Hey, there! Log in / Register

In exchange for better training, DA to drop charges against Primark security firm over the way one of its guards allegedly stomped a girl suspected of shoplifting

The Suffolk County District Attorney's office reported a deal today to drop criminal charges against Securitas for the way a beefy guard allegedly beat an 11-year-old girl he accused of shoplifting at the Downtown Crossing Primark in 2019, in exchange for "sweeping changes" in the way the company trains its guards and special police officers - and keeps track of any improper behavior.

The deal does not involve the criminal charges against the guard, Mohammed Khan, who still faces a potential trial on charges of assault and battery and violating the girl's civil rights for the incident. A Suffolk County grand jury had initially indicted both Khan and his employer for the charges.

The agreement is unconnected to the agreement Securitas reached with the girl and her mother, to settle the lawsuit they filed last year. The company agreed to settle the Suffolk Superior Court suit in December for an amount that was redacted in court filings.

The DA's office said it will monitor Securitas across its scores of Massachusetts client locations for two years and will restore the criminal charges in the event of any violations. An outside auditor will also monitor the company, which agreed to create a database, accessible only to company management of "all videos and written records of arrests or use of force complaints."

The changes in training will include de-escalation of high-risk situations, management of aggressive behavior, unconscious bias, and handling and processing of juvenile offenders. Revisions to the training program will incorporate principles in limits of authority and use of force.

Both the company and the guard were charged with assault and battery on a child under 14 and a violation of her civil rights following the 2019 incident, in which Khan spotted the girl trying to walk out with roughly $175 of merchandise:

On June 9, 2019 he grabbed the 11-year-old girl, pulled her back into the store, and pushed her into a corner obstructing the view of the CCTV security camera. Over the course of more than seven minutes, Khan, who is 6’ 1’’ and 225 pounds, grabbed the girl by the head and neck and threw her to the ground, punched her in the face while straddling her as she was on the ground, and even after being separated from her by Boston Police, re-engaged in struggling with her. All of this was done even though Khan was under explicit orders not to touch any customers, including suspected shoplifters. In addition, his Securitas co-workers and passersby urged him to stop.

Securitas had previously reprimanded Khan four times for excessive use of force, according to the DA's office.

Khan faces his next court appearance on June 9.

Innocent, etc.


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!


Securitas had previously reprimanded Khan four times for excessive use of force, according to the DA's office.

The second time should have been the last; they ought to have fired him then. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that maybe the first incident wasn't that serious (I don't know any details), but the second one established a pattern, and the guy clearly was not suited to the job. Reprimand or not, keeping him on told him they weren't taking his violence seriously.

Voting closed 46

What happened to three strikes and you're out??

Securitas is trash anyway. Have dealt with them when the Hynes has to hire overflow, and they're awful - a bunch of wannabee cops looking to escalate whenever possible. A 14 year old kid walking up the wrong side of the ramp because he's not paying attention doesn't require three grown men to surround and yell at him. And when they're put on metal detectors? Forgettaboutit.

Voting closed 17

I don't see "better training" as being an adequate solution for this gross negligence - unless they mean better training for idiot supervisors in not letting individuals like this remain in the workforce. Clearly any amount of "training" would have been wasted on him.

Voting closed 18

An employee is known as being a hothead but for whatever reason they are allowed to continue doing the same job.

Law Enforcement (including the private version) is not like other jobs. In most jobs, a worker who reacts poorly or makes mistakes might cost the company money or anger coworkers but isn't going to hurt the general public.

That's why the policy for ending employment needs to be different for cops/security vs almost any other job.

Voting closed 27

Thank you! This sounds like the report from many police forces across the USA. More training wouldn't help Khan, he should have never laid hands on someone not engaged in violence.

Voting closed 14

The beating of an 11 year old is expected, when did humanity reach this low?

Voting closed 11

The same commenters? We don't have a hive mind.

Voting closed 5

but I will point out, someone below still tried to thread this needle.

Voting closed 10

how can you be allowed to stomp someone for a crime that is not prosecuted?

Voting closed 12

how can you be allowed to stomp someone

Now go wipe the boot polish off your uvula.

Voting closed 18

A yes, "more training", the thing that always works.

Voting closed 9