3 ms·
I don't think that's right. The way I read it, it seems like the employees made an honest mistake, so holding her until a deputy arrived might not be considered
by simonh 5y ago
I don't think that's right. The way I read it, it seems like the employees made an honest mistake, so holding her until a deputy arrived might not be considered malicious or an abuse. However continuing the prosecution and demanding money from her after she was found not guilty was found to be an abuse and that's what was found in her favour.
- listenallyall 5y agoI don't see how you came up with that conclusion. Nothing in the article, neither party's statements, indicate anything about an "honest mistake." I'm going to point out that two NY Times articles about this situation describe Wal-Mart's actions differently: "The letters stopped coming to Ms. Nurse once her case was dropped." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/17/business/falsely-accused-of-shoplifting-but-retailers-demand-they-pay.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/17/business/falsely-accused-... "The shoplifting charge was dropped ... but Ms. Nurse said that she continued to receive letters from Walmart." https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/01/us/walmart-shoplifting-lawsuit.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/01/us/walmart-shoplifting-la... So once the criminal charges were dropped, did Wal-Mart continue to demand money, or did they not?
- simonh 5y agoMy understanding is that they did, and that was the main problem.