No Charges For Woman Who Bumped 100-Year-Old Walmart Greeter

Last week, we told you about the woman in Milwaukee who was arrested after an argument with a 100-year-old Walmart greeter ended with the centenarian being sent to the hospital. Earlier today, the city’s district attorney said it will not be filing charges.

From the AP:

[Milwaukee D.A.] John Chisholm issued a statement today saying his review of the case, which included store surveillance video, shows the customer was reaching for her sales receipt when [the greeter] was knocked to the floor.

On Nov. 28, the customer was exiting the Walmart when she was stopped by the greeter to check her receipt. When the customer grew impatient, the situation reportedly got heated between the two women. The greeter, who was released from the hospital after undergoing a CAT scan, claimed after that she had been pushed.

Regardless of whether the greeter was pushed or fell, the incident still brings us back to the same question: Isn’t receipt-checking something to be handled by loss-prevention staff and not the elderly?

No charges in elderly Wal-Mart greeter case
[ChicagoBreakingNews.com]

Thanks to Grant for the tip!

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. flyingwolf says:

    So the greet lied according to the store surveillance.
    In other words, the person who is checking to make sure you are not a thief, is a liar. Got ya.

    • flyingwolf says:

      Greeter, greeter, where the hell is that edit button

    • humphrmi says:

      To her credit, a lot of elderly people might not know the difference between a “push” and a bump. To a frail person, they’re probably just as severe.

      Which is why they shouldn’t be doing this job in the first place.

    • Beeker26 says:

      So if the woman didn’t knock her down, who did? If you read the article the woman says “she never intended to make contact with the woman”, meaning she *did* knock her down and is claiming it was an accident.

      Just because they refuse to press charges doesn’t mean she’s innocent. It just means they don’t have enough proof to go after her.

      Of course we don’t have the benefit of the tape. But calling the old woman a liar is completely uncalled for.

      • goller321 says:

        Wrong… if it was inconclusive, they would have stated that. What they said was the woman was reaching for her receipt, that is a fairly conclusive statement.

      • Chaosium says:

        “So if the woman didn’t knock her down, who did? If you read the article the woman says “she never intended to make contact with the woman”, meaning she *did* knock her down and is claiming it was an accident.”

        It doesn’t have to mean that at all. If she didn’t think she was trying to knock her down, didn’t knock her down (and someone else did), but people are TELLING her she did, she could just be confused but correct.

      • Bill610 says:

        So for the woman who was accused, “Just because they refuse to press charges doesn’t mean she’s innocent”…yet for the greeter, “calling the old woman a liar is completely uncalled for”.

        In other words, it’s okay to accuse the younger woman of assault despite evidence to the contrary–the video tape and the prosecutor’s refusal to prosecute, but it’s not okay to accuse the person whose statement contradicts the video tape of lying?

    • tekdemon says:

      First off, nobody has a 100% accurate memory-everyone just kind of makes up what they think they remember based on vague concepts your brain stores. So since she fell and the lady bumped into her (with her arms it seems), it’s pretty easy for her to remember it as being shoved. Secondly she obviously fell down and hit her head, even needing a CT scan so that makes it even harder to be sure her memory is accurate. And finally, the lady is 100 and it sounds like her memory is still pretty darn good for 100.
      She didn’t remember it exactly as it happened on video but nobody would.

    • slappysquirrel says:

      The video is here:

      http://www.jsonline.com/general/37714089.html?bcpid=8725036001&bctid=704910938001

      They struggle over the receipt and the greeter falls. To me, I’d say that it is inconclusive whether the woman pushed the greeter or whether the greeter was just off-balance. What is clear is that when the greeter falls in a way that looks painful, the women just takes her cart and goes off, not even checking to see if the greeter is ok. Provided the woman didn’t shove, she had no legal duty to help the greeter, mind you, but still what a nasty person.

      • danmac says:

        Wow…thanks for that link…after watching the video, I can see why the woman tried to get her receipt back…the “greeter” chased her down, took her receipt, then proceeded to scrutinize the items in her shopping cart for more than 45 seconds…that may not sound like a lot, but if you watch it, you can see that she’s really taking her time.

        Furthermore, it appears that things went down like this: the shopper handed over the receipt, then got understandably frustrated after waiting more than 30 seconds to have her items checked. She reached for the receipt and the greeter tried to keep it away from her, accidentally dropping it in the process. The shopper then reached down to pick up the receipt, inadvertently bumping the greeter and knocking her over.

        And yes, the shopper in question exercised questionable judgment in leaving the scene, but I can’t blame her too badly after the way she was treated (like a potential shoplifter).

  2. Marlin says:

    So in other words the reciept checker was the one being agressive.

    And people whonder why I and many other do not show our reciepts.

    • slappysquirrel says:

      Nope, if you look at the video posted multiple times in this thread, at best the greeter lost her balance, at worst she was shoved. It’s really hard to tell, but the greeter doesn’t seem aggressive at all.

      • glasscocked says:

        Not aggressive? You clearly must have skipped the entire start of the video where the greeter physically chased the customer down and again physically put her hand on her, thus forcing her to stop. That seems pretty aggressive to me.

  3. muralivp says:

    “Isn’t receipt-checking something to be handled by loss-prevention staff and not the elderly?”

    Loss-prevention staff have an age limit?

    • rewind says:

      Well…How likely is it an octogenarian will be able to put (and keep) a choke hold on a deaf shoplifter?

    • Darrone says:

      Canes server more than one purpose ya know.

    • TerpBE says:

      I’d assume that by the time you’ve failed with your hair, hearing, and memory, you probably aren’t cut out for “loss prevention”

    • eirrom says:

      Yes. They need to be under 100 years old.

    • Red Cat Linux says:

      No. That is the problem.

      If they are going to put someone that frail to the task of preventing people from leaving the store with unpaid goods that screams idiocy. If the person was an actual thief, what can you imagine is going to be the outcome in thief vs. 100 year old lady?

      There are so many things wrong with ‘loss prevention’ receipt checking, where the hell do you begin?

    • MrBeetle says:

      They should.

      Think of LP as store-police. Would you want a 100 year old woman chasing down a criminal?

      • regis-s says:

        As far as I know they don’t want anyone chasing down criminals.

        As far as the military goes, if they need bodies bad enough nobody is too young or too old.

        • kujospam says:

          Naw, I would sue the military up the wa-zu. I tried to joined, but was too fat by being 25 pounds over their wait limit. Come to find out a few other states have “fat” camps to reduce weight and train. So if they have to resort to drafting me, then we already lost the war.

          • KyBash says:

            That reminds me of the guy who went for an army physical and instead of being rated 1-A or 4-F they told him he was L-MS — they’d take him when the Russians turned Left on Main Street.

    • dolemite says:

      I dunno…does active duty military and police have an age limit? I haven’t seen too many 90 year old cops walking the beat. What’s loss prevention’s job? Fighting criminal elements.

  4. c!tizen says:

    I say the woman goes back to Wal-Mart and reports the greeter as a terrorist.

  5. not-gonna-tell-ya says:

    IMO, Wally exposes itself to a great liability when it knowingly puts people in this positition. That liability increases when it does so using vulnerable (elderly) employees to boot. I just don’t see a scenario where this is a net positive for the company.

    • minjche says:

      Assuming the employee doesn’t put herself into harm’s way, then I see it as a positive for Walmart and for the employee that she is able to have a job. My guess would be that if she didn’t need the job she wouldn’t be there (whether that need be financial, something to pass the time, etc.).

      In most of the Walmart’s I’ve been to, the greeters have been elderly or folks with special needs, so the fact that they can get a job somewhere (benefits and compensation issues aside) is a positive.

      I think a responsible store manager who develops a healthy relationship with their employees should try to instruct employees like this elderly greeter to exercise safe boundaries with customers.

      • not-gonna-tell-ya says:

        You almost had me, until your last paragraph. By “safe boundaries”, you mean like, oh I don’t know, Follow the law? If it were a responsible manager, there wouldn’t have been an issue (unless the employees demanding people stop to show their receipts are all going rogue).

        • minjche says:

          I’ll thank you to cut the shitty tone, if you don’t mind.

          Of course I meant the greeter should still follow the law. That doesn’t mean you don’t get some vigilante’s out there. By safe boundary I meant maintaining enough personal space and wiggle room that even a customer grabbing a receipt from your hand wouldn’t startle you enough to fall over.

          To put it simply, imagine the level of defensive action you or I would take to prevent ourselves from knocking ourselves over in the course of our jobs, then move it to beyond that because it’s a 100-year-old person.

          • not-gonna-tell-ya says:

            Actually you can shove your shitty tone where your mama don’t kiss you. I’m not going to sugar coat my responses to stay on the proper side of your feeble sensibilities. You made a dumb statement and I pointed it out. Live with it and grow up

            • minjche says:

              Or you completely misread the original comment and the second one explaining it.

              But no, we’ll go with your argument with nothing backing it up. I must just be dumb.

            • minjche says:

              Also (forgot to add this), you should learn that you don’t need to insult someone’s opinion to show you disagree with it. You’re a perfect example of what anonymity and the internet do to what could have been a perfectly civil discussion.

              I don’t mind if you don’t sugar coat your opinions, but you don’t need to coat them in spikes just because you can.

    • sonneillon says:

      Depends. Senior Citizens tend to be more reliable employees than teenagers, and you can pay them about the same.

      And social security doesn’t always make them enough money. If you are too be followed then older individuals always represent too much liability risk and should never be hired, because they can be bumped and can fall at any place of employment. As a society if someone wants to be productive and can be productive we should let them do it.

  6. There's room to move as a fry cook says:

    “[District Attorney] Chisholm says there were inconsistencies between what Speelman recollected and the videotape.”

    • obits3 says:

      I think what happened is this:

      1. Shopper gives old lady her receipt.
      2. Old lady takes her sweet time checking the receipt (I love old ladies, but not when I am in a hurry and alreadly own the stuff).
      3. Shopper starts motion to grab receipt back.
      4. Old lady freaks out and falls down.
      5. Old lady blames shopper for old lady’s lack of balance.

      I would like to see that tape.

      • WisconsinDadof2 says:
        • dg says:

          After watching this video you can see exactly what happened. If I were the DA – I wouldn’t have filed charges either because there’s nothing conclusive about intent. What I saw was:

          * Greeter chasing down customer, putting her hand on the customer’s shoulder AFTER the customer exited the store

          * Greeter positioning cart just outside doors – forcing people to almost walk into the cart to exit.

          * Greeter taking her own sweet time to check the receipt, then looking under the cart, then …

          * Customer apparently saying “Enough of this bullshit”, and moving to take her receipt back so she could leave the damn store

          * Greeter dropping receipt as she pulls back, then Customer diving for receipt so it wouldn’t blow away

          * Greeter falling backwards

          * Customer leaving.

          No one pushed anyone. The greeter is 100% in the wrong. She never should have touched the customer, and she took too long. When the customer went to reacquire her rightful property, the Greeter dropped it, then lost her balance and fell.

          I’d file charges against the greeter for battery upon a person (touching the customer).

          I hope the customer sues the hell out of Wal-Mart and the greeter and wins.

          • slappysquirrel says:

            The people who keep saying that the greeter “took too long” confuse me. The video clearly shows the greeter having the receipt for slgihtly more than 45 seconds and it is a long receipt. She was just doing her job.

            • Mauvaise says:

              They are saying that because of the slew of comments from people in receipt checking threads that all say the same thing, “Just show your damn receipt already – it takes an additional 10 seconds out of your life.”

              Clearly this isn’t so because the “incident” took place at about the minute mark, which means the receipt checker had been going over the receipt for almost a full minute. I’m sorry – that is way too excessive of a time to submit to something that isn’t even mandatory. I’ve never been inclined to show my receipt (not that anyone ever asks me – I guess I don’t look the “shoplifting type”), but now I’m disinclined to ever show a receipt anywhere but as Costco.

              • slappysquirrel says:

                The video shows people going out of the entrance to the store and the woman going out of the entrance to the store, and the receipt checker following her, stopping her and asking for the receipt. The receipt checker doesn’t actually have the receipt in her hands until :23. By my count, it’s a bit more than 45 seconds between her getting the receipt and her ending up on the ground. The woman’s cart is completely full.

                Again, I don’t like receipt checkers, but it is not this woman’s fault that receipt checking exists and she appears to have been just trying to do her job. I don’t think the woman purposefully shoved her, but I really don’t understand the hate against the receipt checker.

                • Bill610 says:

                  Well, it is completely with in Walmart’s rights to have an employee to ASK to see a receipt. But if the person declines, that should be the end of it–customers have NO obligation to comply. The greeter should not have followed the woman, and certainly should not have put a hand on her, as the video shows. Beyond that, it looked like everything in the woman’s cart was in bags except for maybe bottled water under the cart. I really didn’t get the sense that she was trying to match items on the receipt to items in the cart (or if she did, she was probably doing it really badly). You really can’t do that without going through the bags, which she’d have no business doing, either. Rather, I got the sense that she was trying to drag things out, maybe because the woman had ignored her in the first place, or maybe for some other reason.

                  Meanwhile, lots of other people were streaming past without getting their all-important receipt checks, including at least one with unbagged merchandise.

                  This is a case of someone not qualified to do a job which is ill-conceived in the first place.

                  • slappysquirrel says:

                    They were going past her because they had already gotten their receipts checked inside and hadn’t needed to be chased down.

                    Also “Emptied-out bag of dogfood under the cart that is full off stolen merchandise” is the oldest trick in the book. If you’re right that it is bottled water, I don’t see why the receipt checker tried to bend down and examine it.

                    The receipt checker likely was overzealous but the shopper did about everything one could possibly do to look like a shoplifter and attract extra scrutiny. IMHO, there is fault on both sides.

            • obits3 says:

              She did not do her job:

              1. She blocked store traffic.
              2. She did not give the receipt bad to the woman when the woman tried to get it back.
              3. #2 caused the receipt to go flying. Thus, if the old lady had just handed the woman her receipt, then none of this would have happened. The old lady was stubborn. What’s that saying?

              “pride goes before a fall”

              Well… that is what happened. Also, I think that 45 seconds is way too long considering the wait time just to get through the register (my milk is getting warm!). If this sounds mean it is only because I am treating the old lady with the same expectations that I would have for anyone with that job. Being old/just doing my job does not allow you to be a jerk and lie about what really happened.

              • slappysquirrel says:

                1. If the lady had pushed her way out the door without getting her receipt checked, then I don’t see why it wasn’t the receipt checker’s job to chase her down. And store traffic goes by throughout the video. Very few big box stores have entrances so small that one shopping cart and two people can block them.

                2. So you think her job description says “If a customer tries to take her receipt back before you’ve finished looking at it, hand it over and send her on her way”? Why wouldn’t it be “doing her job” for the receipt checker to finish reading the receipt before handing it back rather than allowing it to be snatched away?

                3. It’s saying that the woman’s job was to check the receipt and she was trying to do that job.

                I don’t like that receipt checkers exist, but I don’t see why it is so awful that this woman who was employed as a receipt checker actually tried to check the receipt.

                Also, if I were a shoplifter, I would

                1. Try to push past the receipt checkers
                2. Try to keep the receipt checker from reading my receipt by acting like I was in a hurry
                3. If possible, snatch the receipt back before the receipt checker can notice that it doesn’t match what is in my cart.

                So it is very likely that the checker was trained to regard someone who did those things with suspicion and examine her receipt twice as carefully.

                I feel like your argument is comparable to “Well, if it was the security guard’s job to keep people with firearms from entering the building, but Bob WANTED to enter the building with his firearm, the security guard should have let him.” It just doesn’t make sense.

        • obits3 says:

          Thank you. This was the old lady’s fault. The customer should be pressing charges for false arrest or something like that. Some people may say “The customer should have just let the receipt fly away instead of rushing into the old lady to get it.” The problem with this logic is that (based on the old lady’s actions) the customer had a reasonable fear that she would be detained further! Also, the cart was full of stuff. Looks like groceries. Why should I have to wait and wait and wait while my milk goes warm? This is just a simple case of incompetence.

  7. obits3 says:

    “…store surveillance video, shows the customer was reaching for her sales receipt when [the greeter] was knocked to the floor.”

    New rule:

    If you can’t walk a straight line for 10 paces, you don’t get to be in loss-prevention.

  8. binkleyz says:

    No, the easy answer would have been to keep walking.. No reason to show anyone your receipt unless they’re prepared to detain you while they call the police. I always suggest that very same thing when they get indignant, and I’m still waiting for one of them to follow up on it.

  9. Mordac says:

    Loss Prevention = Security Guard

    Greeter = “Welcome! Would you like a cart?”

    Wal-Mart Greeter = ??

  10. leprechaunshawn says:

    I am glad that this happened in an area I am familiar with because it answers the question I’ve asked myself whenever I see these receipt checking stories. What kind of area are these Wal-Mart’s in where they’re checking receipts at the door? This Wal-Mart is only a 4 mile county bus trip from the inner city of Milwaukee.

    Just two weeks ago my wife and I went to a suburban Wal-Mart in Pewaukee, WI to pick up a laptop that we had delivered site-to-store. We walked right out the front door with the laptop box in hand and the receipt in my wife’s purse. You know what the greeter said to us? “Have a good evening!”

    Based on my non-scientific research, I’ve concluded that if you shop at a store that is not easily accessible to people “from the hood”, you won’t be treated like a criminal. In fact, you can actually have a pleasant shopping experience.

    • obits3 says:

      In the ghetto…
      And this grandma cries
      ’cause if there’s one thing that she don’t need
      it’s another long receipt
      In the ghetto…

    • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

      I routinely set off alarms in stores that use CheckPoint tags, because I have one hidden in my keychain. Save Barnes&Noble and Kohls, most stores don’t give me a 2nd glance.

      • Portlandia says:

        why may I ask do you have a sensor hidden in your key chain??

        • RvLeshrac says:

          The question is: Why DON’T you have a sensor in YOUR keychain?

        • jason in boston says:

          A beeping alarm at the door is not probable cause for shoplifting. /me thinks Steve does it for the lulz.

        • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

          Because if I wore it on my shirt, it would look weird.

          But seriously, I stuck it in there on a whim, and 4 years later, haven’t decided to remove it. It’s fun to see what stores keep what scanners on.

  11. Reading_Comprehension says:

    “Isn’t receipt-checking something to be handled by loss-prevention staff and not the elderly?”

    You can’t keep these old birds down. I know numerous 80+ year-old women who could wipe the floor with most twenty/thirty-somethings if it weren’t for the deterioration of their muscles/bones.

    • Chaosium says:

      “I know numerous 80+ year-old women who could wipe the floor with most twenty/thirty-somethings if it weren’t for the deterioration of their muscles/bones.”

      What a coincidence, I know plenty of quadripleges that would make great long-distance runners.

    • Red Cat Linux says:

      I’ve seen LoL’s take each other out during Macy*s clearance and white sales, but that’s pitting the elderly against the elderly.

      Posting someone’s great-great-grandmother between the exit and a possible thief? Inadvisable.

      Unless by doing so, Walmart is admitting that they don’t think their customers really ARE thieves, and they just do this shit to annoy us.

  12. leprofie says:

    It is a whole lot cheaper to hire retired senior citizens as receipt checkers than anyone qualified as loss prevention specialists. This is another example of Wal-Mart’s questionable employment practices.

  13. cecilsaxon says:

    I think she over compensated for the lack of weight inherent to a paper receipt. You see back in her day they still used chiseled rock tablets-

  14. ChuckECheese says:

    My local Walmart (Spectrum/Christown, Phx AZ) is now deploying staff with shirts emblazoned “LOSS PREVENTION” on them. They wander the entry/exit, but do not check receipts. Receipt-checking @ this location seems to be very infrequent and random, and still done by WM employees in the standard vest.

  15. donovanr says:

    What they should do is put one of those man shaped punching bags at the door saying, “May I see your receipt please; it’s for your own safety?” Then the door won’t open until you wallop the dummy.

  16. MauriceCallidice says:

    We just bought a flat-pack crib and dresser set at Walmart. The box was roughly 3ftx5ft, and weight around 125 pounds. We asked for help, and a Walmart “stockman” with an oversize cart came to help us purchase and load it. The stockman was wearing a Walmarty looking jacket, had a reflective safety vest over it, was wearing a Walmart ID tag, and pushing a Walmart stock cart.

    He went through the checkout line with my wife while I pulled the car around to the front door. When they tried to walk out, the elderly checker demanded to see my wife’s receipt before she would let them leave the the store. Even though the other Walmart employee, the stockman, had just accompanied my wife through the checkout and watched her pay for it.

    Ridiculous.

  17. edrebber says:

    How many legitimate cases did the district attorney neglect for this case?

  18. WisconsinDadof2 says:

    They’ve posted the security footage from the incident here on the Milwaukee Journal’s website:

    http://www.jsonline.com/general/37714089.html?bcpid=8725036001&bctid=704910938001

  19. The Marionette says:

    Oh jesus, here we go again, not even HERE can the consumer be at fault. Regardless if it was an elderly, or actual loss prevention, the consumer shouldn’t have been pushing them to begin with, so pointing out her age isn’t going to justify it. I do agree about them having loss prevention instead of elderly, but my point still stands.

    • Mauvaise says:

      I agree that the consumer shouldn’t be pushing anyone. It’s a good thing then that in this case, they didn’t push anyone.

      That receipt checker took over a minute to check the receipt. That is beyond excessive.

  20. osiris73 says:

    Having seen the video, to me it seems like she got upset that the old woman was taking so long, grabbed her receipt back from her, it fell, and as she lunged for the receipt as it was blowing away, the old woman fell to the ground. The customer DID look like she was blocking the receipt checker from grabbing the receipt again and not intentionally knocking her down.

  21. msbask says:

    Just watched the video. What on earth was that Walmart greeter doing for so long? Reading every item on the receipt? She literally goes through the entire thing over and over. Obviously, can’t hear what she’s saying but I hope that every “just show your receipt, it takes 10 seconds” person out there watches this.

    I’d have lost patience, too. Oh wait, no I wouldn’t have, because I never would have stopped to show it.

    • slappysquirrel says:

      The video shows the receipt checker taking the receipt at :23 and the receipt checker is on the ground by 1:14. If the receipt checker is doing her job at all, taking slightly over 45 seconds seems reasonable to me.

      • msbask says:

        But what job is she doing? She’s reading the woman’s receipt. Not once does she look in any of the bags to verify that the receipt matches. So what is the point?

        • slappysquirrel says:

          The video is not from an angle that lets you see her head motion very well, and she’s facing the cart the whole time, and walking around it. I think it is safe to say that she was looking at the biggest items in the cart and making sure they are on the receipt.

      • danmac says:

        I have to disagree with your opinion. I’m a white male, and I’ve never had anyone scrutinize a receipt of mine for longer than 2 or 3 seconds…if someone took 50 seconds to check over every item in my cart, I would be notably upset. I believe that if I were a black woman, and the receipt checker was mumbling about “you people” as she took her sweet time treating me like a shoplifting suspect, I would be incensed.

        • slappysquirrel says:

          I’d say there is some fault on both sides. Basically, the woman did everything I would do if I actually were a shoplifter (breeze past the receipt checker even though the shopper said she went to the store all the time so presumably knew the receipt checker would be there, get impatient with the receipt check and tried to hurry it along, try to snatch receipt back before receipt checker was finished with it) and, yes, it sounds like the receipt checker’s biases contributed to a situation where the receipt checker wanted to be double-triple sure the customer wasn’t stealing anything and took her time. The customer was understandably defensive and tried to snatch the receipt back and the receipt checker was (I think) understandably suspecting that she was trying to get away with something, even if non-understandable racism was part of that suspicion.

          The article with the checker’s comments certainly paints a “perfect storm” of innocent but suspicious looking* customer and dedicated but biased and overzealous receipt checker.

          So yeah, everybody sucked.

          *and I don’t mean “black,” I mean “pushing a full cart and doing everything she can to get out of the receipt check process without having what was on the receipt compared to what is in her cart”

          • danmac says:

            The article with the checker’s comments certainly paints a “perfect storm” of innocent but suspicious looking* customer and dedicated but biased and overzealous receipt checker.

            I think you hit the nail on the head.

  22. EverCynicalTHX says:

    er…new shit has come to light man..lol

  23. kbr3970 says:

    At one of our local walmarts, (there are 6 or 7 within 35 miles of us) a few of the loss prevention staff were stealing right out of the store. The ones that do their jobs cant even chase someone if they run into the parking lot. A lot of good they do. Besides, in one of the store I frequent, I can pick out the loss prevention people that ‘shop’ because they are in there just about EVERY time I am in there. (This was confirmed by a friend who worked there.)

  24. Smujcat says:

    I imagine the scene sort of like Carol Kane in Scrooge, whacking Bill Murray with a toaster.
    “Here let me find my receipt….WHACK!!!!”

  25. LHH says:

    Why this continues to even be an issue is beyond me. You know the stores practice on checking receipts at the door. So why shop there? Do you really think harassing some old folks who are just trying to do their job “showing them”? Seriously? As long as the store has your dollars they could give a rats ass what you do.

    If you really want to “show them” then stop shopping there! Vote with your dollars. Why this is such a hard concept is beyond me. Giving shit to a bunch of old folks being paid minimum wage to check your receipts is pathetic. You’re not a hero standing up for anyone’s rights. Your just a narcissistic stubborn asshole.

  26. Verdant Pine Trees says:

    OK, apparently the receipt checker is not only 100 years old, she’s also a racist.

    The whole incident flared up when she referred to the shopper as one of “you people”, i.e. “you people think you can get away with something. not today”… read more here:

    http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/woman-sorry-for-100-year-old-wal-mart-greeter-s-fall-1.2531993 :

    “A police report released Thursday shows Speelman made similarly racially charged comments to prosecutors while discussing the case last week.

    Speelman told prosecutors that “these types of people” often become upset when she checks their receipts, the report says.

    When she was asked to clarify what she meant by “these types of people,” Speelman said, “Mexicans, Spanish and colored people,” according to the report.

    Speelman also said “these types of people” are “difficult to deal with,” the report says.”

    • slappysquirrel says:

      Classy.

    • Mauvaise says:

      I didn’t want to be the one to play the race-card, especially since I’m white, but as soon as I saw the video and saw that the customer was black, I had a sneaking suspicion that was why the receipt checker “ran” after her to check her receipt.

      I’m kinda sad (but not surprised) to have my hunch be proven true.

      • Bill610 says:

        I had the same impression after watching the video, and likewise chose not to point out the possibility. Age doesn’t always bring wisdom…sometimes we manage to hold on to the stupid we’ve cultivated our whole lives. Or it may be that she’s old enough that she’s really just lost the ability to control the biases she may at one point have dealt with…in which case, great job on the hiring, Walmart.

    • danmac says:

      Thank you for linking that article, and after reading Speelman’s comments to the prosecutors and seeing the video for myself, I’m not sure Metcalf (the shopper) owes anyone an apology. She was treated poorly, then arrested for trying to remove herself from a situation that quickly snowballed out of control, mostly thanks to an overly aggressive (and possibly racist) receipt checker.

      • glasscocked says:

        I am disappointed to see after this article so many people still think this poor shopper was at fault. She was being spoken down too by a racist all while wasting her time. She should be receiving the apology. With the police report displaying the old woman’s racism and their statement that she never should have put her hands on the shopper I really hope there is a civil lawsuit against the old woman and walmart.

      • Verdant Pine Trees says:

        I think Metcalf should have helped her up (though I must admit I’m not sure how I would react in her shoes, and I was insulted like that). That’s the only thing I think she did wrong, and she knows it.

        Metcalf however, deserves an apology for spending a night in jail, especially when she was singled out not once but twice – the news media has treated her like a pariah.

        I hate to think it, but the checker probably has been targeting other shoppers who are “colored”, “Spanish”, or “Mexican.” How else can that comment (“Not this time”) be explained? Bill610, I agree that at that age, she may not be able to control some of those biases.

  27. CartmanPat says:

    I always enjoy a receipt checking story. People are so inordinately upset by it that the comments tend to make me lawl.

  28. newfenoix says:

    When is this going to end? Why do we have to constantly go through this crap? It is very simple; under THEIR OWN POLICY, door greeters CAN NOT lay hands on or touch anyone. But there are still people that don’t give a damn that these greeters are violating their own companies policy but PHYSICALLY STOPPING people that won’t show their receipt. My wife has worked for the company for ten years and this is one of the easiest ways for Wal Mart to fire an employee. Do you really think that Wal Mart supports these greeters when they get into trouble? They don’t. The company puts them in this situation to get rid of them. Door greeters have no authority to put their hands on a person or to impede their exit from the store. As for those of you that have no problem with a door greeter doing this I say this; I am a cop and IF an officer knocks on my door they DO NOT come into my house unless I called them myself. We live in a society of power hungry fools that can not handle power of any kind.