How a $100 bill ends up costing Target $3.1 million

[DangerAardvark]

The link won't load for me, but if they got sued because they used those stupid fucking iodine pens as evidence, then they deserve what they got.

 

[FallenHero]

Originally posted by: akshatp
What if the lady WAS indeed trying to use a fake bill, and then when SS came to inspect it she produced a real one? That would be pretty sneaky.

Eh, I'm surprised the Secret Service even spoke with her. They don't bother with small time shit. Unless you have 10k+ in large bills that are all fake, they don't do anything.

 

[DayLaPaul]

Originally posted by: FallenHero

Originally posted by: akshatp
What if the lady WAS indeed trying to use a fake bill, and then when SS came to inspect it she produced a real one? That would be pretty sneaky.

Eh, I'm surprised the Secret Service even spoke with her. They don't bother with small time shit. Unless you have 10k+ in large bills that are all fake, they don't do anything.

Most people passing off fake bills do it one at a time, I'd imagine. Had her 1974 bill been found counterfeit, I'm sure a warrant would have been drawn up to search her residence and any other places, hoping to break that mythical $10k barrier. But of course it would all start with one solid lead and one counterfeit bill.

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: KK
I don't care what 1sikbitch said, did she lose her job?

Why would she lose her job? She didn't do anything wrong.

Would you let someone who was under investigation for child molestation near your children? It doesn't matter whether she did or did not at that point, what matters is that she could have, and until she is cleared of any wrongdoing it is human nature to err on the side of caution and believe that she's guilty. It's a witch hunt, really. Even if she didn't, there are always going to be people that see her walk in to their store and keep a close eye on her.

Now, is that worth $3.1 million? Not really. I wanna know how much she sued for, not just how much the jury awarded her.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: KK
I don't care what 1sikbitch said, did she lose her job?

Why would she lose her job? She didn't do anything wrong.

Would you let someone who was under investigation for child molestation near your children?

That and even if SS cleared her did Target send out a letter saying that? Did they admit fault? Probable not. As such even if she kept ehr job she be stuck there as every other business would have her picture and letter from target saying she was trying to steal etc...


Employees should never question if money is real or not the way target did. They should have either just told her they would not accept it as it was to old for their pens or if they really wanted to push it called the local SS and let them handle it. They should have not said it was fake, as they are/were not trained in that, let alone send out that letter and her picture.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: Vic
This wasn't a frivolous lawsuit. I can easily see how someone would think the judgment was excessive, but frivolous? No.

:thumbsup:

 

[BoomerD]

I imagine this made life difficult for this lady, to say the least. The ONLY way to keep corporations in check is by hitting them in the pocketbook...that's the ONLY place you can hurt them.
IMO, the store went above and beyond what would be acceptable in this case, and IMO, she's entitled to this and more.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I imagine this made life difficult for this lady, to say the least. The ONLY way to keep corporations in check is by hitting them in the pocketbook...that's the ONLY place you can hurt them.
IMO, the store went above and beyond what would be acceptable in this case, and IMO, she's entitled to this and more.

Exactly. Set an example so you don't get them pulling this shit. Like that teacher with the $2 bills at Best Buy.

 

[rasczak]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: MrPickins
I don't necessarily agree with the damages, but it sounds like she had a pretty solid case for defamation.

the punitive damages should be given to a charity of the benefactors choice imo

If that's the case, then she can write the check out to me. $3.1 million dollars please, and no funny stuff.

 

[ghostman]

Originally posted by: Vic
This wasn't a frivolous lawsuit. I can easily see how someone would think the judgment was excessive, but frivolous? No.

Indeed. I don't even find that judgment excessive. She only got $100K, which I find to be reasonable for spreading false information that leads to the Secret Service showing up at your workplace. This is regardless of where the woman worked and whether she ultimately lost her job.

 

[Xavier434]

I hate how lawsuits have been reduced to get rich quick opportunities. They have always been like that to some degree but they have never been nearly as aggressive as they are now.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: KK
I hope the bitch gets run over by a bus. Maybe her fucking scum lawyer will be with her too.

Yea how dare she try and protect her good name and image. Who cares it may have cost her a job and maybe future work. Target and any business should be able to ruin you anytime they feel like it. :roll:

Did it cost her the high paying belks job she had?

1sikbITCH already gave the non-smartass answer above. So here is is again.


"Her very livelihood in the security field depends on her being perceived as reliable and beyond suspicion. Now that Target has ruined her credibility, whenever she goes into court to testify against a shoplifter every defense attorney will just bring up the Target incident and discredit her testimony, causing the case to be dismissed. Her career in Theft Prevention was over the minute the Feds walked into her store.
It's likely that this incident cost her a couple years' salary and probably forced her to seek out a new career completely. That'd be worth $100,000."

I don't care what 1sikbitch said, did she lose her job?

Well, it doesn't matter. If you want to be angry, then be angry with the jurors who decided she should be awarded that much. She probably shit her pants when she heard the decision.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I hate how lawsuits have been reduced to get rich quick opportunities. They have always been like that to some degree but they have never been nearly as aggressive as they are now.

And where is your evidence that this was such a case?

She had a valid reason to sue. She received a reasonable judgement and the jury saw fit to award substantial punitive damages.

Do you understand what punitive damages are what the purpose they serve? No one is going to bat an eye at a $100,000 judgement. If companies are to be stopped from ever doing things like this, only a large judgement will make them take notice and put training and policies in place to prevent it. And we're not just talking Target, but all retailers. I guarantee you ever major retailers legal department has seen this and will spend time and effort into making sure a similar incident does not happen in their stores.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I hate how lawsuits have been reduced to get rich quick opportunities. They have always been like that to some degree but they have never been nearly as aggressive as they are now.

And where is your evidence that this was such a case?

She had a valid reason to sue. She received a reasonable judgement and the jury saw fit to award substantial punitive damages.

Do you understand what punitive damages are what the purpose they serve? No one is going to bat an eye at a $100,000 judgement. If companies are to be stopped from ever doing things like this, only a large judgement will make them take notice and put training and policies in place to prevent it. And we're not just talking Target, but all retailers. I guarantee you ever major retailers legal department has seen this and will spend time and effort into making sure a similar incident does not happen in their stores.

Wow! A reasonable response that doesn't involve the lady getting hit by a bus or trying to "get rich quick". Thanks ATOT!

Target likely had the opportunity to settle for something much less, probably in the range of her actual damages. They chose to gamble and go to court. I don't think anyone should really be crying for them. Besides, they'll just write it off!

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I hate how lawsuits have been reduced to get rich quick opportunities. They have always been like that to some degree but they have never been nearly as aggressive as they are now.

And where is your evidence that this was such a case?

She had a valid reason to sue. She received a reasonable judgement and the jury saw fit to award substantial punitive damages.

Do you understand what punitive damages are what the purpose they serve? No one is going to bat an eye at a $100,000 judgement. If companies are to be stopped from ever doing things like this, only a large judgement will make them take notice and put training and policies in place to prevent it. And we're not just talking Target, but all retailers. I guarantee you ever major retailers legal department has seen this and will spend time and effort into making sure a similar incident does not happen in their stores.

Wow! A reasonable response that doesn't involve the lady getting hit by a bus or trying to "get rich quick". Thanks ATOT!

Target likely had the opportunity to settle for something much less, probably in the range of her actual damages. They chose to gamble and go to court. I don't think anyone should really be crying for them. Besides, they'll just write it off!

If it makes you feel better, I'll ask that the OP get hit by a bus.

 

[PingSpike]

Damages are ridonkulous, but I don't disagree with the way the ruling went.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Mahaguru
Target will just do a write off.

Jerry: So, we're going to make the post office pay for my new stereo, now?
Kramer: It's a write-off for them.
Jerry: How is it a write-off?
Kramer: They just write it off.
Jerry: Write it off what?
Kramer: Jerry all these big companies they write off everything.
Jerry: You don't even know what a write-off is.
Kramer: Do you?
Jerry: No, I don't.
Kramer: But they do - and they are the ones writing it off.

haha, classic.

 

[torpid]

I love how ATOTers are wishing her ill will when all she did was sue legitimately for character defamation. It's not her fault the jury awarded punitive damages that are likely unconstitutional due to due process requirements. It will probably get knocked down to 4:1 or similar.

 

[Skunkwourk]

Article doesn't say how much she sued for.

 

[SirStev0]

why did the target employee feel the need to pass such information around. Sounds like they knew the person and this was some sort of personal issue that was taken to an extreme level. Doing it on company time got the company fucked. Sounds like Cantrell is the winner.

 

[SirStev0]

And let's be honest. Who do you think is getting more of that? Her or her lawyer?

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: MrPickins
I don't necessarily agree with the damages, but it sounds like she had a pretty solid case for defamation.

 

[Genx87]

What is the problem? Instead of contacting authorities the employee spread false information to private citizens. People who may be potential employers.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Genx87
What is the problem? Instead of contacting authorities the employee spread false information to private citizens. People who may be potential employers.

From my understanding they, target, and other business's got together and said if you catch someone send us all you have. So target would get info and they would send info out.

The problem is they said someone was passing fake money and shoplifting yet they are not experts in US money and the rest was false as well. She only knew about it as she handles that sort of information at her place of work.

Sounds like a "slam dunk" case to me.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: SirStev0
why did the target employee feel the need to pass such information around. Sounds like they knew the person and this was some sort of personal issue that was taken to an extreme level. Doing it on company time got the company fucked. Sounds like Cantrell is the winner.

In its answer, Target says that its employee sent the email only to a loss-prevention employee at another department store and who also served as theft task force?s communication liaison.

A loss-prevention employee for Target composed an email that was distributed to a group known as the Carolina Organized Retail Theft Task Force, according to the complaint.

The employee?s email -- the contents of which included images of Cantrell shopping and allegations that she had tried to pass a counterfeit bill and had shoplifted -- was sent to 31 members of the group, according to the complaint. Members included local, state and federal law enforcement offices, malls, department stores, home-improvement stores and grocery stores, the complaint alleged.

They were part of a group that shared information to help other stores and law enforcement prevent theft.