Mom Blames Target for 22-Year-Old Son's Suicide

[Lady Pallas Athena]

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

[Lupa Fangs]

Lady Pallas Athena

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

You are forgetting the other half where she explains that he hadn't stolen something and it was over another argument. Store managers aren't free from lying. So if they all edge that and they did that they ought to provide proof. If he rely did do it then no. If they didn't then they a responsible for defamation of character and most certainly should provide proof. If they walked him out of store in cuffs then that shouldn't be too much to ask of them. And his mother has every right to ask for the proof. though I do think she us suing for the wrong thing. She should be going for defamation of character.

And while they can fire you for anything if they specifically stated it's for shoplifting then they need to fork up the proof. They do not have the right to cause someone without proof and susequently fire them without proof. It's defamation of character and should be adressed as such.

[Lunar Gemini Hina]

I believe the mom won't get a lawsuit over death, but if it's for defammation of her son's character than she'll definitely win.

[Unconditional Heart]

Lupa Fangs Makucha

Lady Pallas Athena

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

You are forgetting the other half where she explains that he hadn't stolen something and it was over another argument. Store managers aren't free from lying. So if they all edge that and they did that they ought to provide proof. If he rely did do it then no. If they didn't then they a responsible for defamation of character and most certainly should provide proof. If they walked him out of store in cuffs then that shouldn't be too much to ask of them. And his mother has every right to ask for the proof. though I do think she us suing for the wrong thing. She should be going for defamation of character.

And while they can fire you for anything if they specifically stated it's for shoplifting then they need to fork up the proof. They do not have the right to cause someone without proof and susequently fire them without proof. It's defamation of character and should be adressed as such.

Most likely because she is traumatized. Losing a child no matter the age can have an impact on a parent.

[FirstBornTripletZack]

Lady Pallas Athena

I feel horrible for her but I don't quite understand what she's really hoping to accomplish long-term. She can say that it's about this alleged "Walk of Shame"....which by the way is pretty standard policy for most stores. I was caught shoplifting when I was 11 at my local pharmacy. This was back in the 90s. The store security hauled me through the store and when I left it was with the police, again in view of the employees and customers. They aren't going to sneak you out through back exits to protect your imagined dignity, sorry. It's a very effective deterrent for many, I was so embarrassed and scared that I never stole again.

Are businesses never supposed to fire people with mental health issues? Are they supposed to have a Jim Crow "separate but equal" policy for them? We all know how that goes.

I think the sad thing is that all that tends to happen with this sort of thing is that it makes it harder for people with issues like Aspergers and Autism to get hired. Businesses see them as a bigger and bigger liability with every suit that comes. His mother may get some money and she might even get this supposed Walk stopped...but she's probably also just made it 50x harder for people like her son to get hired.

But Target it later says that he was fired for a verbal disagreement with another employee, so why was he fired in the "Walk of shame" , then again perhaps the mother is not telling the whole truth, or does not want to know the truth, and wants her son to be innocent. Either way Target had no dies he would take his own life.

[Ratttking]

Lupa Fangs Makucha

Lady Pallas Athena

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

You are forgetting the other half where she explains that he hadn't stolen something and it was over another argument. Store managers aren't free from lying. So if they all edge that and they did that they ought to provide proof. If he rely did do it then no. If they didn't then they a responsible for defamation of character and most certainly should provide proof. If they walked him out of store in cuffs then that shouldn't be too much to ask of them. And his mother has every right to ask for the proof. though I do think she us suing for the wrong thing. She should be going for defamation of character.

And while they can fire you for anything if they specifically stated it's for shoplifting then they need to fork up the proof. They do not have the right to cause someone without proof and susequently fire them without proof. It's defamation of character and should be adressed as such.

Show me the defamation you are convinced took place. I don't think you understand what the term 'defamation of character' encompasses. They did not state that stealing was why they were firing him.

[FirstBornTripletZack]

Shark Bacon

I'm so confused. Did he steal? Or was it about the off-grounds altercation? (Or was it because he had a disability and they just didn't want him anymore?)

Anyway, if he was caught stealing, yeah, it makes sense to be handcuffed and walked out. But if he wasn't CAUGHT, just suspected, then they can ******** off. There's cameras all over Target, though, isn't there?

Well, it sounds like there's SOME reason to sue, but wrongful death may not be that reason.

Sad story.

My cousin is high functioning autistic. Stuff like this makes me really scared for when he has to go out and try to live in the actual world.

Unfortunately they should be scared employers treat these people like crap and we witnessed an employee treating his coworker who was disabled like crap, treating her like a five year old, making demands that she shows her hands to him after using the washroom because he is ignorant and believes that disabled people don't wash their hands. Our dad stood up to him, and he denied this, the manager believed him until our dad lied and said that he had the whole conversation recorded on his cell phone and would play it for everyone. Only then did he confess, but later we found out that he harasses her often and no action is taken. He tells her what her "mother" should be cooking for her. When she told him she cooked her own food he called her a liar and accused her of defrauding the government because disabled people don't know hot to cook. Then we later found out from another coworker that he threatened to have her fired for lying when he asked her who read the Harry Potter books to her, when she told him she knew how to read he accused her of lying and threatened to report her until another employee stood up for her. He also spreads rumours that other people got promotions for sleeping with the right people. He treats disabled people like crap at his place of work and does not get punished, so sadly you should be concerned about your cousin. This person even expected management to believe him over her because she was disabled, just shows how stores react to disabled people being harassed and bullied in the work place. He said if they believe the disabled employee they are stupid and only confessed when our dad lied and said he had the conversation recorded on his cell phone. He did not really but that made him confess believing he did.

[FirstBornTripletZack]

Ratttking

Lupa Fangs Makucha

Lady Pallas Athena

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

You are forgetting the other half where she explains that he hadn't stolen something and it was over another argument. Store managers aren't free from lying. So if they all edge that and they did that they ought to provide proof. If he rely did do it then no. If they didn't then they a responsible for defamation of character and most certainly should provide proof. If they walked him out of store in cuffs then that shouldn't be too much to ask of them. And his mother has every right to ask for the proof. though I do think she us suing for the wrong thing. She should be going for defamation of character.

And while they can fire you for anything if they specifically stated it's for shoplifting then they need to fork up the proof. They do not have the right to cause someone without proof and susequently fire them without proof. It's defamation of character and should be adressed as such.

Show me the defamation you are convinced took place. I don't think you understand what the term 'defamation of character' encompasses. They did not state that stealing was why they were firing him.

That is what I was thinking Target did not downright say he was fired for stealing, they just made an example that thief were forced to walk the Walk of Shame for stealing. Walmart does the same, we were shopping and we saw an employee in uniform being walked out by handcuffs with the police, the security (I think it was one of those undercover ones because we see her in the store often) and the manager. Then again that could be employee altercation as well. But nowhere does it say he was stealing they just used that as an example of when employees are are forced to do the "walk of shame" , stores do this to show they mean business. I think there may be some home problems that the mother does not want to admit that could also be the cause of suicide, I doubt that this one incident lead to it. She just is grieving and in her grief she needs someone to blame. She does not even care if she gets money from it just needs someone to blame.

[Ratttking]

FirstBornTriplet

Ratttking

Lupa Fangs Makucha

Lady Pallas Athena

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

You are forgetting the other half where she explains that he hadn't stolen something and it was over another argument. Store managers aren't free from lying. So if they all edge that and they did that they ought to provide proof. If he rely did do it then no. If they didn't then they a responsible for defamation of character and most certainly should provide proof. If they walked him out of store in cuffs then that shouldn't be too much to ask of them. And his mother has every right to ask for the proof. though I do think she us suing for the wrong thing. She should be going for defamation of character.

And while they can fire you for anything if they specifically stated it's for shoplifting then they need to fork up the proof. They do not have the right to cause someone without proof and susequently fire them without proof. It's defamation of character and should be adressed as such.

Show me the defamation you are convinced took place. I don't think you understand what the term 'defamation of character' encompasses. They did not state that stealing was why they were firing him.

That is what I was thinking Target did not downright say he was fired for stealing, they just made an example that thief were forced to walk the Walk of Shame for stealing. Walmart does the same, we were shopping and we saw an employee in uniform being walked out by handcuffs with the police, the security (I think it was one of those undercover ones because we see her in the store often) and the manager. Then again that could be employee altercation as well. But nowhere does it say he was stealing they just used that as an example of when employees are are forced to do the "walk of shame" , stores do this to show they mean business. I think there may be some home problems that the mother does not want to admit that could also be the cause of suicide, I doubt that this one incident lead to it. She just is grieving and in her grief she needs someone to blame. She does not even care if she gets money from it just needs someone to blame.

She should blame her son then. I'm getting really tired of people who try to place responsibility for suicide on anyone but the suicidee. Also sick to death of people trying to make a suicide seem more tragic by pointing out the person who did it was disabled, trans, or whatever other little special interest group they may have been part of. It's not. (None of that is directed at you, I'm just ranting.)

[Unconditional Heart]

Ratttking

FirstBornTriplet

Ratttking

Lupa Fangs Makucha

Lady Pallas Athena

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

You are forgetting the other half where she explains that he hadn't stolen something and it was over another argument. Store managers aren't free from lying. So if they all edge that and they did that they ought to provide proof. If he rely did do it then no. If they didn't then they a responsible for defamation of character and most certainly should provide proof. If they walked him out of store in cuffs then that shouldn't be too much to ask of them. And his mother has every right to ask for the proof. though I do think she us suing for the wrong thing. She should be going for defamation of character.

And while they can fire you for anything if they specifically stated it's for shoplifting then they need to fork up the proof. They do not have the right to cause someone without proof and susequently fire them without proof. It's defamation of character and should be adressed as such.

Show me the defamation you are convinced took place. I don't think you understand what the term 'defamation of character' encompasses. They did not state that stealing was why they were firing him.

That is what I was thinking Target did not downright say he was fired for stealing, they just made an example that thief were forced to walk the Walk of Shame for stealing. Walmart does the same, we were shopping and we saw an employee in uniform being walked out by handcuffs with the police, the security (I think it was one of those undercover ones because we see her in the store often) and the manager. Then again that could be employee altercation as well. But nowhere does it say he was stealing they just used that as an example of when employees are are forced to do the "walk of shame" , stores do this to show they mean business. I think there may be some home problems that the mother does not want to admit that could also be the cause of suicide, I doubt that this one incident lead to it. She just is grieving and in her grief she needs someone to blame. She does not even care if she gets money from it just needs someone to blame.

She should blame her son then. I'm getting really tired of people who try to place responsibility for suicide on anyone but the suicidee. Also sick to death of people trying to make a suicide seem more tragic by pointing out the person who did it was disabled, trans, or whatever other little special interest group they may have been part of. It's not. (None of that is directed at you, I'm just ranting.)

Most do that s**t because the dead cannot respond. And it's human to try to blame something when it could of been one minor thing among Plethora of other problems that the person could not cope with.

Also being as its a loved one doing it, the mind is easily clouded when mourning. And the brain refuses to blame their loved one for their own actions.

[KingNot]

Pricks. Though, he wasn't getting payed enough to kill himself.

[fairy-phoenix]

This kinda reminds me of a news story that happened at a local Superstore a couple of weeks back.

[Lupa Fangs]

Ratttking

Lupa Fangs Makucha

Lady Pallas Athena

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

You are forgetting the other half where she explains that he hadn't stolen something and it was over another argument. Store managers aren't free from lying. So if they all edge that and they did that they ought to provide proof. If he rely did do it then no. If they didn't then they a responsible for defamation of character and most certainly should provide proof. If they walked him out of store in cuffs then that shouldn't be too much to ask of them. And his mother has every right to ask for the proof. though I do think she us suing for the wrong thing. She should be going for defamation of character.

And while they can fire you for anything if they specifically stated it's for shoplifting then they need to fork up the proof. They do not have the right to cause someone without proof and susequently fire them without proof. It's defamation of character and should be adressed as such.

Show me the defamation you are convinced took place. I don't think you understand what the term 'defamation of character' encompasses. They did not state that stealing was why they were firing him.

They didn't but it was mentioned that he was arrested and released without charges. Just a simple arrest can stay on your record, but now I'm confused by how the article is written.

[Keltoi Samurai]

Lady Pallas Athena

Lupa Fangs Makucha

How does it sound like he did it? He was let go. They may allow them to be let go at the store where you work if they pay for the item, but that isn't at all stores. And they must of had some proof to be able to accuse him in the first place. If they accused him where is the proof? Now that he is dead they should really cough up the proof or they are responsible for defamation of character.

"The walk of shame is a Target policy to purposely cause shame, embarrassment and emotional distress to any Target employee who is suspected of stealing from Target,” the suit, filed last Thursday, states, according to NBC Los Angeles. ”The policy consists of employees being arrested and paraded in handcuffs through the Target store in full view of co-workers and customers.” The suit alleges that’s exactly what happened on July 15, 2014 to Graham, who was later released and not charged with any crime.


Store has a policy for a certain event. Employee is subject to that policy. Therefore I draw a reasonable assumption that such an event likely occurred. I agree that they likely had proof that he did it. I don't believe this was some conspiracy, as the mother seems to imply that it is and that this pseudo-arrest/escort is all just some cover-up for something that happened months ago. I just don't think that they're responsible for his suicide or need to provide proof. They had the right to protect their merchandise as per their policies, an employee should be especially aware of that. And they have the right to fire someone for pretty much any reason. It's pretty standard policy for stores that if you're caught shoplifting, you're taken to a private area and police are called. Then it's generally left up to the police to decide whether to press charges or not. Just because no charges were ultimately brought doesn't mean he wasn't guilty of shoplifting. It's often not worth the cost of going to court when the person shoplifted $10 or even just $100 worth of items.

The only reason this is news is because somehow it's different because he was Autistic and because he committed suicide. Had he simply gone about his life no one would care. But because he made a decision on his own now suddenly the store is responsible?

You don't see any difference between "accused" and "guilty," do you?

Just because someone is subjected to a policy regarding someone being suspected of something doesn't mean they actually did the thing they were accused/suspected of doing.

I mean, by that logic, we wouldn't even need criminal courts, since police arrest criminals, thus anyone who is arrested must be guilty, since not being guilty would mean they weren't really a criminal, and thereby they wouldn't have been arrested.

[Hadronyche]

It doesn't matter if he had Aspberger's. You should still know that stealing is illegal and if you get caught, you will get into trouble. So, him having to do the "walk of shame" serves him right. His mother is a ******** idiot.