Jewelry store robbed...owner arrested for shooting at thief.

[ZX9RCAM]

[URL]http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/county-dallas/stories/wfaa091031_wz_jewelthief.26f4321f5.html


Mesquite jewelry store robbed; owner arrested

07:00 PM CDT on Saturday, October 31, 2009


By MONIKA DIAZ / WFAA-TV


Caught on Tape

October 31st, 2009



MESQUITE — The owner of a jewelry store at Town East Mall was jailed Friday after he opened fire on a fleeing theft suspect.
Police said Luis Fuentes was showing a $10,000 diamond ring to a customer at Classique when the man grabbed the ring and fled.
Fuentes fired a shot at the suspect as he escaped; no one was hurt.
Police released a surveillance tape of the man as he ran through the mall and out a door into the parking lot around 4:45 p.m. Friday afternoon.
Fuentes was jailed on charges of deadly conduct for discharging a firearm. Bond was set at $40,000.
The suspect was described as a black male in his 30s, about 6-feet tall and 240 lbs. He had a military-style haircut and a full beard. The man was wearing a light blue T-shirt, gray sweat pants and black-and-white athletic shoes.
Call Mesquite police at 972-216-6759 if you have information about this crime.
E-mail mdiaz@wfaa.com
[/URL]

 

[MadMo44Mag]

Not smart IMO!
The jewels are insured and he took a shot in an open mall - not smart at all! There was no threat to anyone as the guy snatched and ran.
I suspect the charge will stick.

 

[okie556]

Not smart IMO!
The jewels are insured and he took a shot in an open mall - not smart at all! There was no threat to anyone as the guy snatched and ran.
I suspect the charge will stick.

I agree..........another untrained person with a gun not understanding when to shoot and when to file insurance claim!

 

[Texas42]

I agree..........another untrained person with a gun not understanding when to shoot and when to file insurance claim!

+1

 

[Big country]

I have to agree with everyone else on this one.

 

[hk boy]

i saw the news story,
the mall prohibits firearms

 

[KellyAsh]

Sigh....

 

[Hawghauler]

You are all correct but the truly sad part of the story is his marksmanship.

 

[Big country]

You are all correct but the truly sad part of the story is his marksmanship.

I'll give you that one.

 

[Texas42]

Would it be a legal shoot if he hit the bad guy? I mean, the guy is a thief, not a robber.

 

[okie556]

Would it be a legal shoot if he hit the bad guy? I mean, the guy is a thief, not a robber.

I would say no.........hence his arrest. Besides the issue of the mall surroundings the store clerk had no reason to fear for his well being and no reason for deadly force.

 

[Acetone]

What about this?

Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

 

[okie556]

What about this?

I knew as soon as I hit that Submit Reply button someone would dig into this and find the law from the penal code. I stand corrected but think the guy was Bozo for firing a weapon in this particular case.

 

[Acetone]

I knew as soon as I hit that Submit Reply button someone would dig into this and find the law from the penal code. I stand corrected but think the guy was Bozo for firing a weapon in this particular case.

Well, I would hate to actually do some work at work.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Well, it was not at night & that is the only time one can shoot at a "fleeing" thief (I think).

 

[Texas42]

I guess the question was this a theft or a robbery.

 

[Acetone]

Sec. 29.02. ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if, in the course of committing theft as defined in Chapter 31 and with intent to obtain or maintain control of the property, he:
(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens or places another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death.
(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.


Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.




Sec. 29.03. AGGRAVATED ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if he commits robbery as defined in Section 29.02, and he:
(1) causes serious bodily injury to another;
(2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon; or
(3) causes bodily injury to another person or threatens or places another person in fear of imminent bodily injury or death, if the other person is:
(A) 65 years of age or older; or
(B) a disabled person.
(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the first degree.
(c) In this section, "disabled person" means an individual with a mental, physical, or developmental disability who is substantially unable to protect himself from harm.

Sec. 30.02. BURGLARY. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, the person:
(1) enters a habitation, or a building (or any portion of a building) not then open to the public, with intent to commit a felony, theft, or an assault; or
(2) remains concealed, with intent to commit a felony, theft, or an assault, in a building or habitation; or
(3) enters a building or habitation and commits or attempts to commit a felony, theft, or an assault.
(b) For purposes of this section, "enter" means to intrude:
(1) any part of the body; or
(2) any physical object connected with the body.
(c) Except as provided in Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a:
(1) state jail felony if committed in a building other than a habitation; or
(2) felony of the second degree if committed in a habitation.
(d) An offense under this section is a felony of the first degree if:
(1) the premises are a habitation; and
(2) any party to the offense entered the habitation with intent to commit a felony other than felony theft or committed or attempted to commit a felony other than felony theft.

Sec. 31.03. THEFT. (a) A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property.
(b) Appropriation of property is unlawful if:
(1) it is without the owner's effective consent;
(2) the property is stolen and the actor appropriates the property knowing it was stolen by another; or
(3) property in the custody of any law enforcement agency was explicitly represented by any law enforcement agent to the actor as being stolen and the actor appropriates the property believing it was stolen by another...................

I don't really think any of these apply, which is why he is being charged.

EDIT: Well, it is theft, but not at night as the Penal Code states.

 

[Hawghauler]

Some states do allow you to protect your property with force. I think NH is such a state. Property did include automobile. I like NH. Live free or Die!

 

[txinvestigator]

It was not a justified shoot. It was not a robbery, it was a theft. It was not at night.

Even if it had been, I don't think the shoot would have met the standard of reasonableness.

 

[Hawghauler]

The shot would not be considered reasonable to most and certainly not to our courts. Personally I have no problem with the man being shot to death. He was stealing the livlihood of a private citizen in America. The shooter needs a class on marksmanship and a world class asswhoopin for his choice to shoot in a mall. It is a sign of the times and sad commentary when a thief is not considered a "real" criminal anymore. Personally I think a crook that would commit a crime like this in broad daylight in front of witnesses and cameras has no fear of our laws and is very very dangerous.