The Razor Theft and the Knife Clip
You are a loss-prevention guard in a drugstore. At 16:40 you watch a man, about 24, take three packages of razors worth $68 from a shelf, look up at the camera, push them into his jacket pocket, and walk past the last point of sale and out the door without stopping. You follow him outside, identify yourself, and he stops. He says, 'I was going to pay, I just forgot.' As he speaks you see the clip of a folding knife in his front pocket. He is calm but keeps edging toward the street. Police are about 20 minutes out. Your employer's policy says 'apprehend only shoplifters observed from selection to exit' and says nothing about searching.
1. Do you have lawful grounds to arrest, and what must you do with him once you have?
Read the worked answer
Grounds You personally observed the full chain: selection off the shelf, concealment in the pocket, passing the last point of sale, and exit with no payment. That observation is direct, uninterrupted and made by you, which is exactly what the company policy requires. His 'I was going to pay' is relevant but does not undo the completed act.
Authority As a private person you may arrest without warrant under Criminal Code s. 494 where you find someone committing a criminal offence. Theft of $68 is a summary-conviction-level theft, but it remains an offence and the arrest is being made on fresh, personal observation. You are not a police officer and have no broader power.
What you must then do
- Tell him plainly that he is under arrest for theft and why, in words he understands.
- Use no more force than is necessary to keep him there.
- Deliver him to a peace officer without delay (s. 494 requires delivery forthwith). A 20-minute wait for police who have been called is normally acceptable; holding him for a manager's 'chat', a confession, or a restitution payment is not - that converts a lawful arrest into a false imprisonment.
- Keep contemporaneous notes: exact words, times, what you saw, who else saw it.
Reassess constantly: if he becomes compliant and police are delayed well beyond what was forecast, document why you continued to hold him and re-call police.
2. Can you search him, handcuff him, or take the knife? Justify each.
Read the worked answer
Search for property - no. You have no power to conduct a general or strip search. You saw items go into a jacket pocket; you may ask him to hand them over, and you may watch him remove them, but you do not reach into his clothing. Recovery of the property is secondary to a clean arrest.
Pat-down for weapons - only on articulated safety grounds. You have an objective fact: a visible knife clip in a front pocket, combined with edging toward the street. That supports asking him to keep his hands visible and, if you must, a limited safety check for weapons before placing him in a confined space - but never a search for evidence, and never a search you cannot explain in writing.
Taking the knife - not with your hands. Do not reach into his pocket. Direct him to keep his hands where you can see them and tell police exactly what you saw and where. If he is cooperative, ask him to leave the knife on the ground and step back before you approach it; if he is not, keep distance and wait.
Handcuffs - not automatic. Handcuffs are a use of force and must be justified by a risk of violence or escape, not by routine. Calm, stationary, hands visible: no cuffs. If he tries to run or reaches for the pocket, the picture changes and you must be able to explain the change.
The employer gap: your policy being silent does not authorize anything. Silence means you fall back on law and on minimal force.
3. Six months later he sues for false imprisonment and assault. What facts from this incident would make your conduct defensible, and what would sink it?
Read the worked answer
Defensible
- Grounds existed before the detention and were based on your own continuous, uninterrupted observation from shelf to exit.
- You identified yourself, stated the reason for the arrest, and used no force beyond what was necessary - no cuffs, no search, no grabbing.
- You called police promptly and delivered him as soon as they arrived, and your report shows the times.
- Your notes and the CCTV are consistent with each other and were preserved early.
- You did not demand money, a confession, or a signature release.
Would sink it
- Losing sight of him at any point - the 'selection to exit' chain broken means no grounds and the arrest becomes unlawful.
- Holding him after police were available, or holding him for the manager, or detaining him to negotiate restitution.
- A search of his pockets, or handcuffing a compliant person 'because that's what we do'.
- A report written days later from memory, or one that overstates what you saw.
- Force used after he stopped resisting.
Bottom line: a lawful arrest with minimum force and immediate delivery is a complete answer to both false imprisonment and assault. Every element that buys you protection is created at the scene and proved by the paperwork - which is why the notes matter as much as the arrest.