<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ Apr 17 2008, 02:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheKidHypno @ Apr 17 2008, 01:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ Apr 17 2008, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is getting blown wayy outta proportion. So the kid with 0 athletic ability and coordination fell of his seat when a security guard grabbed him and some douche screams "I got it on video!!" like it's a murder scene. It's really not a big deal..</div> lol....that was me yelling. i was hyped up. it was during the nets ralley. </div> lmao my bad about the name callin then. I love how you go from screaming to all silent when the security guard came near you hahahha </div> Well as it is ilgeal to video record on NJSEA Property I wounder why. Also security Officer not guard.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What you also forget is that holding someone unlawfully is for police, not Security Private security is a whole diffrent ball game and as it is private property the izod center that is</div> Nope... I can't lock you up in my closet just because I'm not a cop. </div> Oh great one please tell me what i did wrong and what security agency/ dept are you employed by, better yet can i see your security badge please? Private security is governed by less laws and policys then Law Enforcment is. </div> LOL... security is governed by the same laws as ordinary citizens. Hence you can't hold someone against their will. Kidnapping - It has come to mean any illegal capture or detention of a person or people against their will, regardless of age and sometimes using restraints. In criminal law, kidnapping is the taking away or asportation of a person against the person's will, usually to hold the person in false imprisonment, a confinement without legal authority. Now a security GUARD can do what amounts to a citizens arrest, but there has to actually be a law broken. A person who makes a citizen's arrest could risk exposing himself to possible lawsuits or criminal charges (such as charges of impersonating police, false imprisonment, kidnapping, or wrongful arrest) if the wrong person is apprehended or a suspect's civil rights are violated.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What you also forget is that holding someone unlawfully is for police, not Security Private security is a whole diffrent ball game and as it is private property the izod center that is</div> Nope... I can't lock you up in my closet just because I'm not a cop. </div> Oh great one please tell me what i did wrong and what security agency/ dept are you employed by, better yet can i see your security badge please? Private security is governed by less laws and policys then Law Enforcment is. </div> LOL... security is governed by the same laws as ordinary citizens. Hence you can't hold someone against their will. Kidnapping - It has come to mean any illegal capture or detention of a person or people against their will, regardless of age and sometimes using restraints. In criminal law, kidnapping is the taking away or asportation of a person against the person's will, usually to hold the person in false imprisonment, a confinement without legal authority. Now a security GUARD can do what amounts to a citizens arrest, but there has to actually be a law broken. A person who makes a citizen's arrest could risk exposing himself to possible lawsuits or criminal charges (such as charges of impersonating police, false imprisonment, kidnapping, or wrongful arrest) if the wrong person is apprehended or a suspect's civil rights are violated. </div> Why do you think it is when you go to a Giants or Yankees game the security officer searches the bag and the police officer just watches? Security personnel are not police officers, unless they are security police, but are often identified as such due to similar uniforms and behaviors, especially on private property. Security personnel in the U.S. derive their powers not from the state, as public police officers do, but from a contractual arrangement that give them 'Agent of the Owner' powers. This includes a nearly unlimited power to question with the absence of probable cause requirements that frequently dog public law enforcement officers, provided that the security officer does not tread on the rights and liberties of others as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. This does not come without checks, however, as private security personnel do not enjoy the benefit of civil protection, as public law enforcement officers do, and can be sued directly for false arrests and illegal actions if they commit such acts. Some jurisdictions do commission or deputize security officers and give them limited additional powers, particularly when employed in protecting public property such as mass transit stations. This is a special case that is often unique to a particular jurisdiction or locale. Additionally, security officers may also be called upon to act as an agent of law enforcement if a police officer, sheriff's deputy, etc. is in immediate need of help and has no available backup. Some security officers do reserve police powers and are typically employed directly by governmental agencies. Typically, these are sworn law enforcement personnel whose duties primarily involve the security of a government installation, and are also a special case. Other local and state governments occasionally enter into special contracts with security agencies to provide patrol services in public areas. These personnel are sometimes referred to as "private police officers." Sometimes police officers work as security personnel while not on duty. This is usually done for extra income, and work is particularly done in hazardous jobs such as bodyguard work and bouncers outside nightclubs. In some countries, including the United Kingdom, it is illegal for police officers to take private security work. Except in these special cases, security personnel who misrepresent themselves as police officers are committing a crime. However, security personnel by their very nature often work in cooperation with police officials. Police are called in when a situation warrants a higher degree of authority to act upon reported observations that could not be directly acted upon safely by the security personnel.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What you also forget is that holding someone unlawfully is for police, not Security Private security is a whole diffrent ball game and as it is private property the izod center that is</div> Nope... I can't lock you up in my closet just because I'm not a cop. </div> Oh great one please tell me what i did wrong and what security agency/ dept are you employed by, better yet can i see your security badge please? Private security is governed by less laws and policys then Law Enforcment is. </div> LOL... security is governed by the same laws as ordinary citizens. Hence you can't hold someone against their will. Kidnapping - It has come to mean any illegal capture or detention of a person or people against their will, regardless of age and sometimes using restraints. In criminal law, kidnapping is the taking away or asportation of a person against the person's will, usually to hold the person in false imprisonment, a confinement without legal authority. Now a security GUARD can do what amounts to a citizens arrest, but there has to actually be a law broken. A person who makes a citizen's arrest could risk exposing himself to possible lawsuits or criminal charges (such as charges of impersonating police, false imprisonment, kidnapping, or wrongful arrest) if the wrong person is apprehended or a suspect's civil rights are violated. </div> Security personnel are not police officers, unless they are security police, but are often identified as such due to similar uniforms and behaviors, especially on private property. Security personnel in the U.S. derive their powers not from the state, as public police officers do, but from a contractual arrangement that give them 'Agent of the Owner' powers. This includes a nearly unlimited power to question with the absence of probable cause requirements that frequently dog public law enforcement officers, provided that the security officer does not tread on the rights and liberties of others as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. This does not come without checks, however, as private security personnel do not enjoy the benefit of civil protection, as public law enforcement officers do, and can be sued directly for false arrests and illegal actions if they commit such acts. Some jurisdictions do commission or deputize security officers and give them limited additional powers, particularly when employed in protecting public property such as mass transit stations. This is a special case that is often unique to a particular jurisdiction or locale. Additionally, security officers may also be called upon to act as an agent of law enforcement if a police officer, sheriff's deputy, etc. is in immediate need of help and has no available backup. Some security officers do reserve police powers and are typically employed directly by governmental agencies. Typically, these are sworn law enforcement personnel whose duties primarily involve the security of a government installation, and are also a special case. Other local and state governments occasionally enter into special contracts with security agencies to provide patrol services in public areas. These personnel are sometimes referred to as "private police officers." Sometimes police officers work as security personnel while not on duty. This is usually done for extra income, and work is particularly done in hazardous jobs such as bodyguard work and bouncers outside nightclubs. In some countries, including the United Kingdom, it is illegal for police officers to take private security work. Except in these special cases, security personnel who misrepresent themselves as police officers are committing a crime. However, security personnel by their very nature often work in cooperation with police officials. Police are called in when a situation warrants a higher degree of authority to act upon reported observations that could not be directly acted upon safely by the security personnel. </div> What's your point“? All of that says exactly what I just told you. Ordinary security guards are not cops with no more power of the law than ordinary citizens.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (soul driver @ Apr 17 2008, 06:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>And, knowing many cops personally, some may just look at a "case" like this and laugh and let the kid go and tell the Izod folks, "thanks for wasting my time" . Jigga made some good points.</div> U talk to jakes?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What you also forget is that holding someone unlawfully is for police, not Security Private security is a whole diffrent ball game and as it is private property the izod center that is</div> Nope... I can't lock you up in my closet just because I'm not a cop. </div> Oh great one please tell me what i did wrong and what security agency/ dept are you employed by, better yet can i see your security badge please? Private security is governed by less laws and policys then Law Enforcment is. </div> LOL... security is governed by the same laws as ordinary citizens. Hence you can't hold someone against their will. Kidnapping - It has come to mean any illegal capture or detention of a person or people against their will, regardless of age and sometimes using restraints. In criminal law, kidnapping is the taking away or asportation of a person against the person's will, usually to hold the person in false imprisonment, a confinement without legal authority. Now a security GUARD can do what amounts to a citizens arrest, but there has to actually be a law broken. A person who makes a citizen's arrest could risk exposing himself to possible lawsuits or criminal charges (such as charges of impersonating police, false imprisonment, kidnapping, or wrongful arrest) if the wrong person is apprehended or a suspect's civil rights are violated. </div> Security personnel are not police officers, unless they are security police, but are often identified as such due to similar uniforms and behaviors, especially on private property. Security personnel in the U.S. derive their powers not from the state, as public police officers do, but from a contractual arrangement that give them 'Agent of the Owner' powers. This includes a nearly unlimited power to question with the absence of probable cause requirements that frequently dog public law enforcement officers, provided that the security officer does not tread on the rights and liberties of others as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. This does not come without checks, however, as private security personnel do not enjoy the benefit of civil protection, as public law enforcement officers do, and can be sued directly for false arrests and illegal actions if they commit such acts. Some jurisdictions do commission or deputize security officers and give them limited additional powers, particularly when employed in protecting public property such as mass transit stations. This is a special case that is often unique to a particular jurisdiction or locale. Additionally, security officers may also be called upon to act as an agent of law enforcement if a police officer, sheriff's deputy, etc. is in immediate need of help and has no available backup. Some security officers do reserve police powers and are typically employed directly by governmental agencies. Typically, these are sworn law enforcement personnel whose duties primarily involve the security of a government installation, and are also a special case. Other local and state governments occasionally enter into special contracts with security agencies to provide patrol services in public areas. These personnel are sometimes referred to as "private police officers." Sometimes police officers work as security personnel while not on duty. This is usually done for extra income, and work is particularly done in hazardous jobs such as bodyguard work and bouncers outside nightclubs. In some countries, including the United Kingdom, it is illegal for police officers to take private security work. Except in these special cases, security personnel who misrepresent themselves as police officers are committing a crime. However, security personnel by their very nature often work in cooperation with police officials. Police are called in when a situation warrants a higher degree of authority to act upon reported observations that could not be directly acted upon safely by the security personnel. </div> What's your point??? All of that says exactly what I just told you. Ordinary security guards are not cops with no more power of the law than ordinary citizens. </div> First off we are Security Officers, 2nd my point is that Private security is governed diffrently then law enforcment. Security goes on a smiluar set of rules, however the way they are efforced are diffrent in a big way. You will see some Security officers carrying cuffs.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Security personnel are not police officers, unless they are security police, but are often identified as such due to similar uniforms and behaviors, especially on private property. Security personnel in the U.S. derive their powers not from the state, as public police officers do, but from a contractual arrangement that give them 'Agent of the Owner' powers. This includes a nearly unlimited power to question with the absence of probable cause requirements that frequently dog public law enforcement officers, <u>provided that the security officer does not tread on the rights and liberties of others as guaranteed by the United States Constitution</u>. This does not come without checks, however, as private security personnel do not enjoy the benefit of civil protection, as public law enforcement officers do, <u>and can be sued directly for false arrests and illegal actions if they commit such acts</u>.</div> First off we are Security Officers, 2nd my point is that Private security is governed diffrently then law enforcment. Security goes on a smiluar set of rules, however the way they are efforced are diffrent in a big way. You will see some Security officers carrying cuffs. </div> Look at what you posted up there and I bolded. Security is governed by the same laws as ordinary citizens. Yes, police are more limited than security as far as questioning without probable cause, but that's it. JB, don't be an example of someone where a little knowledge is dangerous. You can learn from anyone. Just because you work in the security area it doesn't mean you know it all 100%. Everyone expects you to still learn. Now don't go detaining anyone <u>against their will</u> that hasn't actually broken a law! And I say security guard just to piss you off for the "Oh great one" sarcasm. I actually accomidated you and said security officer in an earlier post.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 17 2008, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Security personnel are not police officers, unless they are security police, but are often identified as such due to similar uniforms and behaviors, especially on private property. Security personnel in the U.S. derive their powers not from the state, as public police officers do, but from a contractual arrangement that give them 'Agent of the Owner' powers. This includes a nearly unlimited power to question with the absence of probable cause requirements that frequently dog public law enforcement officers, <u>provided that the security officer does not tread on the rights and liberties of others as guaranteed by the United States Constitution</u>. This does not come without checks, however, as private security personnel do not enjoy the benefit of civil protection, as public law enforcement officers do, <u>and can be sued directly for false arrests and illegal actions if they commit such acts</u>.</div> First off we are Security Officers, 2nd my point is that Private security is governed diffrently then law enforcment. Security goes on a smiluar set of rules, however the way they are efforced are diffrent in a big way. You will see some Security officers carrying cuffs. </div> Look at what you posted up there and I bolded. Security is governed by the same laws as ordinary citizens. Yes, police are more limited than security as far as questioning without probable cause, but that's it. JB, don't be an example of someone where a little knowledge is dangerous. You can learn from anyone. Just because you work in the security area it doesn't mean you know it all 100%. Everyone expects you to still learn. Now don't go detaining anyone <u>against their will</u> that hasn't actually broken a law! And I say security guard just to piss you off for the "Oh great one" sarcasm. I actually accomidated you and said security officer in an earlier post. </div> Oh, great one thanks for your great work i am being serouis.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Apr 17 2008, 01:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 07:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Main Event @ Apr 17 2008, 06:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right but in this case no crime was committed, so let the officers involve themselves with this as much as they want.</div> Here is the problem, in a case like this i would say that had that kid decided to bolt from the security officers, the state police would of been called and well the kid would be in a lot of hot water. We had one problem last year when a guest was being dumb and trying to get away from security and talking crap to security. Well the state police showed up, slamed the guys head into the ground the guy had a broken nose, and the State police took him away. </div> I'm not a lawyer, but I have been involved in a case where an adult put his hands on a minor and have worked in a field where the legal ramifications of restraint were discussed. When I was in high school, an adult had a physical confrontation with a friend. My friend, who was sixteen, was behaving like a immature brat and running his mouth and that led to some pushing, shoving and grabbing. There were no punches thrown and no one was remotely hurt, but the adult did get into trouble because he put his hands on a minor. In this case, the kid might have broken a rule, but he didn't break the law. To the best of my understanding, the security guard broke the law when he grabbed the minor. If the minor had decided to walk to the exit, I don't see how security could have stopped him since detaining someone against their will is against the law except that they would have used superior numbers to force him to go and most people don't know their rights and can't really afford to pursue action if their rights are violated. This is why women, especially minority women, are victimized so much by strip searches at airports. The truth is that you only get as much justice in this world as you can afford. </div> Sorry but the security officers in that broke no rules, when force becomes needed to break something up it is allowed. What you also forget is that holding someone unlawfully is for police, not Security Private security is a whole diffrent ball game and as it is private property the izod center that is, had the kid bolted State police would of been called and the kid would be in lockup, with a criminal record over something that dumb. It is always better to let Security take the report and handle it instead of a police dept, espically the NJSP. </div> First, simply bolting and going to the nearest exit are two different things. My understanding is that the police can't simply grab you. They have to have a reason to grab you and the kid hadn't broken any laws. He held up a sign. So, what would the police have charged him with in order to hold him. He wasn't fighting. If he simply said, "Okay, I'll leave" I don't see how he could be held without violating his rights.
After watching the video and working in Security myself (one which carries handcuffs) I will say the way the Guards handled the situation was a DISASTER. Anyone who does security must know, unless you never went through training, that you NEVER EVER lay your hands on a child or in this case a younger kid (13yrs old-15yrs old). You approach the individual and let them know that what they are doing is violating property policy and that if they do not conduct them selfs in a manner that follows said policy then they will be removed from the property. If they refuse to do so, will be done with physical force. Now because the video starts where the guards are removing the person with force, WE as video viewers ,CAN NOT and SHOULD NOT judge the guards based on the video evidence. Only those individuals (video maker) and eyewitnesses should be the only ones to past judgment on them. However if we are going to go on what the video poster said, which is that they were removed with force without verbal contact first, then these Officers/Guards/Ushers etc. should be reprimanded and/or terminated without question. Their is no Security Company that would say remove the child or younger person with force, unless under extremes (i.e. child has weapon, can injure others and self, child can and has put himself in extreme danger). For the aftermath part of it, where they took the individual and had him sign papers and such. This is normal security procedures. However in my personal opinion I believe it was excessive to ban the person and make them write an apology especially for this particular action. But thats just my opinion and the Izod security have every right to do as such. As far as this video holding any water in court is to be decided. If the individual was to sue they would need a lot more than this video to win any sort of case. They would need eyewitness accounts, the officers guidelines to assess that situation etc. etc. etc. So in conclusion the way they handled the situation was without a doubt wrong. Anyone who tries to justify the way the guards went about it, based on the eyewitness report of the poster, is delusional. And anyone who thinks as such, in the position of security, should seriously be coached on how to handle a situation like that. Because you can definitely find yourself at the end of the unemployment line if you handle a situation involving such people like this.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Apr 17 2008, 03:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Apr 17 2008, 01:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 07:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Main Event @ Apr 17 2008, 06:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right but in this case no crime was committed, so let the officers involve themselves with this as much as they want.</div> Here is the problem, in a case like this i would say that had that kid decided to bolt from the security officers, the state police would of been called and well the kid would be in a lot of hot water. We had one problem last year when a guest was being dumb and trying to get away from security and talking crap to security. Well the state police showed up, slamed the guys head into the ground the guy had a broken nose, and the State police took him away. </div> I'm not a lawyer, but I have been involved in a case where an adult put his hands on a minor and have worked in a field where the legal ramifications of restraint were discussed. When I was in high school, an adult had a physical confrontation with a friend. My friend, who was sixteen, was behaving like a immature brat and running his mouth and that led to some pushing, shoving and grabbing. There were no punches thrown and no one was remotely hurt, but the adult did get into trouble because he put his hands on a minor. In this case, the kid might have broken a rule, but he didn't break the law. To the best of my understanding, the security guard broke the law when he grabbed the minor. If the minor had decided to walk to the exit, I don't see how security could have stopped him since detaining someone against their will is against the law except that they would have used superior numbers to force him to go and most people don't know their rights and can't really afford to pursue action if their rights are violated. This is why women, especially minority women, are victimized so much by strip searches at airports. The truth is that you only get as much justice in this world as you can afford. </div> Sorry but the security officers in that broke no rules, when force becomes needed to break something up it is allowed. What you also forget is that holding someone unlawfully is for police, not Security Private security is a whole diffrent ball game and as it is private property the izod center that is, had the kid bolted State police would of been called and the kid would be in lockup, with a criminal record over something that dumb. It is always better to let Security take the report and handle it instead of a police dept, espically the NJSP. </div> First, simply bolting and going to the nearest exit are two different things. My understanding is that the police can't simply grab you. They have to have a reason to grab you and the kid hadn't broken any laws. He held up a sign. So, what would the police have charged him with in order to hold him. He wasn't fighting. If he simply said, "Okay, I'll leave" I don't see how he could be held without violating his rights. </div> Disordley
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PsychoNetsFan34 @ Apr 17 2008, 03:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>After watching the video and working in Security myself (one which carries handcuffs) I will say the way the Guards handled the situation was a DISASTER. Anyone who does security must know, unless you never went through training, that you NEVER EVER lay your hands on a child or in this case a younger kid (13yrs old-15yrs old). You approach the individual and let them know that what they are doing is violating property policy and that if they do not conduct them selfs in a manner that follows said policy then they will be removed from the property. If they refuse to do so, will be done with physical force. Now because the video starts where the guards are removing the person with force, WE as video viewers ,CAN NOT and SHOULD NOT judge the guards based on the video evidence. Only those individuals (video maker) and eyewitnesses should be the only ones to past judgment on them. However if we are going to go on what the video poster said, which is that they were removed with force without verbal contact first, then these Officers/Guards/Ushers etc. should be reprimanded and/or terminated without question. Their is no Security Company that would say remove the child or younger person with force, unless under extremes (i.e. child has weapon, can injure others and self, child can and has put himself in extreme danger). For the aftermath part of it, where they took the individual and had him sign papers and such. This is normal security procedures. However in my personal opinion I believe it was excessive to ban the person and make them write an apology especially for this particular action. But thats just my opinion and the Izod security have every right to do as such. As far as this video holding any water in court is to be decided. If the individual was to sue they would need a lot more than this video to win any sort of case. They would need eyewitness accounts, the officers guidelines to assess that situation etc. etc. etc. So in conclusion the way they handled the situation was without a doubt wrong. Anyone who tries to justify the way the guards went about it, based on the eyewitness report of the poster, is delusional. And anyone who thinks as such, in the position of security, should seriously be coached on how to handle a situation like that. Because you can definitely find yourself at the end of the unemployment line if you handle a situation involving such people like this.</div> I agree with you 100% of the way there, i know one thing when i went through my tranning i was told NEVER unless you must use anykind of Contact or force on anyone. That is the right way to handle this. As I said earlier had this happend where i work we would of asked the person to behave in the right way, and if they had not we would have taken it to the next level, as our policy is to try and advoid physcial contact as much as possible. I think what these security officers did was right, however they as was said handlded it in the wrong way. Maybe it's something with the nets policy i dont know, however it was not handled in the right way.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Apr 17 2008, 03:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Apr 17 2008, 01:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 07:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Main Event @ Apr 17 2008, 06:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right but in this case no crime was committed, so let the officers involve themselves with this as much as they want.</div> Here is the problem, in a case like this i would say that had that kid decided to bolt from the security officers, the state police would of been called and well the kid would be in a lot of hot water. We had one problem last year when a guest was being dumb and trying to get away from security and talking crap to security. Well the state police showed up, slamed the guys head into the ground the guy had a broken nose, and the State police took him away. </div> I'm not a lawyer, but I have been involved in a case where an adult put his hands on a minor and have worked in a field where the legal ramifications of restraint were discussed. When I was in high school, an adult had a physical confrontation with a friend. My friend, who was sixteen, was behaving like a immature brat and running his mouth and that led to some pushing, shoving and grabbing. There were no punches thrown and no one was remotely hurt, but the adult did get into trouble because he put his hands on a minor. In this case, the kid might have broken a rule, but he didn't break the law. To the best of my understanding, the security guard broke the law when he grabbed the minor. If the minor had decided to walk to the exit, I don't see how security could have stopped him since detaining someone against their will is against the law except that they would have used superior numbers to force him to go and most people don't know their rights and can't really afford to pursue action if their rights are violated. This is why women, especially minority women, are victimized so much by strip searches at airports. The truth is that you only get as much justice in this world as you can afford. </div> Sorry but the security officers in that broke no rules, when force becomes needed to break something up it is allowed. What you also forget is that holding someone unlawfully is for police, not Security Private security is a whole diffrent ball game and as it is private property the izod center that is, had the kid bolted State police would of been called and the kid would be in lockup, with a criminal record over something that dumb. It is always better to let Security take the report and handle it instead of a police dept, espically the NJSP. </div> First, simply bolting and going to the nearest exit are two different things. My understanding is that the police can't simply grab you. They have to have a reason to grab you and the kid hadn't broken any laws. He held up a sign. So, what would the police have charged him with in order to hold him. He wasn't fighting. If he simply said, "Okay, I'll leave" I don't see how he could be held without violating his rights. </div> Disordley </div> For holding up a sign? Can I get a disorderly for having 12 items in a 10 item or less line at the store? Please.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheKidHypno @ Apr 17 2008, 04:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>i recorded on my digital camera. cameras are allowed.</div> I know they are, however I still thought video taping was banned from NJSEA Property?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Apr 17 2008, 04:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 03:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Apr 17 2008, 03:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Apr 17 2008, 01:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 07:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Main Event @ Apr 17 2008, 06:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right but in this case no crime was committed, so let the officers involve themselves with this as much as they want.</div> Here is the problem, in a case like this i would say that had that kid decided to bolt from the security officers, the state police would of been called and well the kid would be in a lot of hot water. We had one problem last year when a guest was being dumb and trying to get away from security and talking crap to security. Well the state police showed up, slamed the guys head into the ground the guy had a broken nose, and the State police took him away. </div> I'm not a lawyer, but I have been involved in a case where an adult put his hands on a minor and have worked in a field where the legal ramifications of restraint were discussed. When I was in high school, an adult had a physical confrontation with a friend. My friend, who was sixteen, was behaving like a immature brat and running his mouth and that led to some pushing, shoving and grabbing. There were no punches thrown and no one was remotely hurt, but the adult did get into trouble because he put his hands on a minor. In this case, the kid might have broken a rule, but he didn't break the law. To the best of my understanding, the security guard broke the law when he grabbed the minor. If the minor had decided to walk to the exit, I don't see how security could have stopped him since detaining someone against their will is against the law except that they would have used superior numbers to force him to go and most people don't know their rights and can't really afford to pursue action if their rights are violated. This is why women, especially minority women, are victimized so much by strip searches at airports. The truth is that you only get as much justice in this world as you can afford. </div> Sorry but the security officers in that broke no rules, when force becomes needed to break something up it is allowed. What you also forget is that holding someone unlawfully is for police, not Security Private security is a whole diffrent ball game and as it is private property the izod center that is, had the kid bolted State police would of been called and the kid would be in lockup, with a criminal record over something that dumb. It is always better to let Security take the report and handle it instead of a police dept, espically the NJSP. </div> First, simply bolting and going to the nearest exit are two different things. My understanding is that the police can't simply grab you. They have to have a reason to grab you and the kid hadn't broken any laws. He held up a sign. So, what would the police have charged him with in order to hold him. He wasn't fighting. If he simply said, "Okay, I'll leave" I don't see how he could be held without violating his rights. </div> Disordley </div> For holding up a sign? Can I get a disorderly for having 12 items in a 10 item or less line at the store? Please. </div> It would be charged under disordley conduct (NJ2C:33-2) Improper behavior. A person is guilty of a petty disorderly persons offense, if with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Josh_Boone @ Apr 17 2008, 07:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Main Event @ Apr 17 2008, 06:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right but in this case no crime was committed, so let the officers involve themselves with this as much as they want.</div> Here is the problem, in a case like this i would say that had that kid decided to bolt from the security officers, the state police would of been called and well the kid would be in a lot of hot water. We had one problem last year when a guest was being dumb and trying to get away from security and talking crap to security. Well the state police showed up, slamed the guys head into the ground the guy had a broken nose, and the State police took him away. </div> No he wouldn't have. Running is not against the law. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bravo369 @ Apr 17 2008, 09:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>i'm surprised to hear people say he doesn't have a case. Security physically pulled him out of the aisle. What if he fell and cracked open his head because this security guard reacted physically instead of rationally. Would he still not have a case? The kid went with the guard freely and didn't resist so i don't think it's hard to imagine the kid would have sat down if the guard gave him a warning first. I also see absolutely nothing wrong with what the kid did so i don't know what the Nets would want him to apologize for. If he stood on the seat and held up a sign that said "RJ FOR MVP" would security have reacted the same way? Yes i agree that it is private property and nets can kick him out but there's a right way and a wrong way to do it and the guard physically pulling this kid down like that was definately the wrong way. I would want at least something to happen to the guard simply so that he knows he shouldn't be just grabbing anyone like that. If anything, the kid should accept the punishment but ask the nets and security guard for an apology for the assault committed by guard and then agree not to sue. Also, is the guy even a security guard or an usher? if he's only an usher then it's even worse and i think the kid has even more grounds to sue.</div> And there it is. That's why there's no case.
Hey Josh Boone I couldnt answer your message for some reason cause it wasnt allowing me to. But to answer it I work for CRT a Security Company in a Office Complex off of Rt 3, near the Izod Center actually.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PsychoNetsFan34 @ Apr 17 2008, 05:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hey Josh Boone I couldnt answer your message for some reason cause it wasnt allowing me to. But to answer it I work for CRT a Security Company in a Office Complex off of Rt 3, near the Izod Center actually.</div> Now question, what kind of tranning did you have to go through to carry the cuffs? Reason i ask is cause where I am we do have the tranning class however it is very very hard from what i hear, i also understand that our dept has used them like twice in 10 years.
