except, in the case of a shoplifter, "burn them" (in other words, make their presence obviously known so the person drops the merchandise). These guys work for a private entity, it's the product that matters (or should matter), not the arrest stats.

If you don't have a confirmation that all aspects of the crime have been committed, you don't make the stop. Ever. Ever. Yes, I wrote ever twice. That's how important it is. LP and security (should know:rolleyes:) that they're not police officers. They cannot detain for investigation. Ever. Ever. They can make a citizens arrest for a misdemeanor they personally viewed or a felony where enough PC has been established (risky thing to do, though).

If they don't see EVERY element of a misdemeanor, they can't do a thing. Except, in the case of a shoplifter, "burn them" (in other words, make their presence obviously known so the person drops the merchandise). These guys work for a private entity, it's the product that matters (or should matter), not the arrest stats.

+1,

My store has a required check list of SIX elements of proof. Once ALL SIX have been completed then we can stop them. If all SIX were completed, they WILL have the item on them. If they do NOT have the item on them then all SIX elements were not completed!

Oh I understand trust me, just you and I both know, that not everyone follows that. Anyway, I still don't agree with what they did. Oh well

If you don't have a confirmation that all aspects of the crime have been committed, you don't make the stop. Ever. Ever. Yes, I wrote ever twice. That's how important it is. LP and security (should know:rolleyes:) that they're not police officers. They cannot detain for investigation. Ever. Ever.

In California, technically they're agents of a merchant? So, they can detain to investigate. There's three or four provisions for citizens making detainments in California.

In California, technically they're agents of a merchant? So, they can detain to investigate. There's three or four provisions for citizens making detainments in California.

Nope, LP's can't arrest, or detain just to investigate, at least here in Cali.
That happens rarely and only if there is someone who is a well known *regular* in the store and have him recorded on CCTV stealing previously, all the LP's have to do is get permission from their boss to detain, collect all the evidence from his file and call the Police.

Large corporations like BB, target, Walmart, Kroger, Macy's and other major retailers require their agents to follow these steps:

1. Observe the subject enter the area without the merchandise.
2. Observe the subject select the merchandise.
3. Observe the subject conceal the merchandise.
4. Maintain surveillance of subject with the concealed merchandise on his person.
5. Observe the subject completely bypass all points of sale (registers) and cross the property line with the concealed merchandise.
6. Make the arrest.

Now, here's where common sense comes in when LP's have to skip a few steps (which is risky), if someone goes in a dressing room (it's illegal in CA to monitor dressing rooms and restrooms from the inside) with 4 clothing items, comes out with 3, LP's check the room and can't find the missing items, naturally they assume the suspect has the items on his person.

Everytime an LP makes a stop having skipped any of the above steps takes a chance, hoping that the suspect has the merchandice concealed.

And while on the Target subject, everything is recorded on CCTV on state of-the-art Loronix system to be used as evidence when the case goes to court.

Oh I understand trust me, just you and I both know, that not everyone follows that. Anyway, I still don't agree with what they did. Oh well

Huh?

No, you must have it wrong. If do not follow the rules, you are automatically terminated.

We actually had to let someone walk out of the store today. We saw her conceal the item, but we lost visual for about 10 seconds.

She left the store and we checked the area where we lost visual to see if she dropped it. She did not.

I think it is wrong what they did but he knew full and well that he was violating policy when he stopped her.

7mmMag wrote:


"They fired me," he said, "for violating the policy that prohibited me from making the stop."

Bottom line: Target is playing hardball now, and Dean won't be getting an apology.

Not from any Target managers or spokeswomen anyway.

I don't think Target will sweat much over this, it's just a routine termination.
They don't treat their employees like they are worth very much, that's why they have so much internal shrink resulting from internal theft.

IMHO the only way they can budge is if the local PD delivers the message to them about the change on the girl's life resulting from the guard's *unauthorized* stop according to the local residents.

Since they work hand in hand with their LP this move might bring the desired results and the guard can get some sort of apology.

The Dad has come out and publicly thanked the officer for doing his job, and had his daughter do so as well. Obviously, this has publicized the fact that Target's uniformed security is nothing more than a joke.

Nope, LP's can't arrest, or detain just to investigate, at least here in Cali.

That's a Target regulation, you were discussing state law regarding security jobs in general.

Man i hate Target. I only weigh about 140 and the police said they had me on tape stuffing things inside of my pants. I was only their for about 2 mins.i saw the police officer in the car on the way in. I asked if i could see the tape and wasn't allowed to see it. they let me go because they said sumthing was in the way of the camera.

Man i hate Target. I only weigh about 140 and the police said they had me on tape stuffing things inside of my pants. I was only their for about 2 mins.i saw the police officer in the car on the way in. I asked if i could see the tape and wasn't allowed to see it. they let me go because they said sumthing was in the way of the camera.

Actually it was Target LP who had you on tape not the Police.

You lucked out this time and LP messed up their concealment part of the footage, , but they probably won't make the same mistake twice, and now that you've been red flagged next time they'll watch you like a hawk from the time you roll into that parking lot until you leave the store. :rolleyes:

Man i hate Target. I only weigh about 140 and the police said they had me on tape stuffing things inside of my pants. I was only their for about 2 mins.i saw the police officer in the car on the way in. I asked if i could see the tape and wasn't allowed to see it. they let me go because they said sumthing was in the way of the camera.

What does your weight have to do with you being a shoplifter? I've arrested a 90 pound 69 year old Asian lady shoplifting. And it doesn't take more than 10 seconds to shove something in your pants. Are you saying they stopped you? Then let you go?

This happens here in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania all of the time. Just a couple weeks ago, there were two Home Depot employees fired for following an obvious shoplifter from the store. They had already called Police authorities whom were on their way, and the two were simply trying to keep an eye on the suspect. They got fired after the man was apprehended, because they violated Home Depot Policy.


According to the head honcho's, the job of the "loss prevention" employees is to notify authorities when a suspected shoplifter exits the store. They do not want the employees to follow because if that shoplifter get hits by a car, or causes somebody to swerve and wreck, that individual wouldn't have been running if it wasn't for the "loss prevention" employees chasing them.

In all, the cost of a lawsuit is much more expensive than a $30 dollar saw or a $100 power drill.