1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Virginia man says Walmart suspected him of kidnapping his kids because they’re biracial

Discussion in 'The OT' started by fluffybear, May 28, 2013.

  1. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Consider... This white man, with his bi-racial kids... on their way home they picked up his black wife... the police was waiting for him at home. So, a couple of questions about that...

    1. What do you think would have happened if his wife wasn't in the car? IF it was still the white man and three black kids... how easy would it have been without his wife with him to "prove" those were his kids?

    2. Since the police got there before he did... that means they didn't follow him home... so I have to assume someone got the license plate of his car or something... the police looked that up and found the owner and the address... isn't it possible to spend a couple of extra seconds and see that he was married too?

    Meanwhile... as I've said, the policeman is sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place. He wasn't at the store, but he has to respond to the call... once he is dispatched, I think he is stuck... and if he is any kind of person and cop at all, I suspect he was almost immediately struck with a feeling of a goose-chase report as soon as he saw the family arrive home.

    By all accounts, it sounds like the family isn't mad at the police... so I'm assuming he tried to be tactful... it sounds like the anger of the family is addressed at the store and whomever complained to the store... and it sounds like Wal-Mart has gotten the word to keep quiet as I've seen nothing further in terms of statements from Wal-Mart employees or that complaining customer.

    Again I say... I didn't think we lived in a country where you have to prove you are NOT doing anything wrong at all times. Our justice system claims "innocent until proven guilty"...

    Pretty soon, if this scenario is met with approval... we will all have to carry proof of identity, proof of birth, proof of citizenship, proof of marriage, proof of relation to any children with us, and proof of ownership of any objects in our possession at all times... because someone might say "hey, I think he stole that" and then you suddenly have to prove that you didn't.

    That's not the country we supposedly live in... is it?
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Very well put Stewart. I agree. Batlle, while I understand what you are saying, I am guessing you also feel that people who do time for years and are then proven guilty deserve nothing more than an apology and sent on their way? Even though it could cause them to not get a job since they were wrongfully convicted. No matter though, the cops did their job though right?
     
  3. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,744
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    So this is an "I hate Walmart" issue? I suppose if they are upset over being racially profiled by Walmart security and not upset by the responding officers it must be the family trying to get publicity against Walmart.

    When something is no big deal people generally do not go to the press and make a big deal out of it. :)
     
  4. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    That seems like an odd conclusion jump.

    As long as the police officer was respectful, the family might have felt like I do that he didn't have much choice when a complaint is issued and he is dispatched on the call. Since he didn't seem to escalate the situation, maybe the family is giving him a pass.

    But, according to the article I read, the police said that Wal-Mart security called them... so the mother called the store to speak to the manager... the store manager passed the buck to security... and the security person said he didn't call the police, but that someone in the store had said that the guy and those kids didn't "look right"... and the mother pressed them to ask what that meant, and that's when Wal-Mart went into the "no comment" zone.

    So... I can see where the policeman might have been respectful and apologized to them, while Wal-Mart is trying to act like it didn't happen and ignore the family... so I can see why they might complain.

    I'm not sorry to say that there really is no way to defend this scenario happening. It shouldn't happen in a supposedly free country like ours.
     
  5. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,744
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Someone went to the press. That happens when someone has a story they want to tell.

    The last time I got stopped by the police and questioned I eventually mentioned it on an Internet discussion group related to what I was doing at the time but it was a positive mention defending the officer against a blanket "all cops are bad" complaint. My last traffic offense I didn't mention to anyone (except at work to people who might want to be careful driving on that section of road).

    No stories in the paper ... no public complaints. No big deal.

    That is why I believe this family thought it was a big deal. Big enough to get the word out about how somebody profiled. Now conflicting stories are out about the incident and there must be a conspiracy! (There always seems to be a conspiracy.)

    So who is the target this time? Not the police who politely did their job? Walmart for possibly reporting a customer's concern to police (or possibly not)? The unknown (conspiracy: possibly non-existent) customer who did the profiling? There has to be someone that is the target of the story.

    No big deal doesn't make the news.
     
  6. gov

    gov Legend

    1,101
    50
    Jan 11, 2013
    There is a true crime story developing in the Midwest involving abducted children and a particularly grizzly conclusion of the case, it would be tough to explain to those parents somebody had a chance to save the kids and did nothing, assuming there was such a chance.

    {I might not post more about the case, it is just so sad and horrible. But looking out for kids shouldn't garner such a brouhaha with so many truly depraved adults running loose in the world)
     
  7. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    I will assume you meant to type NOT guilty, but how does that even remotely fit this situation?
     
  8. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    So, with no evidence to go on, you are OK to condemn the security guard, the store manager, the police officer to an extent and the entire Wal-Mart corporation for willful racial discrimination and then an orchestrated coverup. Seems fairly contradictory to this statement:

     
  9. sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,599
    370
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    Not one compliant would be made about this if the kids were white. We can't report every person with kids, so why do so solely based on race.
     
  10. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Wow. That's amazing that you went that way.

    First... I have given the policeman the benefit of the doubt in most of my posts... so you aren't reading them apparently.

    Second... I've heard from the mother's mouth that she called Wal-Mart and they are passing the buck and going silent... so she is drawing the same conclusion that I would in that scenario.

    Lastly... Really? You are comparing the family who did nothing wrong and yet was targeted as if they might be child-abductors to the people (store employees, customer, etc.) who set this into motion and definitely did so something to earn scrutiny?

    I don't want to live in the world that you seem to be encouraging... where its ok for people to point fingers at you and call the police and you have to prove you aren't doing anything wrong on a daily basis. That's a very unfriendly world if you ask me.
     
  11. joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Agreed.
     
  12. joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    I assume by you not really responding to the question that I was correct. Your view of the world we live in is a lot harsher then I want to view it and also seems to show you feel its better to be guilty until proven innocent instead of innocent until proven guilty. You are entitled to your opinion, I just don't have to agree with it or like it.
     
  13. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    So now I'm encouraging it, really? Talk about not reading.

    My only point all along has been that, IF any sort profiling or racist attack was done, (which there is really NO specific evidence of) it appears to have been done by the CUSTOMER who reported it to the security guard. So blame that person and quit transferring it to everyone else who was just doing the job they are charged with.

    The report states the officer told the parents that Wal-mart security called them after witnessing the event in question so they had to follow-up, the outraged parents seemingly accept that as the officer doing his duty then turn their rage on Wal-Mart. They call Wal-mart and the Security Guard says, not exactly, we did not witness it, it was a customer that came to us and reported it. We only relayed that report to the police.

    Why doesn't the security guard get the same pass as the officer is what I want to know? Perhaps, there will be more $ati$faction in putting the blame on Wal-mart than the individual who reported it...

    In the end, the guy got asked a damn question by a police officer, that's it. But, you would think that he was nearly beaten to death, carted away to jail, tried, convicted and locked up for years!
     
  14. joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    In my mind the blame does go to the person who reported it. But I also think Wal-Mart should of taken the customers name just in case something like this comes up again. They could possibly see a pattern with a specific person and no not to report it in the future without more adequate suspicion. By Wal-Mart taking no other action that just reporting it, they promote this kind of behavior to occur again and that would be a shame so they are not innocent either. Just my opinion.
     
  15. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    I would jjust like to know where the guilt or innocence comes in?
    He was asked a question by a police officer, that's it. he wasn't arrested, wasn't charged with anything, just asked a damn question.
     
  16. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    This happend only a few days ago (at least it was only reported a few days ago), how do you know what action they may or may not be taking?
    How do you know they don't have the persons name?
     
  17. joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Before an innocent person gets convicted it starts with just a question too.
     
  18. joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Well thanks to Wal-Mart not wanting to comment on it, we will never know. Although do you think if Wal-Mart had any way to take a high road on this they wouldnt since it went public?
     
  19. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    The old "all they did was ask a question" defense... What's that saying? The road to hell is paved with good intentions...

    And it wasn't just a question... A police cruiser pulls up to a guy's house and waits for him to come home... his neighbors see that... then when he gets home he has to prove his kids are really his kids... then they are told "someone" told a Wal-Mart security guard that it "didn't look right"...

    So is that acceptable? I mean, should we all just start saying "that doesn't look right"... I mean, the argument that this somehow would stop a real child abduction... so, shouldn't all people with kids at all times be required to provide proof that those are their kids? If not, then why not? Who gets a pass from the "that doesn't look right" report?

    On a semi-related note...

    I went to Wal-Mart tonight... obviously not the same one in the article since I live in another state... as it happens, a car across from me had a white man, a black woman, and a child... Somehow, I didn't feel any need to call security and ask for police to follow them home. I made the leap of logic that since there was nothing going on other than a family doing their shopping, I shouldn't try and invent a problem... of course it probably helps that I don't have a problem with interracial couples.
     
    1 person likes this.
  20. trh

    trh This Space for Sale

    5,626
    275
    Nov 2, 2007
    NE FL
    And from what has been reported, you're assuming the person who made the report was a racist? Now that is the kind of America I don't want.
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page