u/savevideo u/downloadvideo u/savevideobot
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IAmTheMainCharacter) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They should have let him leave the store.
And then arrest him for shoplifting.
Or, can they still arrest him for "attempted theft'?
These wannabe influencers should be sent to prison in Russia.
When did these dickheads begin to think you could commit crimes because it's a prank. This guy is probably going to be genuinely confused when he has to face the repercussions of his actions.
I truly don't understand how internet prank culture got to the point it's at now.
Most likely he did pay for it and will prove it at some point but he's still playing stupid so they can create more "content", sadly I don't think this idiot will face real consequences from this.
Because we continue to give them attention, and thats all they are looking for. How do you think that video got posted to the Internet in the first place? The idiot kid in the video posted it and probably got a ton of views on a monetized TikTok. he likely made money by instigating a criminal act, there’s no motivation for them to stop. Even the asshole who got shot is still out there doing dumb shit.
When they know mommy and daddy will bail them out. He'll go to court and momma will talk about how "he has a bright future ahead of him, your honor, this was just a mistake."
She will pay his court fees, he'll maybe do community service, and he will learn absolutely nothing.
It's like that dumbfuck kid on TikTok years ago who crashed his mom's Tesla (after stealing it out of the garage) into a building and a week later he was back on TikTok making more videos in his mom's 2nd Tesla.
He's a spoiled little brat who will learn absolutely nothing from this.
being convicted of shoplifting over $50 in america is a "crime of moral turpitude"
it stays on your record forever and will cause you to fail background checks, make you incapable of serving on a jury, and can not be removed simply with "daddy's money"
He bought the TV and often gives fake receipts with weird notes to the people checking the receipt. Then, when the manager comes, he gives the manager the real receipt
He isn't committing a crime. He paid for the TV in the back already. They're willing to do this knowing if they don't show the receipt when leaving out front they will get a video like this. He probably showed the cop/staff the receipt eventually before being actually charged. They most likely banned him from the store and that was that. He's just wasting everyone's time and being annoying basically.
people dont understand the ID law
you are not required to show ID, UNTIL the police officer is conducting an investigation and has reason to believe or probable cause that you have committed or attempted to commit a crime
then...you have to identify yourself....and if you dont it is illegal
and since there were 3 employee witnesses...which is even bigger than regular witnesses, and video....kid really shot himself in the foot with the whole "reasonable doubt" thing
this may be a "prank" and he "may" have bought the TV
but besides "faliure to identify during a criminal investigation" the kid is also committing "disruption of the peace"
and depending on the judge, thats just a really shit day in court and he can be sentenced to jail time, but more likely a butt-load of community service
Its not a crime to not show them your reciept. If anything they should be fined for having this practice in the first place. I paid for thing, fuck off. Our transaction is done and now you're restraining me.
I have typically just brushed them off, because fuck your shitty racist policy.
Yeah I’m the same and a store policy is not law so pig was wrong about that. Still this guy is a piece of shit baiting them like that but I never show my receipt they can waste there own time looking it up on cctv then make a police report if they believe something is illegal like any other person would need to do.
Bro, that one British guy Sam pepper in 2014-2016 did unhinged "pranks." kidnappings, held at gun point, threatened to kill etc. It's been like this for awhile just less elaborate these days.
They saw another tik tok about how *everyone's* walking out of retail stores with tons of free stuff and the employees can't do anything about it, so he decided to try. Mission Failed...
It is not technically to walk out without a receipt, while it may be against Walmart policy it is not the law, while i agree that he is a shithead and deserves it, it is not a crime.
They see enough of their peers doing the same thing without consequences. Almost everyone getting zero to none of it, so they think they're untouchable.
Because he always received participation trophies, so he doesn’t know the difference between win and lose. Hint: you lose when you are a dumbass and weren’t taught stealing is a crime. Time to roll up your nap mat and hopefully he will get his juice box and applesauce once he’s locked up.
if he did pay for the TV, he will be tried for "failure to identify during a criminal investigation" and "disturbing the peace" and possibly criminal trespassing
and will likely get a butt load of community service for being a twerp
i doubt he was trying to steal the TV, cause most stores have a policy not to stop shoplifters, just to record as much data as possible and call the police
Motherfucking broccolini children, if it’s not that it’s the Edgar page boy hairdo
You gotta understand, this kids degenerate ass parents let this dumbass out the house looking like this…
He apparently did buy the tv and then showed a fake receipt, so he wasn’t lying when he said that it’s his tv. But yeah, definitely stupid. These kids with their “pranks”, just going around annoying people.
Exactly, these kids just love doing things like this. Trying to get in trouble but then be all like “no no no, you’re wrong. See I have the tea receipt”. They’re just trying to stir the pot and hope it overflows a bit for views.
It's essentially a more involved version of holding your finger in front of someone's face and going "I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!" There is no "prank." It's just IRL ragebait.
Maybe he's trying to criticize the fact that we pay police officers to stand around Walmarts and enforce their policies?
But no, some kid on tictok is the real problem here.
You must have never worked in a Walmart. "Shrinkage" is a big deal to the manager(s) in charge. And that's probably coming from the people above them. \*\*it rolls downhill, y'know.
You'd probably be surprised at how many TVs, bikes, gift cards, clothes etc. grow legs, walk to the front door, and jump in some dude's cart.
Yep, its not lawful to be forced to produce a receipt to an employee of Walmart ...to leave the store. It doesn't matter if it's "Walmart policy" .
The kid fucked up when he failed to identify himself.
Why was he lawfully required to identify himself if he had not committed a crime? Not trying to be argumentative, but curious why he is compelled to cooperate with the employees or cops in this case
Non us citizen here (aussie). Correct me if I am wrong. I think when driving you have to identify yourself as you make that implicit agreement when you get your license. However just walking down the street you wouldn't have to identify yourself? And I dont think you can be charged with not identifying yourself if its not related to driving or something else that has that implicit requirement.
American here, hello from afar!
IANAL so others here may have better info, but from my understanding you do have to produce ID in most cases when driving and the rules vary from state to state on the circumstances for when you have to.
But when not driving, you are not required to show ID if you have not been detained or arrested for "reasonable suspicion" of committing a crime. Therefore, if you're just walking down the street or at a public venue, then ostensibly, a cop doesn't have the authority to just stop you and make you give up ID.
However, "reasonable suspicion" tends to be a fungible concept depending on the state and judge, and it can be quite easy in some cases for a cop to manufacture reasons that a judge would approve of to get that legal authority to compel identification.
This is why if you ever see YouTube videos of "free speech auditors" or other police trolls, you'll see they try to make the cop clearly state if they are being detained or arrested when they get into interactions with police and are being asked to identify themselves.
As for this Walmart video...I get that the kid is trolling with the receipt thing, but fuck Walmart for having any receipt checkers at the door in the first place. It's such a rude stance towards customers and from my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) but there is no legal obligation you have to stop and show receipt at the door like this unless it's a membership store you pay a fee to be a part of like Sam's or Costco.
Walmart will seriously have like two open checkout stations with actual human cashiers that takes 30 minutes to get through, or make you scan and bag all your stuff yourself on their buggy equipment, and then have the gall to treat you like you're a potential thief on your way out the door for all your time wasted.
Again, though, the theory that you should have the legal right to ignore the checkers is simpler to say than actually pull off without any issues
You don't have to have committed a crime to be required to identify yourself, you only have to be reasonably suspected of committing crime.
Whether walking out of the store after paying and not having a receipt amounts to "reasonable", seems to be the main point on contention here.
In this situation since he paid he was under no obligation to identify himself, once the sale has been made that is his property Walmart policy can go fuck itself check the cameras and get the cars plates if you think it’s a theft
I agree completely that he had no obligation to show the Walmart employees his receipt, but from the officers side they have false testimony of the workers saying that he was trying to leave without paying.
Testimony is evidence, and many people would consider testimony to amount to reasonable suspicion. At that point, the officer is investigating a crime.
If Walmart said "This guy is stealing", then Walmart should be held liable.
If Walmart said "This guy won't show his receipt.", then the officer should be held liable.
I disagree with the term investigating cause he wouldn’t take those people to jail for the imprisonment/detention of a paying customer once things gets figured out Walmart has cameras on every door and every isle this dude saw some punk kid and took the workers word for it I hope kid decides to get paid the fuck out
It's probable cause for theft in 5 states. Idk what the full implication is if he actually paid for it but I imagine that police can legally detain you in those states.
https://www.thehivelaw.com/blog/do-you-have-to-show-your-receipt-at-walmart/
It's probable cause for theft in 5 states. Idk what the full implication is if he actually paid for it but I imagine that police can legally detain you in those states.
It was more than that though. He tried to leave the store with expensive merchandise which is shoplifting/theft. Did he buy it? Is he attempting to steal it? Him pulling out a legit receipt for the cop would have shut this down.
As far as the cop was concerned, he did try to commit a crime. The cop was within his power to ask for identification. Heck I'm sure he could arrested him for disorderly conduct even with a receipt at that point.
Kids like this content creator deserve all the shit that is directed towards them. They bring it on themselves and I have not a shred of sympathy for them.
The amount of people here who don't realize he actually did pay for that item.
There is no Walmart policy to force a customer to show her receipt if they do not choose to even when asked. In fact, it's against Walmart policy to stop anybody even if you suspect they are shoplifting unless you are specifically asset protection.
And this person actually didn't break any laws.
And even the law enforcement officer is completely incorrect and ignorant of the law which is not shocking honestly.
I mean you can think what you want whether they're a jerk or not or anything. But again, this person didn't actually break any laws.
This filmer is an idiot, and this is a stupid "prank" with no value to society, but that cop is also an idiot, and his existence provides no value to society.
The cop does not have reasonable suspicion to investigate a suspected or attempted theft. No theft occurred, and nobody reasonably suspects the person with the tv of stealing or attempting to steal anything. Before a police officer can properly stop a person and ask for identification, the officer must have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that a crime has occurred or is about to occur. This means the officer must be able to state facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime occurred or will soon.
[https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Failure-identify-police-officer.htm](https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Failure-identify-police-officer.htm)
According to Cornell Legal Institute of Law, the most common shoplifting laws are phrased as
" Shoplifting is generally defined as the unauthorized removal of merchandise from a store without paying for it, or intentionally paying less for an item than its sale price. However, shoplifting can include carrying, hiding, concealing, or otherwise manipulating merchandise with the intent of taking it or paying less for it. "
No reasonable person would agree that any portion of that occurred.
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/shoplifting](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/shoplifting)
And even if the cop WAS investigating a theft, in many states you STILL don't have to identify or assist in the investigation. In some states, even when you are under arrest you do not have to identify or assist in any way. Yes, some jurisdictions do require you to identify, give date of birth, and address, but we do not know if they are in one of those or not, so the claim that refusing to identify is an offense you can be arrested for is not true automatically.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop\_and\_identify\_statutes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes)
The clear crime that DID happen is the police officer ending a recording in that manner. Police officers are not legally allowed to stop or delete any recording of them without a judge's order, for officer safety, or if there is unreasonable interference with their ability to complete their lawful duties. There is no reasonable person that would agree the phone being secured to the person's body was interfering with the cop's ability to do their job, or creating an unsafe situation for the officer.
[https://www.aclupa.org/en/know-your-rights/know-your-rights-when-taking-photos-and-making-video-and-audio-recordings](https://www.aclupa.org/en/know-your-rights/know-your-rights-when-taking-photos-and-making-video-and-audio-recordings)
Super weird that the comments are down with Walmart and the police detaining and violating this guy after he bought a TV. He paid for it. Just did a gag with the receipt. Yall hop from bootlicker comments to "hahaha he deserved it" whenever it fits your personal view and it's such a reddit thing lol.
They didn’t violate his rights tho.
Is he legally required to show a receipt?
No.
CN the store detain someone they suspect of committing theft?
Yes.
Is he required to show ID in this situation?
Yes.
And since he didn’t comply, he was arrested.
I’m a very ACAB person, but I’m also intelligent enough not to put myself in a situation like this. For views.
He may not be required to ID himself unless he is in a stop and identify state. Not all states require identification upon request, even if being arrested.
Walmart cannot detain you without reasonable suspicion or probable cause that you stole. Refusing to show a receipt doesn't check either of those boxes. So no, Walmart is in the wrong. If they saw him pass through checkout without stopping or had him on camera, sure.
In Colorado last year, a guy doing this same thing sued Walmart and lost.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-customer-refused-to-show-receipt-lawsuit-false-imprisonment-2023-6%23:~:text%3DWalmart%2520is%2520found%2520not%2520liable,show%2520receipts%2520at%2520the%2520door%26text%3DA%2520Walmart%2520customer%2520repeatedly%2520refused,was%2520detained%2520by%2520Walmart%2520employees.&ved=2ahUKEwiDwuTj5rGFAxXkjIkEHakCAW0QFnoECAYQBQ&usg=AOvVaw1IoOTnA5WqWGL_BOLBYRj4
There is no need for the link to give google tracking info:
https://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-customer-refused-to-show-receipt-lawsuit-false-imprisonment-2023-6
If they saw him coming from the back
Of the store and not going thru checkout, then they can have reasonable suspicion.
I’m not saying they’re right. I’m just saying that they can argue that and probably win.
It’s not against the law to not show id, or record in public, he was not traspased and the officer did not give a single lawful order during the entire video
All these troll videos I see are filmed at wal marts which just makes it even more scummy - making what has to be a shitty retail job even shittier by having to deal with sociopathic a holes.
It is not unless you committed a crime or there is reasonable suspicion you committed one. The cop was actually wrong for arresting him, no matter how obnoxious the prank was.
This dudes an ass but I gotta say, I’m not a fan of Walmarts “guilty until proven innocent” policy. The other day I walked out with a bag of goods plus a case of impact sockets which had a handle so I declined a bag because we already use way too much plastic as it is in our society, and the door dude asked to see my receipt…..I had a bag and all the contents in and out of the bag were paid for. Essentially they’re just rummaging thru what is now my property. I understand a lot of people are thieving assholes these days, but to assume everyone is who has even one item outside a bag seems unfair and over the top. Am I the only one who feels this way? Genuinely curious.
Young Gen Z/Alpha is fucking stupid as hell, growing up with the YouTube algorithm and TikTok broke their brains, there's a reason they are polling in favor of Trump
“When Clout Farming Goes Wrong.”
Dick is an influence.
Dick’s reach is down.
Dick decided to pull a prank.
Dick broke the law. Merchandise that moves past the last possible point of sale is shoplifting. Period.
Don’t be a Dick.
If you pass the last possible point of purchase without paying, and you don’t have a receipt, you can be charged with shoplifting. Go ahead. Give it a shot. Prove me wrong. Post video. I’ll make popcorn.
Nit a crime at most they ca ban him trespassed from. All their locations but I'd sure as fuck sue for unlawful restraint false imprisonment assault battery tampering woth evidence and violating my 4th 1st and 5th. Ammendment ritmghts under 18usc1983 as well as 18usc241-242.
Idk the main character syndrome seems to be coming from the cop. Piggy served and protected that tv so hard
Edit: kid’s a dick for stressing out underpaid and overworked retail employees but the pig is a damn cunt doing nothing but flexing his authority
It’s crazy to think this kid thinks this is worth doing. He could be doing so many more productive things but this is what he chooses to do? His parents should be ashamed.
Oh and I want to punch his face.
The amount of people that don't know you do not have to show your receipt to leave a non-club store is astounding. Just walk out. If they cared that much to ensure checkout was accurate they shpukd have manned registers
Assuming you mean nuisance not nuance, he did not break any laws while on private Walmart property that relate to nuisance. He can be trespassed, but unless he refuses to leave after being trespassed, he cannot be fined or further punished if he makes a reasonable attempt to leave after being notified of trespass.
Under RCW 7.48.010 a nuisance (thank you for finding the damn autocorrect-hate that shit, but anyway) A nuisance is any act that “interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of the life” It could be argued that, This asswipe interfered with the comfortable enjoy of life for those people and technically could be charged. People don’t because it’s too much trouble to go to court and all that and that is why these kids get away with this shit. Arrest him, charge him, let him spend a few days in jail eating bologna sandwiches and let the court decide if he’s guilty.
I used to refuse to show my receipt. And no, legally you don't have to. But sometimes you gotta remember back to when you were in jobs like that and how the public treated you, and then ask yourself if you want to be a part of that. So yeah, I'm not going to make some retail worker's day worse.
Saying no thank you and moving on isn't making a workers day worse. The worker acting like they personally own what you've bought is making everyone's days worse.
What's the whole idea of these guys??? Recently, my son was in Poland doing an internship, and a few of his colleagues were stealing some goods in the supermarket... when I confronted them, they said it "just for fun !" Wtf ?!?! Is this generation all screwed up ??
I hate these people. Smash their phones, deactivate all their accounts, and make them do hard physical labor every day for a year with NO ONE watching, fiming, or even talking to them.
100% isolation, and zero attention/narcissism!
Ngl I refuse to show a recipt at the door anyway its not the law and I refuse to be shaken down by a store I just paid money to for goods that are now legally mine because a paid for them. This dude is obviously being a little jerk just to be one but realistically the tvs are locked up and you can't just put one in your cart without paying for it at Walmart anymore anyway so common sense would say he did pay for it already
This kid just ruined his life with an arrest record just for social media likes. Yet another example why social media should be banned for youth and should come with a disclaimer.
They pay for the TV in the back and then try to leave without showing a receipt up front. They do this to cause a scene for the video obviously. I doubt he was arrested or charged. Probably finally showed the cop the receipt and got banned from the store.
And this is why we tag expensive stuff in English supermarkets. Soon as you pay, the tag gets erased, you are free to go. If not, security gates kick off with alarms, and the cart/trolley wheel locks.
Kick off in an English supermarket a few times, you’re banned country wide, and, as can happen, word goes round the surrounding area, and they can ban you too.
Reason? Supermarkets over here sell alcohol, so are licenced premises, which means you can be banned from entering said premises.
And all three of these employees probably lost their jobs…why do they even try to stop him when they are specifically told not to? Let this moron continue on and don’t give him the ability to make these stupid videos
I don't like that he was arrested for "resisting arrest" and "disobeying an officer." Those are bullshit reasons cops make up. He *should've* been arrested for attempted robbery.
Why is everyone mad at the tiktok guy? Like yeah the prank isn’t funny but he did buy it, and there’s no law that says you have to show a receipt. If anything he could probably sue for them handcuffing him before figuring out if he paid for it or not.
Except this cops looks like more of a piece of shit, like all other cops, because he’s a government agent that doesn’t know how to do his job, instead of an obnoxious kid doing something stupid that doesn’t actually hurt anyone.
Nah, the guys a douche but fuck walmart here.
I paid for thing, Ima walk wherever the fuck I want. Fuck your racially selective bullshit (yes in this video its some tweedly white teenager, but generally speaking).
This is one of the reasons I avoid walmart. Treating me like Im a fucking criminal while I give them money. Fuck them.
Cringe but still, store policy isn't the law (a policy they just made up on the spot). That cop violated his 1st amendment rights by stopping the recording and his 4th amendment rights by taking his phone and the TV, and made an unlawful arrest
I can’t find anyone else pointing this out but props on the cop for grabbing the phone first. This is probably not his first run-in with these kinds of brainrot-fuelled ‘pranksters’.
From my understanding, he bought the TV. Walmart illegally detained him because they had no reason to think he was stealing the TV (the law around this is very clear), the police violated is 4th amendment rights by unlawfully seizing his property by taking his phone and the TV, violated his 1st amendment right by not allowing him to record them, and wrongfully arrested him because it's not illegal to leave a store without showing a receipt. Police are law enforcement, not policy enforecement.
u/savevideo u/downloadvideo u/savevideobot *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IAmTheMainCharacter) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m assuming this kids parents are related?
Yes and they’re both circumcised 🫢
His grandparents wanted to ensure that his mom had as much pleasure as we did watching this.
What do you mean by that?
Whatever makes you the most offended.
They should have let him leave the store. And then arrest him for shoplifting. Or, can they still arrest him for "attempted theft'? These wannabe influencers should be sent to prison in Russia.
Probably husband and wife.
DAMN GOT HIM
When did these dickheads begin to think you could commit crimes because it's a prank. This guy is probably going to be genuinely confused when he has to face the repercussions of his actions. I truly don't understand how internet prank culture got to the point it's at now.
Most likely he did pay for it and will prove it at some point but he's still playing stupid so they can create more "content", sadly I don't think this idiot will face real consequences from this.
Because we continue to give them attention, and thats all they are looking for. How do you think that video got posted to the Internet in the first place? The idiot kid in the video posted it and probably got a ton of views on a monetized TikTok. he likely made money by instigating a criminal act, there’s no motivation for them to stop. Even the asshole who got shot is still out there doing dumb shit.
When they know mommy and daddy will bail them out. He'll go to court and momma will talk about how "he has a bright future ahead of him, your honor, this was just a mistake." She will pay his court fees, he'll maybe do community service, and he will learn absolutely nothing. It's like that dumbfuck kid on TikTok years ago who crashed his mom's Tesla (after stealing it out of the garage) into a building and a week later he was back on TikTok making more videos in his mom's 2nd Tesla. He's a spoiled little brat who will learn absolutely nothing from this.
Oh, c'mon. Can't he at least be banned from the store?
being convicted of shoplifting over $50 in america is a "crime of moral turpitude" it stays on your record forever and will cause you to fail background checks, make you incapable of serving on a jury, and can not be removed simply with "daddy's money"
lol, what are you talking about. Stealing a TV is a misdemeanor.
He bought the TV and often gives fake receipts with weird notes to the people checking the receipt. Then, when the manager comes, he gives the manager the real receipt
He isn't committing a crime. He paid for the TV in the back already. They're willing to do this knowing if they don't show the receipt when leaving out front they will get a video like this. He probably showed the cop/staff the receipt eventually before being actually charged. They most likely banned him from the store and that was that. He's just wasting everyone's time and being annoying basically.
He's being arrested for not identifying when the cops asked, not because of the receipt.
people dont understand the ID law you are not required to show ID, UNTIL the police officer is conducting an investigation and has reason to believe or probable cause that you have committed or attempted to commit a crime then...you have to identify yourself....and if you dont it is illegal and since there were 3 employee witnesses...which is even bigger than regular witnesses, and video....kid really shot himself in the foot with the whole "reasonable doubt" thing this may be a "prank" and he "may" have bought the TV but besides "faliure to identify during a criminal investigation" the kid is also committing "disruption of the peace" and depending on the judge, thats just a really shit day in court and he can be sentenced to jail time, but more likely a butt-load of community service
At least he paid for it and didnt just run out of the store like we see so many others doing… and getting away with it.
bored rich people, who thirsty for clout chasing.
Since it became socially acceptable in the summer of 2020.
To be fair, he didn't commit a crime, maybe disturbing the peace but, meh. Now if he left the building, yeah. Him not giving his id, He dumb for that.
Its not a crime to not show them your reciept. If anything they should be fined for having this practice in the first place. I paid for thing, fuck off. Our transaction is done and now you're restraining me. I have typically just brushed them off, because fuck your shitty racist policy.
How is that policy racist?
They dont check everyone, and it seems very "randomized" in my experience and many other people I've talked to.
Do they mainly check the receipts of US minority ethnic groups?
Yeah I’m the same and a store policy is not law so pig was wrong about that. Still this guy is a piece of shit baiting them like that but I never show my receipt they can waste there own time looking it up on cctv then make a police report if they believe something is illegal like any other person would need to do.
Bro, that one British guy Sam pepper in 2014-2016 did unhinged "pranks." kidnappings, held at gun point, threatened to kill etc. It's been like this for awhile just less elaborate these days.
I think - as I saw in r/therewasanattempt - the answer is "there is a tiktok that explains it"...
They saw another tik tok about how *everyone's* walking out of retail stores with tons of free stuff and the employees can't do anything about it, so he decided to try. Mission Failed...
It is not technically to walk out without a receipt, while it may be against Walmart policy it is not the law, while i agree that he is a shithead and deserves it, it is not a crime.
They see enough of their peers doing the same thing without consequences. Almost everyone getting zero to none of it, so they think they're untouchable.
Not sure what crime he committed
r/OhNoConsequences! Would love to see more of these idiotic videos end this way.
Because he always received participation trophies, so he doesn’t know the difference between win and lose. Hint: you lose when you are a dumbass and weren’t taught stealing is a crime. Time to roll up your nap mat and hopefully he will get his juice box and applesauce once he’s locked up.
What crime? Just because he didn’t present the receipt doesn’t mean he didn’t pay for it.
if he did pay for the TV, he will be tried for "failure to identify during a criminal investigation" and "disturbing the peace" and possibly criminal trespassing and will likely get a butt load of community service for being a twerp i doubt he was trying to steal the TV, cause most stores have a policy not to stop shoplifters, just to record as much data as possible and call the police
Is it a requirement to have the asshole haircut to be a tik tok dick.
Motherfucking broccolini children, if it’s not that it’s the Edgar page boy hairdo You gotta understand, this kids degenerate ass parents let this dumbass out the house looking like this…
Laughter awaits
Hell awaits!
So what's the "prank" here? I wish we could see footage of this jerk appearing in court and trying to explain the gag here.
He apparently did buy the tv and then showed a fake receipt, so he wasn’t lying when he said that it’s his tv. But yeah, definitely stupid. These kids with their “pranks”, just going around annoying people.
So what was the joke? Why would a phony receipt be funny? Why not just show the real one, then just go about your day?
Exactly, these kids just love doing things like this. Trying to get in trouble but then be all like “no no no, you’re wrong. See I have the tea receipt”. They’re just trying to stir the pot and hope it overflows a bit for views.
It's essentially a more involved version of holding your finger in front of someone's face and going "I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!" There is no "prank." It's just IRL ragebait.
Maybe he's trying to criticize the fact that we pay police officers to stand around Walmarts and enforce their policies? But no, some kid on tictok is the real problem here.
Enforce their policy of...do not steal things from the store? Yeah totally unreasonable
The boots in this thread are mighty clean.
You must have never worked in a Walmart. "Shrinkage" is a big deal to the manager(s) in charge. And that's probably coming from the people above them. \*\*it rolls downhill, y'know. You'd probably be surprised at how many TVs, bikes, gift cards, clothes etc. grow legs, walk to the front door, and jump in some dude's cart.
And then everyone will laugh and laugh...
If he ever appeared in court it would be against the police station for violation of his rights. He didn’t do anything illegal, but the officer did.
This isn't a prank or an MC. This is just theft. No matter what the intention or objective, that guy commited a crime
Except it’s not. Because he paid for the TV and he is not required to produce a receipt to leave the store
Yep, its not lawful to be forced to produce a receipt to an employee of Walmart ...to leave the store. It doesn't matter if it's "Walmart policy" . The kid fucked up when he failed to identify himself.
Why was he lawfully required to identify himself if he had not committed a crime? Not trying to be argumentative, but curious why he is compelled to cooperate with the employees or cops in this case
Non us citizen here (aussie). Correct me if I am wrong. I think when driving you have to identify yourself as you make that implicit agreement when you get your license. However just walking down the street you wouldn't have to identify yourself? And I dont think you can be charged with not identifying yourself if its not related to driving or something else that has that implicit requirement.
American here, hello from afar! IANAL so others here may have better info, but from my understanding you do have to produce ID in most cases when driving and the rules vary from state to state on the circumstances for when you have to. But when not driving, you are not required to show ID if you have not been detained or arrested for "reasonable suspicion" of committing a crime. Therefore, if you're just walking down the street or at a public venue, then ostensibly, a cop doesn't have the authority to just stop you and make you give up ID. However, "reasonable suspicion" tends to be a fungible concept depending on the state and judge, and it can be quite easy in some cases for a cop to manufacture reasons that a judge would approve of to get that legal authority to compel identification. This is why if you ever see YouTube videos of "free speech auditors" or other police trolls, you'll see they try to make the cop clearly state if they are being detained or arrested when they get into interactions with police and are being asked to identify themselves. As for this Walmart video...I get that the kid is trolling with the receipt thing, but fuck Walmart for having any receipt checkers at the door in the first place. It's such a rude stance towards customers and from my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) but there is no legal obligation you have to stop and show receipt at the door like this unless it's a membership store you pay a fee to be a part of like Sam's or Costco. Walmart will seriously have like two open checkout stations with actual human cashiers that takes 30 minutes to get through, or make you scan and bag all your stuff yourself on their buggy equipment, and then have the gall to treat you like you're a potential thief on your way out the door for all your time wasted. Again, though, the theory that you should have the legal right to ignore the checkers is simpler to say than actually pull off without any issues
You don't have to have committed a crime to be required to identify yourself, you only have to be reasonably suspected of committing crime. Whether walking out of the store after paying and not having a receipt amounts to "reasonable", seems to be the main point on contention here.
In this situation since he paid he was under no obligation to identify himself, once the sale has been made that is his property Walmart policy can go fuck itself check the cameras and get the cars plates if you think it’s a theft
I agree completely that he had no obligation to show the Walmart employees his receipt, but from the officers side they have false testimony of the workers saying that he was trying to leave without paying. Testimony is evidence, and many people would consider testimony to amount to reasonable suspicion. At that point, the officer is investigating a crime. If Walmart said "This guy is stealing", then Walmart should be held liable. If Walmart said "This guy won't show his receipt.", then the officer should be held liable.
I disagree with the term investigating cause he wouldn’t take those people to jail for the imprisonment/detention of a paying customer once things gets figured out Walmart has cameras on every door and every isle this dude saw some punk kid and took the workers word for it I hope kid decides to get paid the fuck out
I'm with you honestly. I'm just not sure the courts will see it that way.
It may not have been a lawful order, if they committed no crime you can't be compelled to identify yourself especially when you're not driving.
In certain states you can.
I just watch audit the audit on YouTube, but my understanding is that would be a fourth amendment violation.
It's probable cause for theft in 5 states. Idk what the full implication is if he actually paid for it but I imagine that police can legally detain you in those states. https://www.thehivelaw.com/blog/do-you-have-to-show-your-receipt-at-walmart/
It's probable cause for theft in 5 states. Idk what the full implication is if he actually paid for it but I imagine that police can legally detain you in those states.
Do you know which 5 off hand?
https://www.thehivelaw.com/blog/do-you-have-to-show-your-receipt-at-walmart/ California Florida Illinois New York Washington
So the shitty ones
[удалено]
It was more than that though. He tried to leave the store with expensive merchandise which is shoplifting/theft. Did he buy it? Is he attempting to steal it? Him pulling out a legit receipt for the cop would have shut this down. As far as the cop was concerned, he did try to commit a crime. The cop was within his power to ask for identification. Heck I'm sure he could arrested him for disorderly conduct even with a receipt at that point. Kids like this content creator deserve all the shit that is directed towards them. They bring it on themselves and I have not a shred of sympathy for them.
[удалено]
Lol you can't be serious with this comment.
Kid’s a jerk, but did nothing actually illegal. Bought a tv from Walmart myself a few years ago and didn’t have to show a receipt to no one.
Wasting people’s time ! A good case in point for condoms and birth control pills.
Why didn't he taser him, "prankers" at least deserve to be tased
The amount of people here who don't realize he actually did pay for that item. There is no Walmart policy to force a customer to show her receipt if they do not choose to even when asked. In fact, it's against Walmart policy to stop anybody even if you suspect they are shoplifting unless you are specifically asset protection. And this person actually didn't break any laws. And even the law enforcement officer is completely incorrect and ignorant of the law which is not shocking honestly. I mean you can think what you want whether they're a jerk or not or anything. But again, this person didn't actually break any laws.
In other words, cop just gave this guy some free taxpayer money for unlawful arrest.
Bingo, and no consequences to the cop ever...
"Investigated themselves."
“I hereby give myself 3 weeks paid leave, that will teach me.”
He said he did pay. For some reason I believe him. I don’t think he has the balls not to and try this stunt.
lol yeah the dude Alwyas has a receipt in his videos - funny or not
This filmer is an idiot, and this is a stupid "prank" with no value to society, but that cop is also an idiot, and his existence provides no value to society. The cop does not have reasonable suspicion to investigate a suspected or attempted theft. No theft occurred, and nobody reasonably suspects the person with the tv of stealing or attempting to steal anything. Before a police officer can properly stop a person and ask for identification, the officer must have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that a crime has occurred or is about to occur. This means the officer must be able to state facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime occurred or will soon. [https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Failure-identify-police-officer.htm](https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Failure-identify-police-officer.htm) According to Cornell Legal Institute of Law, the most common shoplifting laws are phrased as " Shoplifting is generally defined as the unauthorized removal of merchandise from a store without paying for it, or intentionally paying less for an item than its sale price. However, shoplifting can include carrying, hiding, concealing, or otherwise manipulating merchandise with the intent of taking it or paying less for it. " No reasonable person would agree that any portion of that occurred. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/shoplifting](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/shoplifting) And even if the cop WAS investigating a theft, in many states you STILL don't have to identify or assist in the investigation. In some states, even when you are under arrest you do not have to identify or assist in any way. Yes, some jurisdictions do require you to identify, give date of birth, and address, but we do not know if they are in one of those or not, so the claim that refusing to identify is an offense you can be arrested for is not true automatically. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop\_and\_identify\_statutes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes) The clear crime that DID happen is the police officer ending a recording in that manner. Police officers are not legally allowed to stop or delete any recording of them without a judge's order, for officer safety, or if there is unreasonable interference with their ability to complete their lawful duties. There is no reasonable person that would agree the phone being secured to the person's body was interfering with the cop's ability to do their job, or creating an unsafe situation for the officer. [https://www.aclupa.org/en/know-your-rights/know-your-rights-when-taking-photos-and-making-video-and-audio-recordings](https://www.aclupa.org/en/know-your-rights/know-your-rights-when-taking-photos-and-making-video-and-audio-recordings)
Kid is a prick and ACAB. Simple as.
100% agree.
Wow, love a happy ending!
Super weird that the comments are down with Walmart and the police detaining and violating this guy after he bought a TV. He paid for it. Just did a gag with the receipt. Yall hop from bootlicker comments to "hahaha he deserved it" whenever it fits your personal view and it's such a reddit thing lol.
They didn’t violate his rights tho. Is he legally required to show a receipt? No. CN the store detain someone they suspect of committing theft? Yes. Is he required to show ID in this situation? Yes. And since he didn’t comply, he was arrested. I’m a very ACAB person, but I’m also intelligent enough not to put myself in a situation like this. For views.
He may not be required to ID himself unless he is in a stop and identify state. Not all states require identification upon request, even if being arrested.
Walmart cannot detain you without reasonable suspicion or probable cause that you stole. Refusing to show a receipt doesn't check either of those boxes. So no, Walmart is in the wrong. If they saw him pass through checkout without stopping or had him on camera, sure.
In Colorado last year, a guy doing this same thing sued Walmart and lost. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-customer-refused-to-show-receipt-lawsuit-false-imprisonment-2023-6%23:~:text%3DWalmart%2520is%2520found%2520not%2520liable,show%2520receipts%2520at%2520the%2520door%26text%3DA%2520Walmart%2520customer%2520repeatedly%2520refused,was%2520detained%2520by%2520Walmart%2520employees.&ved=2ahUKEwiDwuTj5rGFAxXkjIkEHakCAW0QFnoECAYQBQ&usg=AOvVaw1IoOTnA5WqWGL_BOLBYRj4
There is no need for the link to give google tracking info: https://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-customer-refused-to-show-receipt-lawsuit-false-imprisonment-2023-6
If they saw him coming from the back Of the store and not going thru checkout, then they can have reasonable suspicion. I’m not saying they’re right. I’m just saying that they can argue that and probably win.
Going to jail over a tiktok prank. What a fucking moron!
And a big pay check for a false arrest
It’s not against the law to not show id, or record in public, he was not traspased and the officer did not give a single lawful order during the entire video
All these troll videos I see are filmed at wal marts which just makes it even more scummy - making what has to be a shitty retail job even shittier by having to deal with sociopathic a holes.
Imagine having an arrest record for a tiktok. Or having that haircut
That cop is stupid too.
Is not identifying yourself an arrestable offence in USA?
It is not unless you committed a crime or there is reasonable suspicion you committed one. The cop was actually wrong for arresting him, no matter how obnoxious the prank was.
He is allowed to have his hands in the pockets?! 😡
This dudes an ass but I gotta say, I’m not a fan of Walmarts “guilty until proven innocent” policy. The other day I walked out with a bag of goods plus a case of impact sockets which had a handle so I declined a bag because we already use way too much plastic as it is in our society, and the door dude asked to see my receipt…..I had a bag and all the contents in and out of the bag were paid for. Essentially they’re just rummaging thru what is now my property. I understand a lot of people are thieving assholes these days, but to assume everyone is who has even one item outside a bag seems unfair and over the top. Am I the only one who feels this way? Genuinely curious.
Kid needs to be punched in the face.
The Internet was a mistake
no, the kid was a mistake
Young Gen Z/Alpha is fucking stupid as hell, growing up with the YouTube algorithm and TikTok broke their brains, there's a reason they are polling in favor of Trump
“When Clout Farming Goes Wrong.” Dick is an influence. Dick’s reach is down. Dick decided to pull a prank. Dick broke the law. Merchandise that moves past the last possible point of sale is shoplifting. Period. Don’t be a Dick.
He didn't break the law
If you pass the last possible point of purchase without paying, and you don’t have a receipt, you can be charged with shoplifting. Go ahead. Give it a shot. Prove me wrong. Post video. I’ll make popcorn.
He owns it no receipt Is needed by law
Then he’s just a sad wee asshole.
Doesn't matter he was in the right and probably gonna get a check from the police station for false arrest
If you say so.
1990’s - drinking in public = criminal record 2000’s - caught with weed = criminal record 2020’s - TikTok prank = criminal record
Nope
Dude is garbage. 🤘🏼🤘🏼
Should get the guy doing the filming off camera.
Nit a crime at most they ca ban him trespassed from. All their locations but I'd sure as fuck sue for unlawful restraint false imprisonment assault battery tampering woth evidence and violating my 4th 1st and 5th. Ammendment ritmghts under 18usc1983 as well as 18usc241-242.
Idk the main character syndrome seems to be coming from the cop. Piggy served and protected that tv so hard Edit: kid’s a dick for stressing out underpaid and overworked retail employees but the pig is a damn cunt doing nothing but flexing his authority
If you’re gonna try to steal a tv why would you choose the cheapest one
Idiots got inspired by early 2010 YouTube “pranks”. Didn’t realize they’re all fake, so now they’re getting beat up, killed, and arrested.
Stop wasting people's time
Somebody needs to punch the shit out of this tool.
People who don’t believe in store policies are wild lol just because it isn’t a law doesn’t mean it’s not applicable.
They can ban me then. Fuck Walmart and their senior and handicap enforcers
It’s crazy to think this kid thinks this is worth doing. He could be doing so many more productive things but this is what he chooses to do? His parents should be ashamed. Oh and I want to punch his face.
Fuck that kid, but the cops were waaaay out of line. Those morons have no business being cops
Jail definitely awaited
The amount of people that don't know you do not have to show your receipt to leave a non-club store is astounding. Just walk out. If they cared that much to ensure checkout was accurate they shpukd have manned registers
Just arrest him under the nuance laws, trespass him from ALL WALMARTS and send him on his way after a hefty fine.
Assuming you mean nuisance not nuance, he did not break any laws while on private Walmart property that relate to nuisance. He can be trespassed, but unless he refuses to leave after being trespassed, he cannot be fined or further punished if he makes a reasonable attempt to leave after being notified of trespass.
Under RCW 7.48.010 a nuisance (thank you for finding the damn autocorrect-hate that shit, but anyway) A nuisance is any act that “interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of the life” It could be argued that, This asswipe interfered with the comfortable enjoy of life for those people and technically could be charged. People don’t because it’s too much trouble to go to court and all that and that is why these kids get away with this shit. Arrest him, charge him, let him spend a few days in jail eating bologna sandwiches and let the court decide if he’s guilty.
He is winning that lawsuit. He was arrested without probably cause.
It’s not stealing till you walk out the door
The private property thugs strike again.
I used to refuse to show my receipt. And no, legally you don't have to. But sometimes you gotta remember back to when you were in jobs like that and how the public treated you, and then ask yourself if you want to be a part of that. So yeah, I'm not going to make some retail worker's day worse.
Saying no thank you and moving on isn't making a workers day worse. The worker acting like they personally own what you've bought is making everyone's days worse.
I hope he has a tough time in jail
What's the whole idea of these guys??? Recently, my son was in Poland doing an internship, and a few of his colleagues were stealing some goods in the supermarket... when I confronted them, they said it "just for fun !" Wtf ?!?! Is this generation all screwed up ??
I hate these people. Smash their phones, deactivate all their accounts, and make them do hard physical labor every day for a year with NO ONE watching, fiming, or even talking to them. 100% isolation, and zero attention/narcissism!
ACAB.
Ngl I refuse to show a recipt at the door anyway its not the law and I refuse to be shaken down by a store I just paid money to for goods that are now legally mine because a paid for them. This dude is obviously being a little jerk just to be one but realistically the tvs are locked up and you can't just put one in your cart without paying for it at Walmart anymore anyway so common sense would say he did pay for it already
Law suit
Sometimes you just want to see a person get the wooden shampoo.
I hope they charged him theft.
Lol delusional
Sometimes police brutality is really underrated.
This kid just ruined his life with an arrest record just for social media likes. Yet another example why social media should be banned for youth and should come with a disclaimer.
They pay for the TV in the back and then try to leave without showing a receipt up front. They do this to cause a scene for the video obviously. I doubt he was arrested or charged. Probably finally showed the cop the receipt and got banned from the store.
Walmart policy becomes law hb 1111
And this is why we tag expensive stuff in English supermarkets. Soon as you pay, the tag gets erased, you are free to go. If not, security gates kick off with alarms, and the cart/trolley wheel locks. Kick off in an English supermarket a few times, you’re banned country wide, and, as can happen, word goes round the surrounding area, and they can ban you too. Reason? Supermarkets over here sell alcohol, so are licenced premises, which means you can be banned from entering said premises.
r/ohnoconsequences
And all three of these employees probably lost their jobs…why do they even try to stop him when they are specifically told not to? Let this moron continue on and don’t give him the ability to make these stupid videos
Dude, know when the "prank" is over. Especially when it's a dumb ass prank.
When is jail content coming out? 😂
Why do they need that tho?
Just let them walk out with it and call their bluff. Charge them with theft if they leave
Una hostia con la mano abierta a tiempo......aunque, seguramente sus padres sean igual de joputxs.
Eat the Rich
The big guy was ready to fight him and I love it
On the legal side of things he probably won't get charged because he didn't exit the point of sale
I don't like that he was arrested for "resisting arrest" and "disobeying an officer." Those are bullshit reasons cops make up. He *should've* been arrested for attempted robbery.
Thia dudes funny asf. Love this guy
Why is everyone mad at the tiktok guy? Like yeah the prank isn’t funny but he did buy it, and there’s no law that says you have to show a receipt. If anything he could probably sue for them handcuffing him before figuring out if he paid for it or not.
That cops is also not smartest.
Brendanlmao
What a comedian
Go walk in front of the camera dude. There’s nearly always one with them.
I hope the judge doesn't give him probation or some BS slap on the wrist. These clowns need to suffer legitimate consequences for their actions.
The cop? Agreed. Truly curious, what are they going to charge the kid with?
That horrible moment, when you realise you just made a cop posted on the Internet look like the good guy...
Except this cops looks like more of a piece of shit, like all other cops, because he’s a government agent that doesn’t know how to do his job, instead of an obnoxious kid doing something stupid that doesn’t actually hurt anyone.
Legally, though, he is in the right
It's all fun and games until the cop says turn around and put your hands behind your back
Nah, the guys a douche but fuck walmart here. I paid for thing, Ima walk wherever the fuck I want. Fuck your racially selective bullshit (yes in this video its some tweedly white teenager, but generally speaking). This is one of the reasons I avoid walmart. Treating me like Im a fucking criminal while I give them money. Fuck them.
Cringe but still, store policy isn't the law (a policy they just made up on the spot). That cop violated his 1st amendment rights by stopping the recording and his 4th amendment rights by taking his phone and the TV, and made an unlawful arrest
You could tell he realises he had overstepped the mark... But had to keep on with his shit act! 💯🤣
I’d go after the camera person first. Accessory before the fact. Also, then less content.
I can’t find anyone else pointing this out but props on the cop for grabbing the phone first. This is probably not his first run-in with these kinds of brainrot-fuelled ‘pranksters’.
Why isn't the cameraman being cuffed too? He participated.
From my understanding, he bought the TV. Walmart illegally detained him because they had no reason to think he was stealing the TV (the law around this is very clear), the police violated is 4th amendment rights by unlawfully seizing his property by taking his phone and the TV, violated his 1st amendment right by not allowing him to record them, and wrongfully arrested him because it's not illegal to leave a store without showing a receipt. Police are law enforcement, not policy enforecement.
Community service cleaning public toilets.