The Seattle Police Department is reviewing an incident on Friday,
May 8, in which officers arrested a 29-year-old man and banned him from
the Eastlake REI store after he used his phone to photograph two
armored-car security guards who were servicing an ATM inside the
store.
Shane Becker, a Seattle web designer, says he was standing in line
at REI, getting ready to purchase a lock for his car’s bike rack, when
he saw two Loomis security guards refilling the ATM.
Becker walked over and took a picture of the security guards and the
open ATM with his phone. On his blog, iamshane.com, Becker wrote that he took the
photo because he’s “fascinated by the insides of things that we don’t
normally get to see.”
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,”
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 police 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, and they arrested him. Becker acknowledges he wouldn’t give police
his ID, but says he was afraid they’d hand it over to Loomis.
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. On the morning of
Tuesday, May 12, Becker received an e-mail from SPD’s Office of
Professional Accountability informing him that a complaint had been
filed against the officers on his behalf.
Kara Stone, general manager at REI’s Eastlake store, says the
incident was “super unfortunate” and claims Becker was not banned from
the store at the request of REI staff, although SPD records indicate
otherwise. “Shane is welcome to come into our store,” she says.
An employee named Frank who answered the phone at Loomis’s office
would not comment on the incident or whether Loomis has any company
policies about photography of staff members.
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. It would be really nice
if officers would start realizing that [before making an arrest] rather
than going through this rigmarole.” 
I’m fairly confident that Becker can sue the security guards for false imprisonment. That kind of thing is tricky with cops, but with private security guards, the law’s pretty clear.
Becker is a douche beyond all terms of douching and needs to be slingshotted into the sun. Anarchists dont have blogs, stupid. Nor do whiney straightedge vegans own cars or shop at ‘the man’ like REI. A real one would have made a bike rack out of found art.
What #2 said. Becker is a total tool.
#2 & #3: So douchebags can be detained without cause?
@4 makes a great point. Are we supposed to overlook what happened here because you read his blog and found he was a douche? Isn’t that like blaming a victim? He was asking for it by being himself? That is a pretty fucked up way to look at things don’t you think?
My wife has gotten into trouble for taking photos at Costco. Apparently it’s against Costco policy to take pictures of the price of bananas. I’m still not really sure what exactly they’re afraid of?
Granted, this “photographer” did nothing illegal and just gets off trying to “stick it to the man”. His lack of reasonable thinking is stunning for him not to consider the obvious “initial” reactions of the Loomis workers, however, for them to threaten him with a physical restraint if he tried to leave was way out of line. But their reason for concern was totally justified. They should have put one of themselves in between the picture-taker and the money, secured the money and the ATM, and left the scene to return later when it was “safer”. Perhaps, to have even called the police if they were truly threatened by him… but why would they continue to leave themselves exposed if they felt concerned for their safety.
All that being said, I went to the vegan-anarchists website and was floored to realize that I recognize this good citizen of the Seattle area. My wife and I witnessed him smashing the storefront window at Niketown and stealing merchandise from the window display back when W.T.O. was here. I will tackle him if I ever get to see him in public again… someone please photograph that!!
Douche or no douche this is troubling. Maybe what needs to happen is more public education on law, civil rights and basic freedoms. Should be taught, in schools, starting from a young age. There should be field trips to take pictures in public and assignments to do access to information requests. And stuff like that. Yeppo yep yep.
Some statements need to be made. Sometimes douche bags are the only ones acting while others sit behind their keyboards “talking” about what should be done.
The thing that I find most disappointing is that he was obviously trying to make a political statement. Just own up to it. Don’t make up some sissy excuse about wanting to see the insides of things that you don’t normally get to see the insides of.
I have a few points to make… 1) only one side of the story is out there. More often than not the truth will be somewhere in the middle of Shane’s story, Loomis, REI, and SPD…
2) reading the story did the Loomis employee physycally detain Shane??? Not sure but it seems Loomis did not unlawfully detain Shane…
and my last rant… where it isn’t illegal to take pics of people in public, is it legal to publish them on the net without permission?
He wasn’t in a public park, he was in a private business. If REI has specific rules regarding photography, that’s their right. As for the Trespass card, REI staffers would have signed their portion of it. It sounds like REI is backtracking after the fact. As for refusing to present your ID when you encounter the police, well, that will indeed get you arrested.
@10 (Scooter): Here are some things I learned yesterday about photographers’ rights:
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
The relevant points are that one is allowed to photograph anything on public property, and it is reasonable to assume one can photograph anything on private property until told otherwise (by a person, by a sign). Photos you take are your property, and it’s legal, and reasonable, to put images of your property on the web.
@#2/Gay Pitbull: Since when do anarchists inherently not have blogs? What is anti-anarchist about the Internet? Isn’t a blog a pretty standard way of stating your opinions in the “digital age” or whatever we’re in? And isn’t the Internet the ultimate free forum? So wouldn’t it be censorship-happy, control-freakish conservative types that would be against using the Internet to voice your anarchic ideals rather than vice versa? And whether you agree with his blogging-anarchist or straightedge-at-REI existence or not, civil liberties are civil liberties and belong to everybody, not just the ones you think qualify as “non-douches.”
@Take it all in: you make a lot of good points, but one thing about Shane is that he is crazy into “the way things work” or whatever, and he probably never stopped to think that there might be consequences of taking that picture. To him, it would be ridiculous to get in trouble for something like that, so he wouldn’t stop to think of it as a possibility in the first place. So I don’t think he’s making “sissy excuses.”
Did Erica C Barnett have to sign a Trespass card when she stole wine from QFC? Is she prohibited from entering a QFC?
The Seattle PI just posted a preliminary incident report from SPD. The officers viewpoint generally matches Shane’s. There is just one discrepancy with REI. The SPD report states that REI security requested Shane be criminally trespassed. Yet general manager Kara Stone claims Becker was not banned from the store at the request of REI staff. Whats the truth?
@4 & 5
Are you trying to tell me you’re not disappointed with the lack of tasering in this story?
The Seattle PI just posted a preliminary incident report from SPD. The officers viewpoint generally matches Shane’s. There is just one discrepancy with REI. The SPD report states that REI security requested Shane be criminally trespassed. Yet general manager Kara Stone claims Becker was not banned from the store at the request of REI staff. Whats the truth?
The Seattle PI just posted a preliminary incident report from SPD. The officers viewpoint generally matches Shane’s. There is just one discrepancy with REI. The SPD report states that REI security requested Shane be criminally trespassed. Yet general manager Kara Stone claims Becker was not banned from the store at the request of REI staff. Whats the truth?
Maybe the police are confused about the trespassing thing because Shane may or may not have been arrested for shoplifting at the same store two years ago, and that incident may or may not have resulted in a 1-year no trespass order. Maybe someone should ask Shane about that.
REI is too expensive anyway. Whenever you buy something there, they have to jack up the price you pay to subsidize jokers who bought high-end mountaineering gear there 20 years ago and brought it back for a full refund. And got it because rules is rules, baby.
If I’m going to pay crazy high retail prices, I want something for it I can use now, not bequeath to my progeny. And if it takes you more than 30 days to figure out if you really wanted that gale-proof tent, you’re retarded and a grizzly bear is going to eat you, so you don’t need a tent.
so Shanes cockbuddy @ 13 – the dude lives a lie, he knows it, we know it and yet you don’t.
it’s like finding a 1%er, they aren’t going to expose themselves. neither would a true anarchist unlike that little pathetic poser trying to sell his faggy tshirts.
The poster ‘epinonymous’ may or may not find sexual release by being shat upon by a goat, and he may or may not have been banned from the Puyallup Fair after being found naked in a goat pen. Maybe someone should ask ‘epinonymous’ about that.
Perhaps in the future Becker will resist the urge to do something stupid involving armed guards.
He obviously has no concern for how his actions make others feel. If you are an armed guard, having to deal with large amounts of cash(that people have a record for trying to steal) how would you feel about having your picture taken while trying to perform your job? Obviously he didn’t CARE about the guards feeling comfortable and safe. In my book that makes him a total jackass, regardless of what is ‘legal’. Legal vs Illegal, doesn’t equal Right vs Wrong. The right thing to do would have been to be a considerate human being, which it sounds like he was not.
Welcome to the club, Shane.
Welcome to the club, Shane.
Lainy, No. 24, how’d you get so dumb? People have guns because they can’t control their feelings. So we don’t need to worry about their feelings, you pseudo hippy moron, we need to worry about them going off and shooting folks. They wear guns openly and dark sunglasses to make us scared. Do you think they sit around drinking organic juice and tofu asking if their oppressive and fear inducing demeanor is right or wrong? Seriously, did you ask for extra helpings when the hit on the head stupid stick came around? Security guards and cops don’t have feelings, they have guns.
Lainy, No. 24, how’d you get so dumb? People have guns because they can’t control their feelings. So we don’t need to worry about their feelings, you pseudo hippy moron, we need to worry about them going off and shooting folks. They wear guns openly and dark sunglasses to make us scared. Do you think they sit around drinking organic juice and tofu asking if their oppressive and fear inducing demeanor is right or wrong? Seriously, did you ask for extra helpings when the hit on the head stupid stick came around? Security guards and cops don’t have feelings, they have guns.
Actually, the fact that he took photos of Loomis personnel and an open ATM is a FEDERAL issue. SPD get involved because they are the first agency of response designated by Federal code. The issue of what this guy did is now out of the hands of REI but in the hands of authorities because irregardless of the intent of the photography, the photo itself can be used to threaten the lives of the people who are doing their jobs so common people can use the ATM, or bank. This guy can now be held responsible for any robbery committed against armored transportation.
Loomis is not a security service. It is an armored transportation service. There is a reason those people carry guns. Think about it.
There is point that alot people seem to be missing here. This guy Shane was not taken to SPD for not showing is ID to the Loomis people, it was for showing it the Police themselves when asked to see it. Loomis, by the way that Shane’s blog and everythign else reads did not have him arrested or detainded. That was a sole decision by SPD….
Instead of playing dressup with his friends and printing out weak shirts, he really has a chance to convince people he’s a real anarchist now. He is self fellating like never before, and from the looks of it he was pretty good at it to begin with.
He’s reaping exactly what he has sown.
And for those screaming “but what if we all get arrested for taking pictures now?”, don’t get bunched panties over this. He was arrested because he was a self righteous prick to everyone else involved. A little more cooperation, with the cops specifically, would have defused the whole situation.
Also: if he really wanted to look at upskirt pics of ATM machines, he could have found them online as he expertly demonstrated to us. Whining about getting caught taking those upskirts? No sympathy.
The piece of the story that we should all (unjokingly) be concerned with, is the unnecessary detainment of someone who was (most likely unknowingly) exercising his rights as an American citizen. How quickly we’re willing to give up our freedom when it’s happening to the “other” guy. Do you not realize that we’re all in this together. If we don’t speak up when we see an injustice happening then we might as well agree with it. What’s next, waterboarding for US criminals? Accepting that wire tapping is just a way of life? I am so sad and discouraged to see how complacent, lazy and cowardly American citizens have become. It seems to me like a slap in the face to all of the soldiers past and present who have fought for our freedoms.
Am I the only one who noticed that the article was directly across from a full-page REI ad in the print version?
Shane is a douche but because he chose to exacerbate the situation by refusing to show his ID and be polite. Really, where is the harm in saying “Hey, sorry man, I didn’t mean to worry you. I just thought it was cool and so I took a picture.”
Wow, what a bunch of mostly lame comments. The bottom line is that Shane was arrested for not showing his ID to SPD, right?
Loomis was WAY out of line here in attempting to detain this man. In NO way was Shane required to show ID to Loomis OR REI. And @29: Where in FEDERAL law does it state that taking pictures of an open ATM is illegal?
Is there anything wrong or illegal with being curious about the inner workings of a cash machine?
@32 – you’re dead on there sister.
I just want my total freedom to take a picture. I have taken pictures of police hand cuffing people and they just ask me to stop did not ask any other questions or take my camera. These fake cops should not have the power that they think they have, lets not let them become more powerful. We should all breakout the Zeitgeist video’s and relearn our rights as people and take the power back……….
So far this guy has been accused of being a rioter, a vandal and a common thief (breaking a window in Niketown and stealing tennis shoes) and a shop lifter, (shoplifting from REI a year ago.)
Maybe that is the reason he didn’t want anyone to know who he was.
I doubt that Guards who handle large amounts of cash like their pictures taken for some pretty obvious reasons.
Wow, you’re all ignoring the big green elephant in the room…. The bald guard looks FUCKING HOT! (at least from the back/side)
Just FYI, Washington doesn’t have a stop-and-identify statute on the books–which means you are not required to provide police with identification if you don’t want to. That right is obviously different when you’re driving a car, since you can be compelled to produce a license, but a pedestrian in Washington state does not have to identify themselves to police. For more information, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_Id…
It’s their store. If they don’t want to you to take pictures, you don’t take pictures. If you don’t like that, you find another store. This guy (and clearly a lot of posters here) sounds like the prototypical punk-ass child of a boomer. He was “afraid the police would give his ID to Loomis”??? That’s about the most retarded reasoning I have heard in The Stranger in a while (and that’s saying something). You really should check out his blog — this guy is a piece of work. I am especially fond of his tagine: “Designer. Typophile. Rails/Rubyist. Still Vegan. Still Straightedge. And, Baby, I’m An Anarchist.” Ooooh, Shane, you edgy dude, you. What a fucking idiot. Based on his Flikr Pool it would seme that he doesn’t know anyone who showers more than once a week.
man this makes the cops in china, egypt, and turkey look like mr. rogers.
someone needs a holiday in cambodia
*** IT’S NOT ABOUT PHOTO RIGHTS! ***
good grief, read the article for content: “Loomis wanted my ID so that they could write a report internally,” 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.”
i find it wholly reasonable and even prudent for loomis to want to know (1) who this guy is, and (2) what he’s doing.
@44 Loomis may “want to know” but they don’t get to demand to know. Too bad so sad for them.
So my friends and I were reading this story in The Stranger, (the actual paper) and the first thing I noticed was that there was a full page REI add right next to this article. From what I gathered, he was buying a bike lock and the add was for summer biking. Add placement on someones part, was it The Strangers staff or a request by REI. I’ll be talking with my new media class filled with graphic designers, photographers and print publishers about this. Anyone have any thoughts?
And to top it off, Shane’s a hobo!!! Check out Shane’s illegal boxcar trainhopping.
http://www.vimeo.com/veganstraightedg
Seriously, if you have an actionable case against the police, you go to a lawyer, you don’t muddy the waters by going to the press and local news. FIRST the lawyer. Unless, of course, you realize you don’t have a case.
@47 – If your goal is to raise public awareness and inspire public debate (like these comments), then you blog first. If your goal is to sue somebody to make money, then I guess you go to a lawyer first. The two are not mutually exclusive.
JohnnyColonoscopy
“Police Arrest Idiot for Being Uncooperative and Not Presenting Identification”
Headline fixed.
I could understand if they were loading Snickers bars into a vending machine…use your head, frickin dingleberry.
Wow, you posters amaze me. I saw this story as one of rights. Maybe I’m jaded. Saturday, I had a King County Animal Control “Officer” detain me and call the police because I would not show her my ID. (I never carry one when I walk my dogs in a park I’ve been going to for 11 years.) All over a dog license–high crime, mind you. On his arrival, the deputy told me if I didn’t answer EVERY question Animal Control asked, he would put me in handcuffs and take me to jail. After he ran my name and address through his computer, he gave AC that information plus my Social Security Number. When AC asked for my phone number, I asked why. Same with asking my dog’s names and if they were microchipped. (She scanned them without my permission.) Later, I spoke with a friend who is a Code Enforcement Officer and was a Community Police Officer. Guess what? My rights were violated! Animal Control has no power to detain and question, which is why AC had to call the police. The problem with the police is their preception that everyone is guilty if they have to be called. They bully and demand and heaven help you if you don’t cowtow.
And why do we go to the press? If a lawyer doesn’t think a case is big enough, he/she is reluctant to take it. Also, the pervasive attitude is “Don’t Rock the Boat”. At least the Stranger has the guts to put the story on the front page. I, for one, am tired of my provacy rights being eroded.