An independent human-rights board of inquiry has determined that a woman who was accused of being a repeat shoplifter by staff of food retailer Sobeys in Tantallon, N.S. was actually a victim of discrimination.

On May 26, 2009, Andrella David was stopped at a grocery-store checkout by a Sobeys employee, who accused her of being a “known shoplifter in the store,” according to a statement by the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission (NSHRC) issued on Oct. 9. David was told that the store’s surveillance footage had captured previous instances of her shoplifting, that she was being watched and that if it happened again, they would press charges. There was no indication that David had attempted to shoplift.

David demanded to see the videotape in an attempt to prove that she was not the same person who had been caught shoplifting in the surveillance footage. David was taken to an office with surveillance equipment as staff tried to locate the videotape, which was believed to have captured David committing theft before May 2009. David eventually left the store and later tried to rectify the situation with Sobeys’ senior management, which accepted the allegations made by its employee over David’s word. David filed a complaint with NSHRC, alleging that Sobeys had discriminated against her when it had falsely accused her of stealing from the store.

Board chair Marion Hill’s written decision determined that David had been discriminated against on the basis of her race and/or colour and perceived source of income, both of which are protected under the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act. “During the course of the evidence provided in this proceeding, it was clear that race played a role related to the Complainant’s [David] adverse treatment,” Hill wrote. “Ms. Barnhill [the Sobeys employee] gave evidence that, all things being equal, had the Complainant been white, she would never have been approached.”

Hill found that colour and race had been important factors in the decision to confront David and that “racial profiling” had been a factor in the treatment of David. The decision described how the Sobeys staff member had relied heavily on poor-quality video in her identification of David. “The most distinguishing feature that could be positively identified from the pictures and the video evidence was the fact that the alleged shoplifter was a black woman with dark hair,” Hill wrote.

While Hill accepted the argument that shoplifting, which results in serious financial loss, was a concern for Sobeys, “the respondent’s continuous identification of the complainant as a known shoplifter is unjustified.”

Hill has reserved decision on remedy; those arguments will be heard on Oct. 27 and 28.