Possible Unlawful Detainment/Attempt To Illegally Seize Personal Property Caught On Tape ? Any Advice ?

[51MEANTXGUNS50]

I decided to make a four segment personal video consisting of me purchasing/unboxing several out of print DVD box sets from Amazon.com, B&N, and Wal Mart. While the first couple of segments went along without a hitch, what should have been the last one, which was me purchasing three recent releases at Wal Mart, while making the purchase, there arose an incident that has me wondering if a possible abuse of power occurred:

I arrived at a local Wal mart this morning for my final couple of purchases, camera in hand, basically consisted of me doing some observational humor and a goofy little homage to Saturday Night Fever, made it to the entertainment section, got what I was looking for, headed to the register, couple of employees were shooting the breeze, girl running the register was a good sport about being on camera, played along and we did kind of flirt a little (ie, me joking about how I could use a lovely assistant in my vids), who I assume to be her superior and some other male employee basically approached me aggressively and demanded that I stop recording the transaction implying it was against the law to film there. I politely clarified that it was not and pointed out my constitutional right to film in public, the younger guy with her actually had the audacity to say that my rights aren't applicable in Wal Mart (?). I admit, I did antagonize them by saying they had no idea what they were talking about and telling them to get back to work. I got my receipt and proceeded to leave when low and behold, I was held up by a greeter wanting to check my receipt and merchandise along with two security guards. They initially tried to lull me with small talk then asked to see my camera. I asked them why and they said they wanted to make sure "I didn't video tape anything I wasn't supposed to." I ascerted that I did nothing wrong and they weren't going to touch my property, the other one attempted to casually take it from me to which I reinterated they weren't going to touch my camera in an even firmer tone. They refused to let me leave yet despite asking them close to two dozen times if I was being detained I never got a yes or no response. They then decided to say they were detaining me because I was creating a disturbance and implied they had the authority to take my camera and verify it's content and demanded I follow them. This time I got aggravated with the whole thing and just left, they then followed me and tried to corral/flank me to either intimidate me or get me back in the store but I reminded them that I can legally defend myself from an unlawful detainment so they might as well not even bother, one of them responded by brandishing what I assume was pepper spray and started shaking it to intimidate me (this unfortunately happens off screen though I voice it). I got to my car and left and caught them appearing to write down my license plate and make a phone call.

For almost four years now I have regularly created video clips of me reviewing, purchasing, and unboxing hard to find, rare and out of print movies/boxsets and the occasional new release from places like Hastings, B&N, Best Buy, Wal Mart and Amazon.com. I have never had a problem as I was a regular at all these stores and never had a problem up until this incident. Of all the times I do this what could have compelled them to change their take on this and take it as far as they did ? Did the employees and security guards cross any kind of professional or legal line doing what they did ? While the edited version of the purchase itself is only about 20 minutes, the entire video is a bit over an hour which makes it impossible to upload on any video sharing website, even just the incident itself. No matter how I edit it I can't upload it or share it electronically with other people in its entirety. Don't want to go back to the Wal Mart this happened at or go to the company these guys work for in person. What do you all think ?

[sky_wire]

One point you’re mistaken: Wal Mart is not public property, it’s private property. If they don’t want you filming on their property, they have every right to exclude you. That said, it doesn’t sound like they handled it very well. I think the proper thing for their security to do would be to escort you to the door and give you a written warning not to return to their property or they would charge you with criminal trespass. Sounds like this was a very unusual situation that their rent-a-cops couldn’t handle.

[guest043013-2]

And now that you have posted about this rather unusual episode on a silly little board like this, I would offer that if you do find an attorney willing to sue Wally World, the media will have fun with you pointing out your persona here. Will do wonders for your personal life and your credibility with a jury.

I would also suggest that posting it on youtube might not be a wise decision...

[straightshooter30]

Likely you'll never get anything about their in writing, at least I never have in similar circumstances. (Stopped from taking still images with professional gear in malls, arenas.) There are so many reasons to prevent recording on their premises from recording their workplace violations to preventing up-skirt, and stalking... They obviously had no idea of your intentions or what you had recorded. Sometimes it's easier to show them you've deleted the images and recover it later... ;-)

[ferg576]

Gotta chime in. While WM is private property, its not a private place and there is no expectation of privacy except in the bathrooms and dressing rooms. I guarantee they are filming you! I do not think they have a no filming policy posted when you walk in. That said, they can always ask you to leave, after all, its their property. I do not think they have the right to detain or search in this case. BTW, I don't think you have to even show your receipt at the door when leaving, since its not a shopping club.

[ck1942]

"and pointed out my constitutional right to film in public"

is a very overly broad statement.

While the First Amendment allows for much "public" and certainly for much more "private" access and excess (my terms) it is nowhere near 100 pct of anything.

For example:

City parks are certainly "public." Photographing people there, and certainly photographing underage people, may well be a criminal violation. "Child pornography" is not perfectly defined by criminal statute and certainly subject to a peace officer's interpretation followed by a judicial interpretation. Especially if the photographer neither asks for nor receives a person's consent.

Photographing at Wal-Mart is perfectly legal (more or less) while you are in the"public" zone, such as from the street or sidewalk with a long lens. Even though the "red fire zone" may well have a dedicated to the city right of way, it may not strictly be "public" and certainly the interior of the store is never a public access zone for all activities, including photography, soliciting (not the P kind) even though soliciting may well be an express of First Amendment rights, such as "religious" or "political."