You could leave a cardboard cutout of Erik Estrada at the front counter and I guarantee you no one would ever know the difference. Not so much because you resemble Erik Estrada, more so because you have the personality of cardboard.
Bosco, did you just want me to discover that you made Law Review? You know I'm already into you.vjm, it's getting bad. I also had a run-in with the neighbor of some of our classmates when she complained about the noise. She told me I'd be fat when I grow up.
Why must you make trouble everywhere you go? Rabblerouser.
Is that really how it works? I don't have to show my receipt if I don't want to? If I'm bored I might just try that to be difficult next time I'm at Best Buy or something.
it seems to me that the first issue is whether or not you have any rights in play here. given that you're on private property, your rights are limited beyond those which are granted by your status as "invitee." for example, the reference to "reasonable suspicion" strikes me as misguided as that is a constitutional standard applied to stop & frisk searches by the police. private security personnel are not required to demonstrate reasonable suspicion, at least not in the fashion that one would expect in the criminal procedure context. instead, your remedy for an inappropriate search (and corresponding detention, for that matter) is grounded in tort law here. given that there exists a "shopkeeper's" exception for such searches, you'd have to somehow show that the search was unwarranted, arbitrary, capricious, etc. as you refused to display your receipt upon request, i seriously doubt that you'd survive a MSJ.you're on private property and as such you have very limited constitutional rights. you certainly don't have a constitutional right on private property to withhold a receipt should you so desire. instead, you impliedly assent to whatever conditions the store maintains by voluntarily enterting; any failure to conform brings you in under the shopkeeper's exception.anyway, that's my best guess