Tesco ardkeen worker attacked?

Kotek Besar

The incident as described in this thread is appalling, shocking and downright unbelievable. I cannot begin to imagine how the Tesco staff member is feeling.

Racial profiling in the way it has been in this thread is not on and hopefully a mod will come along shortly to fix a few posts. I'm shocked by some of the racist remarks that have been made. Talk about tarring everyone with the same brush.

eamonn3974

bucketybuck wrote: »

Knee jerk rubbish always amuses me.

So because one asshole acts like an asshole, its all Tescos fault? A duty of care? Just what standard are Tesco meant to meet to stop random crazies flipping their lid? Should they only allow one person in a store at a time, just in case he happens to be an arsehole who might hit somebody.

Blaming the security guard is misguided here for two reasons.
One, was he actually near the incident or further away? For all you know he could have rushed to the scene the minute he heard a disturbance.
Two, store security guards are not the police, they actually dont have the authority to do anything. He can still step in, but so could every other man in the store, so if blame is to thrown everywhere, you also have to blame all the male staff and male customers.

Simple fact is the blame goes to only one person, to the asshole who attacked the woman, not to Tesco, not to the security guard, and not to anybody else your kneejerk frothing decides didnt do enough.

As I pointed out there is only one exit to the shop and this is where the externally hired guard was stationed at the time of the incident. Regarding blame I admit that only the perpetratior is to blame for his actions but this event was witnessed by a large amount of people including staff so the guard should have intervened rather than other customers having to come to the employees aid. Regarding what Tesco could do to prevent such incidents, install under the counter 'panic buttons' to call over the security for assistance in the event of an attack rather than the staff having to physically leave their station and seek assistance and having more than one guard on duty to facilitate this process would also be benificial but yet again Tesco wont pay for two guards.Although the guard is not able to physically detain or restrain anybody he should have at least been the one to intervene rather than customers having to do it. Regarding race,I dont think it important, any man whether black,white,asian or eastern who raises his hand in force to a woman is nothing but a bully and should be strung up..regardless of color, race or creed.

MitchKoobski

Christ lads it doesn't matter if he was black, white or mahogany pink.

The worker was attacked by some prick and I hope they find him.

michellie

Sorry could only get back to this thread. I was just told he was foreign. I don't know his nationality. Poor woman, it must have been terrifying for her, I can only imagine it would be so hard to go back to work there after that incident!

I had a polish man freak out on me in work about 3 weeks ago, he went ape **** in the waiting area, I was genuinely frightened of him and just relieved there was a window between us, and no one in the waiting area. He went out to the car park then and hammered down on the horn in his car after I threatened to have him removed. Lunatic.

Sully

Worth noting that there are plenty of crimes committed, similar to this, by Waterford natives and white people. So lets not go around making stupid sweeping remarks on a whole group of people. You get bad eggs in every colour, race or nation.

rasper

we definitely dont need a pscho like that here, hope he gets 6 months or whatever and is deported straight from the gates of the Joy, no doubts hes a dickhead in his own country too and his type encourages racial tension , so for the good of everyone lets send him home

Kotek Besar

rasper wrote: »

we definitely dont need a pscho like that here, hope he gets 6 months or whatever and is deported straight from the gates of the Joy, no doubts hes a dickhead in his own country too and his type encourages racial tension , so for the good of everyone lets send him home

What if he's Irish?

Ostrom

Winghunter wrote: »

What is the city coming to,people think they can do what they want and the they can. Billy McCarthy was going on about the way these black people are treated by the people of Waterford,well Billy go and work in a shop or pub and see what way the people of Waterford are treated by these people,here's your proof, Hope the Law will do the right thing and deal with this bastard.

Great standard of evidence.

Of my five years in hospitality I've seen far more trouble from drunk locals than any others.

PandyAndy

Hope the scumbag gets caught. Strange how no one intervened...

wmpdd3

Ellie1984 wrote: »

Yea, we were just ahead of him in the self service so we didn't actually realise that the argument was gonna go on. What we saw was a "middle-eastern/indian" looking guy that was shouting at the check out girl because he wanted to use the toilets but the toilets upstairs were closed and he was asked to use the ones in the petrol station. They were at the "get me your manager"-"i'm sorry there is no manager on duty right now" stage when we left...

(there were many managers on duty and they were making their way to him as soon as possible)

No that was a different 'gentleman', he was a Pediatrician from the hospital, I could hear him complaining to the the basket till operator as I bought my groceries. He was informing her of the 'law' that states you must have a toilet if the doors are open(the cafe was closed) and how very distressing it is to not be able to use the toilet.

My heart goes out to the check out operator, its a very hard job looking after 8 customers at a time, with out something like that happening.

eamonn3974

efla wrote: »

Great standard of evidence.

Of my five years in hospitality I've seen far more trouble from drunk locals than any others.

Race doesnt matter. Black or white the guy is just some over the top bully who needs a good taste of his own medicine. Hope the Cops get this one and send him away for the benifit of all.

ziedth

I think the racial profile of the guy isn't relevant in the grand scheme of things. Scumbags who do things like this aren't human in my eyes so if he black/polish/white/Spanish isn't the point.

Fair play to anyone who tried to help the poor girl.

michellie

PandyAndy wrote: »

Hope the scumbag gets caught. Strange how no one intervened...

They did. He ran off.

Master and commander

darrells27 wrote: »

Just found out that it was a contract secutity on, the regular guy was out sick.no point hiring these guys useless bastard.

security staff are instructed in many cases not to intervene in things like this. Their job is to prevent theft. Also id they intervened they could end up agrevating the perp who could become more agressive. Who knows, he could have a syringe or a gun for all they know. Also if he gets away and the victim is injured, the could potentially file a claim against the security company that either they contributed to the injury or caused it by aggrevating the foreigner. They could be liable.

dayshah

bucketybuck wrote: »

Two, store security guards are not the police, they actually dont have the authority to do anything. He can still step in, but so could every other man in the store, so if blame is to thrown everywhere, you also have to blame all the male staff and male customers.

But the customers did intervene, not the guy you would have thought would intervene.

But you are right that its the attacker who is to blame.

PTH2009

Its scary when you think about it. thats somebodys Daugher/Wife/Girlfriend/Sister/mother that was attacked so brutally.

laughter189

Can a security man not even intervene in a non-agressive manner , and ask the perpertrator to stop and leave the premises ?

Master and commander

eamonn3974 wrote: »

he should have at least been the one to intervene rather than customers having to do it.

the securioty companies insurance wouldn't cover it if the woman was injured, so there's nothing he could do.
Sure while a decent joe publics mindset may be to help someone in trouble, that all chnges when you are in a business situation where liablity and insurance are issues you have to deal with. Its not worth the risk to intervene.

GF's bro was in security and he was told just to stand and look tough. If he suspected theft he could question but not apprehend or detain. If he did and they(shoplifter) fell over or something, his company could be held liable for damages. He was under instructions not to intervene in any disturbances unless he was attacked and acted purely in self defence. He told me he had to stand at the door of penny's WD, and watch teen knackers kick the teeth out of a girl with a baby on the ground. Under his contract and instructions, there was nothing he could do. the girl could have claimed for damages if he did get involved.

Kotek Besar

Master and commander wrote: »

security staff are instructed in many cases not to intervene in things like this. Their job is to prevent theft. Also id they intervened they could end up agrevating the perp who could become more agressive. Who knows, he could have a syringe or a gun for all they know. Also if he gets away and the victim is injured, the could potentially file a claim against the security company that either they contributed to the injury or caused it by aggrevating the foreigner. They could be liable.

I think this is a very valid point. If the security guard's job is to prevent theft, not the welfare of staff, then perhaps he is indeed under instruction not to intervene in cases such as these - for the very reasons stated in the post above.

Notwithstanding also that, potentially, this could have left opportunist criminals free to loot while the security guard was busy not doing his job.

Master and commander

laughter189 wrote: »

Can a security man not even intervene in a non-agressive manner , and ask the perpertrator to stop and leave the premises ?

no because thats still intervening and even talking to a perb could enrage them further and the sec co. could be held liable for the consequences of same.

eamonn3974

Master and commander wrote: »

the securioty companies insurance wouldn't cover it if the woman was injured, so there's nothing he could do.
Sure while a decent joe publics mindset may be to help someone in trouble, that all chnges when you are in a business situation where liablity and insurance are issues you have to deal with. Its not worth the risk to intervene.

I disagree. I acknowledge the liability issue but if a member of my family had to intervene and got hurt while doing so in a situation like this one rather than the security on the premises then I be pretty pissed off about it.Seems to be a case of common decency and in this case the public showed more compassion in coming to the aid of the woman.

Master and commander

Kotek Besar wrote: »

Notwithstanding also that, potentially, this could have left opportunist criminals free to loot while the security guard was busy not doing his job.

indeed, i didn't think of that. As in it could potentially be a planned set up.
Again the sec. co. could potentially be held liable for loss by failing to prevent theft and then be sued by the supermarket authorities. Again, it goes against normal human instinct to help, but these are the legal issues busineses must think of if they want to stay in business.

indeed in addition to being held responsibel for the womans injuries if they intervened, what if the security guard injured (accidentally) the perp in an attemp to subdue him, what if he fell over and hit his head. They would then also be liable for his injuries.

Mooley22

He was caught and arrested.Two guys that saw it happening followed him in their car when he left.He went into the hospital for a min then got in a taxi.So they followed the taxi and when he got out and went into a house they rang the guards who then came and arrested him.Fair play to the lads i say

deisemum

I hope the unfortunate worker recovers without any effects from this brutal attack.

On the issue of staff restraining someone I happened to be walking out of Tesco one night and there were 4 teenagers sauntering out alongside me and next thing there was a big commotion.

I was shocked to see security and 2 manager types grab 2 of the teens from behind, yanked them back into the shop and in front of everyone then restrained them by the throat in a very aggressive manner ie standing behind them with an arm around their neck and made them empty their pockets.

They let them go once they realised the lads hadn't taken anything but after reading this thread I didn't realise they staff could do that.

dayshah

I remember working somewhere and I was told that if someone was seen shoplifting the security guard couldn't even say anything, for fear of a slander suit. It was up to the normal staff to ask the person if they forgot to pay.

So a security guard can't go about rugby tackling suspect shoplifters. But this is totally different. People die from kicks to the head (not that there were kicks to head reported in this instance). That warranted intervention.

Mooley22 wrote: »

He was caught and arrested.Two guys that saw it happening followed him in their car when he left.He went into the hospital for a min then got in a taxi.So they followed the taxi and when he got out and went into a house they rang the guards who then came and arrested him.Fair play to the lads i say

Well done to them, they showed some initiative.

Master and commander

Mooley22 wrote: »

He was caught and arrested.Two guys that saw it happening followed him in their car when he left.He went into the hospital for a min then got in a taxi.So they followed the taxi and when he got out and went into a house they rang the guards who then came and arrested him.Fair play to the lads i say

it is unlikelythat any conviction will be possible as there is no proof that it was this man. If the guys in the car had videoed the whole thing attack, flee, taxi and house then yes they could. Put as it stands it is just their word against his. He would just cliam they were making it up and trying to pin it on him, they would have to have a video of the whole incident from attack tot he house to proove it.

in addition it was a naieve and foolish move on the part of the two guys to follow the man as he could very well claim that they were chasing/stalking him and counter claim on that basis. If he had fallen on a kerb or whatever he could level charges agains the tow lads.
It was the decent thing to do though, but ill thought and foolish. Also he could have shot at them. This kind of thing is best left to the guardai as thats their job.

eamonn3974

Master and commander wrote: »

indeed, i didn't think of that. As in it could potentially be a planned set up.
Again the sec. co. could potentially be held liable for loss by failing to prevent theft and then be sued by the supermarket authorities. Again, it goes against normal human instinct to help, but these are the legal issues busineses must think of if they want to stay in business.

indeed in addition to being held responsibel for the womans injuries if they intervened, what if the security guard injured (accidentally) the perp in an attemp to subdue him, what if he fell over and hit his head. They would then also be liable for his injuries.

What if the member of the public fell and hit there head. Im guessing your related to the security sector.

eamonn3974

Master and commander wrote: »

it is unlikelythat any conviction will be possible as there is no proof that it was this man. If the guys in the car had videoed the whole thing attack, flee, taxi and house then yes they could. Put as it stands it is just their word against his. He would just cliam they were making it up and trying to pin it on him, they would have to have a video of the whole incident from attack tot he house to proove it.

CCTV from instore and the employee could identify him. Wonder would a judge question the actions of the externally hired 'security'.

dayshah

Master and commander wrote: »

it is unlikelythat any conviction will be possible as there is no proof that it was this man. If the guys in the car had videoed the whole thing attack, flee, taxi and house then yes they could. Put as it stands it is just their word against his. He would just cliam they were making it up and trying to pin it on him, they would have to have a video of the whole incident from attack tot he house to proove it.

Why is this trolling continuing on this thread?

There was CCTV, and a whole load of witnesses who can identify whoever did it.

Master and commander

dayshah wrote: »

Why is this trolling continuing on this thread?

There was CCTV, and a whole load of witnesses who can identify whoever did it.

well if there was cctv then that would be enough. the victims id-ing could be questioned though as she could just be pointing the finger.

I know about security cos my GF's bro was a security guard(edit)/bouncer and he was always on about what the rules are in these cases.
Once he told me that he was bouncing in clonmel and there was a fight after they threw a few lads out. They went onto the street (off the footpath) and started kicking the shlte outand stamping on a fella on the ground.
He said:

"you can only intervene and break it up while they are on the footpath and along the frontage of the premsis. Once they step off the path or go down past the frontage of the premesis you are not allowed to lay a finger on them. then it becomes the guards job to deal with"

so all he could do was call the guards while he stood there and looked on watching it.