Quote:2921.29 © Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that personâs name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that personâs name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.
I'll bet that this section only applies to people not suspected of a crime. IMO the officer suspected him of being a shoplifter -- remember, the officer later said he was surprised that there was no illegal booty in the bag -- and so was not asking a citizen for papers, he was asking for proof from someone he suspected of theft and therefore of lying.
IMO the cop did what he should have. I know, let's raise defense money for HIM, a poor working stiff who has to deal with schmucks like that all the time.
IMO Righi is a jerk. He thought he was cute with the "No thanks" and thought he could just drive off into the sunset without consequence. It is jerks like this that cause the rest of us problems. Soon cashiers will have to hand the merchandise bag to the doorman, who will inspect it, and then give it to the customer as they walk out the door. The bag is not the property of the customer until the transaction is complete, (only the government can search a person IIRC) and now the transaction will be more definitive as being at the door as opposed to at the checkout.
You can tell Righi is a jerk, because he's publishing names of all those involved for maximum stink power. What a maroon.
-V
Gift Shop Greeter
The Forsaken Inn
(edit: mmiissppeelleedd jerko's name)