The Seattle Police Department’s internal investigations unit is reviewing an incident on Friday, May 8, in which officers arrested and banned a Seattle man from the downtown REI after he used his phone to photograph two security guards inside the store.

Shane Becker, a 29-year-old web designer, says he was standing in line at REI, getting ready to purchase a bike rack lock, when he saw two Loomis Fargo security guards refilling an ATM inside the store.

Becker says he walked over and took a picture of the security guards and the open ATM with his phone because he is “fascinated by the insides of things that we don’t normally get to see.”

b41b/1242164923-3513998015_0acdf812d5_o.jpg
The verboten photo, via IamShane.com

According to Becker, the armed security guards confronted him about the photo and threatened to tackle him if he tried to leave the store. “Loomis wanted my ID so that they could write a report internally because I took a picture of them with the machine open,” Becker says. “They said they didn’t know who I was or what I intended to do with the photograph or why I would want to take it.” Becker refused to show the Loomis employees his ID, REI security got involved, and the police were called.

According to a police report, when officers arrived, one of the armed Loomis guards told them he was concerned about his safety and was not sure if Becker was going to attempt to grab the money that was going into the ATM machine.

Police claim Becker was uncooperative and refused to give them his ID. Becker acknowledges that he refused to provide officers with ID, but did so because he was afraid they would hand it over to Loomis. Ironically, Becker says another REI customer photographed his arrest, and he’s hoping to get a copy of the photo.

Police took Becker to the West Precinct and held him for about half an hour before requiring him to sign a Trespass Admonishment card, barring him from returning to REI for a year, and released him.

Kara Stone, general manager at REI’s downtown store, says the incident was “super unfortunate” and claims Becker was not trespassed at the request of REI staff, although SPD records indicate otherwise. “Shane is welcome to come into our store,” she says.

Frank, the guy who answered the phone at Loomis’s office—he would not provide his last name or position with the company—would not comment on the incident or whether Loomis has any company policies about photography of staff members.

Not only was REI, SPD, and Loomis’s overreaction to the incident totally ridiculous, it may have also been illegal.

Doug Klunder, Privacy Project director at the Seattle branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, says cases like Becker’s are becoming more frequent. “These come up all the time and the ultimate answer ends up being, yes [the photographer] had the right to take the photo and should not have been arrested and detained,” Klunder says. “It would be really nice if officers would start realizing that rather than going through this rigmarole.”

Becker, who says he’s been an REI customer for several years, says he’ll be contacting the ACLU about the incident, but he also wants to find a way to spend the $200 REI dividend he wasn’t able to use last week. For now, he says, “I won’t be shopping there.”

Jonah Spangenthal-Lee: Proving you wrong since 1983.

145 replies on “Police Arrest Man for Taking Photo in REI”

  3. a whiney straightedge vegan with a car, shopping at REI and to top things off an ‘anarchist’ with a fucking blog.

    what a walking paradox.

  4. Sounds like a whole bunch of badges need to be given an orientation on the rights of citizens to take photographs of activities occurring in publicly accessible locations.

  5. I was under the impression that the cops could only arrest or detain someone if they had cause to suspect that a crime had occurred. Did the Stranger ask the Seattle PD what Shane was suspected of when he was arrested? Your writeup only says that he was “uncoopoerative”, so they arrested him. Is being uncooperative a crime?

  6. All I had to do was view this self-obsessed douchebag’s website to know this is a crock of shit. I’m so surprised that a Straight-edge vegan anarchist would be complaining about this (sarcasm).

  11. Hmm, I don’t know if I would necessarily creep up behind a security guard refilling an ATM and snap a photo without asking first. Sounds like that’s what he did, and I’m sure there’s a certain proximity zone that would trigger a guard’s internal alarms that the dude probably set off. The ensuing mess sounds unreasonable on everyone’s part however. Whatevs.

  14. If he’s getting a $200 dividend check, isn’t he a customer who buys a lot of stuff? Super unfortunate indeed.

  15. I’m not sure they overreacted. I think it was really naive and stupid of this guy to take a photograph of security guards refilling an ATM, just because–what, he thought it was neat? What a dork! Of course they’re going to get suspicious! They’re in a vulnerable situation with all that cash right there for the taking; of course they’re going to be hyper-aware and a little edgy about some idiot snapping photos of them at work. If someone snapped a picture of me at an ATM, I’d want to fling their camera into the nearest intersection. People need to use their common sense.

  17. RCW 9A.76.020: Obstructing a law enforcement officer:

    (1) A person is guilty of obstructing a law enforcement officer if the person willfully hinders, delays, or obstructs any law enforcement officer in the discharge of his or her official powers or duties.

    Seems pretty vague. Regardless, I notice Shane wasn’t actually *charged* with anything. I wonder if that means anything about the validity of the arrest in the first place…

  18. wow, this really pisses me off. I used to have a friend in high school that turned out to become one of those fake-cop-money-transporting-tough-guys.
    Talk about an uber douche upgrade.
    He is such a prick now.

    Even if you don’t like this kid you gotta agree this is pretty absurd and obvious over reaction on the side of the security. The public is expected to act irrational but “professionals” shouldn’t let their passionate hate for people like this kid to factor into the way they react.

    This is the basically why the concept of police will never work flawlessly. They are human (and we can derive “emotionally retarded” based upon that).

  20. Ah, arresting people for taking innocuous photographs…it sends me back to the good old days in Karl-Marx-Stadt in the 1970s…

  21. This guy and the screaming douchebag outside the Seattle Times w/ his video camera both personify everything I hate about Seattle. And the T-ball generation. “I’m special! I’m a winner!”

  23. I would have agreed with the guy about how shitty the situation was but then I saw his blog. What a loon. And from the looks of it he’s also a total media whore who will make this non-event his claim to fame.

  24. Oh my god. Just look at his website. He’s a vegan straightedge anarchist. And, he acted like an asshole when they were being perfectly reasonable. What an aphid.

    My sympathy is with the security guards. Let them do their bloody jobs unhindered next time! He hasn’t been “victimized” by the “system”, as much as he’d like to think he has. What a whiner.

  25. you know, i think the guy is a bit of a jackass, and it was likely that his comments escalated the situation, instead of making it go away. but you know, he has a point, regardless of how much of a megalomaniac he is. for a country who prides itself on being so ‘free’, there’s way too much fake cop nonsense happening.

  26. I wonder how juch the tax payers will have to shell out to settle this? Our cops aren’t just ineffective, arrogant, and reactionary. They are expensive to clean up after too. How about cutting some of them and funding things that actually help rather than hurt people?

  27. @23 yeah EVERYONE who has a blog is totally trying to be famous……totally…you are so right. Writing about yourself and stories of your life is so fucking narcissistic.
    Good thing nobody does it these days….phew

  28. #20 innocuous? Come on. At the very least, provocative. The first thing I would assume is that someone taking a picture would want to know something about the inner workings of an ATM. Believe it or not, there are reasons for wanting to know such things besides just thinking the inside of these machines are neat. If you were getting cash out of an ATM and someone came up and took a picture of you, would you smile and say cheese? This dude’s a dumbass and was purposely trying to provoke.

  29. @15:

    COMMON SENSE dictates that one guy TAKING A PHOTO isn’t exactly gearing up to bum-rush two ARMED security guards. They overreacted no question.

    And seriously, take an anger-management class, stat, before your deck some poor sap for the heinous crime of invading your personal space.

  30. I really don’t see what the big deal is about his blog. He doesn’t register on my douche meter, I think he just seems pissed off, and in my opinion, rightly so.

  31. I really don’t see what the big deal is about his blog. He doesn’t register on my douche meter, I think he just seems pissed off, and in my opinion, rightly so.

  32. I really don’t see what the big deal is about his blog. He doesn’t register on my douche meter, I think he just seems pissed off, and in my opinion, rightly so.

  37. How the hell are people this divided on this issue. The guy did something totally within reason, not to mention within his rights, and then told the security guards (who I think lack any real authority to begin with) that no, they could not have his ID for taking a photograph.

    Legitimate, I don’t think they have the right to demand ID from anyone.

    Then he was arrested? He could have been the biggest prick in the planet, but he was also standing up for his (and your) rights.

    That being said, Jonah, did you type this on a mobile phone? I’ve never seen so many typos.

    Love you.

  38. I hope he sues that pants off Loomis, REI and SPD. Rent-a-cops are assholes and are usually the guys that are not mentally fit to become actual cops. They have a huge chip on their shoulders because of this and this guy smart for not sharing his ID with them. They have no right to request it, plus the guard who threatened to tackle him should be reprimanded by Loomis for making the threat. Sorry, don’t care if the guy is a douche on his blog or not, this whole incident is just plain wrong.

  40. Everyone in this story acted a fucking fool at some point, but this kid’s arrogance is truly astounding (my views on veganism, straightedge, and anarchy aside). Why he felt the need to take a picture of the ATM is beyond me. I know that I’m personally not a fan of strangers taking pictures of me, and I’m not a security guard handling large sums of cash on a daily basis.

    Whatever. This kid was clearly trying to show “the man” just how punk rock he is. What he’s doing hanging out at REI and Fall Out Boy shows is anybody’s guess.

  41. I agree that whether he’s a douche or not is not the issue. But can we start another thread to assassinate his character

  42. I have to side with Becker here.

    Yeah, he was being obtuse, and passive-aggressive. Maybe even a bit of a douchebag.

    But he’s right.

    People take all sorts of pictures of all kinds of silly stuff every day with their cell phones. Welcome to the 21st century. He didn’t do anything illegal. He didn’t break any state secrets. His shitty little cellphone pic posed no real security risk. In short, he caused no harm, even if you think he was stupid and/or a bit of an asshole.

    The rent-a-cops were on a power trip. They escalated the situation till it got completely out of hand. Becker was under no obligation whatsoever to show ID to rent-a-cops. If they had a lick of sense or the slightest bit of training, they’d know that. Since he was standing there in line, they could have simply turned tables on him; they could have shot a pic of him with their own cell phones (surely one of them must have had one), and written their company report, with or without his cooperation or ID. There was no need to escalate the situation other than their own desire to make him do what they wanted.

    The cops weren’t much better. Although at least real cops CAN require you to present ID. Still, they detained him for no real reason, as evidenced by the fact that they never charged him with anything.

  44. Is this guy really an anarchist or is he just quoting Against Me! in his tweet-sized bio? I want to support the cause but I find Larry Flynt easier to sympathize with.

  45. This guy got names, pictures, badge numbers, and a detailed narrative of the incident. Basically everything a lawyer needs to sue the fuck out of Loomis, REI, and SPD.

  47. 42: “they detained him for no real reason, as evidenced by the fact that they never charged him with anything.”

    The fact that the douchebag wasn’t charged with anything does not show that the cops had no reason to arrest him. First of all, the cops don’t charge people, the prosecutor’s office does. The prosecutor’s office declines to charge all kinds of crimes every day, because there are only so many prosecutors and they have better things to do. Second, according to the post, “when officers arrived, one of the armed Loomis guards told them he was concerned about his safety and was not sure if Becker was going to attempt to grab the money that was going into the ATM machine.” Last time I checked, grabbing money would be a crime, and the Loomis guardn’s statement (even if it did turn out to be a lie) is enough for the officer to have probable cause to arrest.

Comments are closed.