The Papers Please Circuit City - He's a millionaire people!

Amazing what you can find on Google!

From Dicky Mellon Scaife's rag!

Same guy? Not a common name - doubt there are two in Pittsburgh. I'm betting this is the same guy.

On edit - yep same guy - right on his blog.

My name is Michael Amor Righi. People have asked me why I often use my full name. I use my full name in print because some people know me as “Amor Righi” and others as “Michael Righi.” These days I go by Michael, but in college I went by my middle name, Amor, which was my grandfather’s name.

I currently spend my time working with technologies such as Java, XML and Python. In January 2002 I started a training and consulting company which recently changed names to Field Expert. The job keeps me out of town two to three weeks a month, which is good because I enjoy traveling.

I am proud to call Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania my home. Pittsburgh is this country’s best kept secret. If you have never been to Pittsburgh I urge you to visit.

http://www.michaelrighi.com/about/

Michael Amor Righi started his own business when he was 8 years old, bought his first house at 19 and, now 25, is owner of a half-million dollar information technology training and computer consulting business based in his Downtown loft.

----

Righi -- who at 18 wrote himself a check for $1 million and dated it July 25, 2011, his 30th birthday -- is intent on changing that.

"I'm looking forward to (being a millionaire), but I'm more interested in helping Pittsburgh and seeing Pittsburgh do well," he said. "My biggest hobby is the city of Pittsburgh."

Righi registered the domain name www.vspittsburgh.com and soon plans to post comparisons between Pittsburgh and other cities to show companies the benefits of locating in Pittsburgh.



http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/multimedia/s_471949.html
Michael Amor Righi

And people are contributing to his defense fund! I call that suckers!

I would also like to thank everybody who contributed to my legal defense fund. As of September 5th, 2007 at 6:00PM EST, I received donations from 195 people committed to seeing civil rights maintained in this country. The total raised so far is $3,225.55. (This amount represents the total after PayPal took their cut.) I will use this money to fight the charges brought against me by the Brooklyn, Ohio Police Department. If any money remains after paying my attorney I will donate the excess money to the ACLU so that they may fight to prevent this from happening to others in the future. September 6th, 2007 @ 7:53PMEST Update: My legal fees have already exceeded $7,500. Donations are still kindly welcomed, but not necessary

http://www.michaelrighi.com/

He's an Ayn Rand fan - bet he's a Republican or Libertarian to boot!

Though I have to say it is kinda nice to see a puke or libertarian standing up and saying I have had enough.

I hope he damn well refunds the money people are sending him for his defense fund through paypal or at least gives it to charity.

his economic status and his politics together help to determine whether he was treated wrongly or not?

Am I understanding you correctly?

He can afford his own legal defense. Naming all the people as he is he could well end up in the mother of all lawsuits.

On edit he has a donate link right on his webpage - I'd want to know his worth before I'd give any money. I don't think you're poor if you're written up as Pittsburgh's 50 finest on the society page.

A few people contacted me wanting to know if I was accepting donations for my legal fund. Donations are appreciated and kindly accepted. Please note however that I am not a poor kid begging for financial support. I have equity in my home that I could tap into if need be, and I am determined to fight in court no matter how much time or money it takes. My legal battle will take place whether or not you choose to help me financially. I agreed to accept PayPal donations because a number of people contacted me wanting to help, and I wanted to give them an easy way of making a difference in this situation. Believe me, every dollar you donate will make a difference. At the very least it will help to offset my legal costs, and if it turns out that I raise more money than is needed I will donate the extra money to the ACLU. Donations can be made via PayPal to: paypal@michaelrighi.com.

http://www.michaelrighi.com/category/legal/page/2/

He admits he's not poor.

So a few suckers jerked their knees and sent him money. It doesn't change the way he was treated by the store OR the officer involved.

"I wanted to give them an easy way of making a difference in this situation."

Sure, he could have told them he didn't need the help. Since he's putting it this way, I'm guessing he DID tell them and, being the bullheaded troublemaker activists they are, insisted on "helping" anyway.

"if it turns out that I raise more money than is needed I will donate the extra money to the ACLU."

I'm curious as to why you quoted what you did. It totally contradicts the message you're trying to send.

ed.: extermination of an errant quote mark.

there are more worthy battles to fight than over whether a store wants to see your receipt. Yeah the cop screwed up but he brought most of this on himself.

Hope some judge is wise enough to just dismiss the charges and laugh his butt out of court. AS one Marine I heard quoted one time said - this wasn't a hill worth dying for.

Let him enrich his attorney out of his own pocket. I have better causes to donate my money to and I'd rather send my money directly to the ACLU.

Stop being a fricking causehead!

:eyes:

he can afford to fight this, he can afford a damn good lawyer and the time that it will take. Most plaintiff's cases go belly up or settle because they cannot afford to properly litigate the claim.

is icky. Asking for support ala letters to the editor - raising awareness - would be something different. Hope it is a different person - (the person asking for $ not being the multimillionaire) - haven't read the thread fully yet, and am guessing that if this hasn't yet been determined, that it is soon. Why? Because if a lot of 30K a year (salary) folks are giving dollars that have a direct impact on their budget, to help a really rich person for whom that same donation is a significant less percent of the annual salary, than it reeks of an opportunist with little real concern for folks of lesser means.

Is this Jr High? I haven't met an adult in...well, ever who used the word icky. But then again, this must be Jr High because the poster cannot read what is in black and white and understand it either.

A few people contacted me wanting to know if I was accepting donations for my legal fund. Donations are appreciated and kindly accepted. Please note however that I am not a poor kid begging for financial support...I agreed to accept PayPal donations because a number of people contacted me wanting to help.

Point out to me exactly where he was "begging for money from others". I don't see it and you obviously don't either because that is not what it says! Seems to me putting false words in others mouths may be icky.

If I were in his shoes (which I wouldn't because I'd just show the damn receipt in the first place) - I would thank them for offering and ask that donations be sent to ACLU

I would also like to thank everybody who contributed to my legal defense fund. As of September 5th, 2007 at 6:00PM EST, I received donations from 195 people committed to seeing civil rights maintained in this country. The total raised so far is $3,225.55. (This amount represents the total after PayPal took their cut.) I will use this money to fight the charges brought against me by the Brooklyn, Ohio Police Department. If any money remains after paying my attorney I will donate the excess money to the ACLU so that they may fight to prevent this from happening to others in the future. September 6th, 2007 @ 7:53PMEST Update: My legal fees have already exceeded $7,500. Donations are still kindly welcomed, but not necessary

Clearly this guy has a paypal account setup and if he posted this - he's soliciting donations.

Internet scam - how dumb can we be?

double post

What an asshole.

couple months ago? I can't remember which store it was. Thanks.

They never have what I want or need, but they have other things that cost more. I quit them after the firing/rehiring, am glad my memory works a tiny bit where am I? Thanks.

I haven't gone there since they did that firing.

Have mouse, will travel (the Net)
Teen-ager probes Web weaknesses to help give firms security

http://www.post-gazette.com/businessnews/20000601hole1.asp

Pittsburgh's 50 Finest

50 Finest duo Viviana Altieri and Sean Acierno led this year's energetic group into the ballroom buzzing with excitement. Fanfare spied Tracey Montgomery chatting with Lisa Pellow and Brian Freed in the buffet line with Benjy Grinberg. Also spotted were Kevin Heher; Michael Pihakis; Michael Righi and Amber Nicotra.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/living/fanfare/s_523010.html

... for his paper.

called him Dicky Cougar Mellon Scaife.

Being rich, Republican or Libertarian doesn't change that. I don't think they have a right to treat anyone like that, so this doesn't change my opinion at all.

It's always easy to do that when you have the resources to defend yourself.
Some poor slob with two nickels to her name probably wouldn't dare risk arrest over it.

from suckers, I mean readers who buy into this sad tale.

but if he has the resources to pay for his own defense and is accepting donations, he's a cheap shit.

My point was that for anyone (not just the guy in this blog story) it's easier to take the risk when you have money or other resources. You can afford to buy legal advice, to take time off from work to promote your case, etc.

if they suspected him of shoplifting. Now I don't know if not showing a receipt to a CC door checker puts you under suspicion but it well could. May be stupid but that may be their training. And the store does have a right to detain in immediate vicinity outside the store.

1800 - OHIO: SHOPLIFTING LAWS

Summary Of Detention Provisions

Who is covered? A merchant, a merchant's employee or his agent, or a police officer.

What can the merchant, his employee, or agent do? Detain a person within or without a mercantile establishment for the purpose of recovering the article he believes has been taken or in order to cause the arrest of such person.

What are the ground rules for such detention? The law provides that such detention can be made, but:

1. There must be "probable cause" for believing that items offered for sale have been unlawfully taken.
2. Such detention must be "without search."
3. Such detention must be without using "undue restraint."
4. Detention must be in a "reasonable manner" to cause an arrest or to recover items unlawfully taken.
5. Detention must be for a "reasonable length of time."
Where can such detention take place? Such detention can take place in the mercantile establishment or in the immediate vicinity.

What can a police officer do? Under this law, any police officer may arrest, without first obtaining a warrant, any person he has probable cause for believing has unlawfully taken merchandise, provided such arrest is made within a reasonable time after the goods are taken.

http://www.omeda.org/fastfacts/1800.htm

IMHO show your receipt or take the items back in and get a refund and tell them you're never doing business with them again. Write and complain to the store, the company, the head of the company but don't be stupid and run up a bill with your attorney.

The manager insisted repeatedly, that he has a legal right to arbitrarily force customers to produce receipts and shopping bag contents. It seems that the manager did not have 'probable cause' for believing that shoplifting had occurred, which is stipulated by #1 of the ground rules in your post, which means there was no legal grounds for detention.

Someone else posted a link in another thread to that effect. Because really all the person is doing from a legal standpoint is failing to comply with a store policy and exercising their right not to be searched. Store policy does not override that right. Stores can implement almost any ridiculous policy they want to, and people can fail to comply and possibly get tossed out of the store or banned. But, they can't be held against their will, even if the store thinks failing to comply makes them suspicious. Unless there is actual evidence they were attempting to commit a crime, they don't have the right to detain a customer.

Just because you didn't submit to a search of your personal posessions (and they are yours after the sale), doesn't give them probable cause. If a cop asks to search your car, you refusing doesn't constitute probable cause. If it did, why have rights at all? If you don't give them up, then that's probable cause for the cop to ignore it?

See my post here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1758368&mesg_id=1758368


Here is the relavent info:

Are Door Bag Searches Legal?

Yes, as long as the inspection is voluntary. No, if the bag check is involuntary or coerced. This is a rather fine legal distinction that is subject to misunderstanding and abuse. Basically, nothing in the law gives the merchant the right to detain a customer for the purpose of searching a shopping bag unless there is a reasonable suspicion of retail theft. See my web page on Shoplifting: Detention & Arrest for more details

A customer can refuse to have their bag checked and simply walk out the door past the bag checker. Hopefully the bag checker has been trained to know that they cannot force anyone to submit to a bag search without cause. This is important because the expectation of the bag checker is that all bag contents have been purchased. The worst thing that could happen is that an aggressive bag checker would forcibly detain or threaten a customer who refused to comply with the voluntary search


You've got the conditions for what they should do to avoid false arrest, so I won't repost them here.

mwalker

...about value systems here.

Unbelievable chain janking and knee jerking.

Are you saying that since he is financially well off he should not stand up to da' man? He says he is looking forward to being a millionaire - that he owns some company worth half a million... I live in a house in San Diego that the bank thinks is worth $700,000 or more... I am not worth anywhere near that amount -- In fact I wonder at times if we will make it through the week without having to use a credit card for groceries.

As for people sending money for his defense? That smells bad.

I also think he made a great big deal out of showing his receipt and pretty much wrecking his little sisters birthday (I think he hates her.) BUT - he does have the right to be a major pain in the ass if he believes that his civil liberties are being violated.

As I've said many times we've never heard the whole story - just his.

But perhaps stretching the truth a bit or leaving out a few key points might help scam a few suckers of their money.

This guy is an asshole and I'm sending this link to the admins and ask that they take that other thread off the home page.

It's an insult to all the people out there doing something to make a real change, which personally is not protecting us from minimum wage store clerks asking to look for our receipts.

he probably doesn't even have a full grasp of who or what "the man" is.

The term South Park Republicans was invented for douchebag asshats like him

"Righi -- who at 18 wrote himself a check for $1 million and dated it July 25, 2011, his 30th birthday -- is intent on changing that. "

Actually with this one I'm with him. BTW, if you read the entire thread at this link you'll see this was the policy of owners of PPG buildings in Pittsburgh before 9-11 supposedly.

PPG: Photography Not Allowed
Earlier today I read an article on Boing Boing about a photographer who was harrassed for taking pictures of the PPG buildings in beautiful Pittsburgh Pennsylvania. You may recognize the PPG building as being Dr. Claw’s lair from the Inspector Gadget movie that starred Matthew Broderick.

I live in downtown Pittsburgh exactly three blocks away from PPG plaza, and I was curious to see if I too would be stopped by security for taking photos. After enjoying a gyro and strawberry smoothie at the nearby Three Rivers Arts Festival, I strolled through PPG with camera in hand. PPG plaza consists of a 40 story building surrounded by five smaller buildings of similar design. Between the buildings is an outdoor plaza that features an ice rink in the Winter and a series of interactive water fountains in the Summer. I began taking my pictures at this plaza. (You can view all of today’s photos in the gallery.)

At the plaza there were a couple of parents taking pictures of their children running through the water fountains. From what I had read, PPG permits “eye-level” photography so I wasn’t surprised to see that these parents were having no problems. I decided to test the waters a little by taking pictures of the tops of the buildings. I snapped about five photos from this vantage point without incident.

I then proceeded to Third Avenue which runs between a few of the buildings. Here I took notice of two security guards relaxing outside a parking garage. Standing on the street about twenty feet away, I took two pictures of the towers around us before one of them shouted, “No pictures of the buildings!”

http://www.michaelrighi.com/2005/06/11/my-run-in-with-ppg-security/

Michael Righi likes to challenge authority...and security guards stopping people from taking snapshots in a public plaza is beyond absurd, so he has a point.

But then what is he going to do with this proof of authoritarian terra-induced idiocy?

I'm sympathetic, but I don't see how this hobby of his is going anywhere beyond local notoriety...

what do you expect to get out of it?

I'm just curious what it is about this story that makes people think this guy is another Rosa Parks or something. What does it do for you? Is it really fighting back against tyranny?

Obviously I'm skeptical, and more than a bit cynical--but I am sincerely interested in knowing what people expect will happen as a result of this guy's actions and how it will affect them.

What's the attraction :shrug:

:rofl:

And I know lots of Libertarians and Republicans that won't stand for rights being abused. There IS common ground for many people in America.

So it would only matter if he was dirt poor?

Unfrigging amazing

The RING.

As would the average big "L" Libertarian. Let market forces decide which rights stores trample all over. After all, you can always stay home and make your own electronics if you don't like the corporate atmosphere of complete and total authority. Leave government out of the business of securing and protecting rights. :silly:

Owning a "half-million dollar" business is a very far cry from being a millionaire...

:shrug:

He did say they 'weren't necessary' but if I were this guy (well first I would have shown the damn receipt) but I would refuse the donations and insist they just send them directly to the ACLU

or will I have to chase him down for it and deal with his daddy

and next time, they should let this pompous little prick have it with both barrels on the way IN the store.

Whether this guy has money, owns a business, or is poor doesn't change the fact that requiring him to submit to a search is not legal. The store can request it and if he refuses, they can tell him never to come back, but they can not detain him without probable cause. See this post for the legal actions that a store can take:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1758368&mesg_id=1758368

For you to say the store should be able to use a weapon against this person, because he didn't voluntarily give up his right, is fucking ridiculous! Yeah, let's just give corporations more power to take away our rights! WTF?!

-mwalker

And far more obnoxious that the usual conservative asswipe. Far as I'm concerned, they can pave the parking lot with him.

that's a fucked up thing to insinuate. I don't give a shit if a person is a Republican or a Litertarian or a Democrat or a Socialist or a Communist.

Don't you remember?


AN INJUSTICE ANYWHERE IS A THREAT TO JUSTICE EVERYWHERE.


Ask people I know in the South Bronx if they're sick and tired of stores searching their bags because of racial profiling.

He has poor grammar skills, and a shitload of typos in that blog.

This totally changes what is right and what is wrong.

What does it matter if he's a millionaire?

If everything in the OP is true, then he's scamming a whole lot of fools.

People say the story and wanted to give him money to help the legal case. He said that he had money in his house and didn't need donations. He also said they would help. I don't know the state of it all - he may be a millionaire, or he may own a business that is worth that (big difference!).

-mwalker

send money to anybody they don't really know anything about or what their motivation is? I can't understand it since I've never been inclined to do that. Especially now there are so many scammers out there. What's behind this?

What makes people into instant believers instead of being cautious about a story like this? Do they get some kind of temporary psychological boost out of thinking they've helped a 'worthy cause' that may somehow affect them? Are some progressives so inclined to support any skirmish "for civil rights" as long as they can personally identify with it? Is this the right way to change anything, or is it just false solidarity instead of real solidarity?

:silly:

If people have money to throw at people like this, why don't they get behind a consumer effort that will really make a difference? Let this guy fight his own battles for damages. Because he has clout behind him it might not get thrown out...but it's not going to help you or me.

Reminds me of that "Save Karen" website where people sent some $15,000 just because somebody named Karen needed some money.\\

Is this any better than the "true believers" who open their wallets to needy televangelists?