Thoughts on this? Man shoot an unarmed robber gets arrested.

[candcallen]

He was committing a violent felony.
Full stop.

"Was" is the key word as in he stopped and proceeded to run out the door.

No one will give any phucks the thief was shot. The question is justification.

 

[gll]

"Was" is the key word as in he stopped and proceeded to run out the door.

No one will give any phucks the thief was shot. The question is justification.

Justified under the law gets him charged; justified in my mind sets him free if I'm on the jury...

If it goes to trial, I hope someone of like-mind is on the jury.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Obviously, we don't know the details.

But if the women were being attacked, this was justified and he should not have been charged.

See post #3.

He may have hit the women, but when he was shot, he was evidently trying to get away, as they were hitting him.
That's when he was shot.

Just going by what is said in the article.

 

[Darkpriest667]

Never speak to the police, they aren't your friends despite what your authoritarian overlords are telling you. Let them arrest you and speak to an attorney.

 

[seeker_two]

At this point, prosecutors are a better friend to criminals than defense attorneys....

 

[candcallen]

Never speak to the police, they aren't your friends despite what your authoritarian overlords are telling you. Let them arrest you and speak to an attorney.

Every police officer tells their family members to never talk to the police.

The adversarial nature of the legal system demand you act like you're in a fight for your life from the first encounter. Nothing personal, it is just the nature of the system.

 

[Darkpriest667]

At this point, prosecutors are a better friend to criminals than defense attorneys....

At least in El Paso ;-)

 

[cycleguy2300]

Not his store not his fight not his problem. He Fvked up!

Isn't that the attitude yall gave Calipinkcrocs such a hard time for?

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Never speak to the police, they aren't your friends despite what your authoritarian overlords are telling you. Let them arrest you and speak to an attorney.

Don't never speak to them, cops have questions they need confirmed or negated to understand if a crime was committed.

Know why and what you did well enough to not say something stupid, especially if you did something stupid.

I really don't think its the talking to cops thats the issue, but its idiots that get caught AND say idiot things that lock them into a crime. I talk to cops all the time and have yet to be arrested.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[GeauxLSU]

Not what he said but nice try.

Just trying to figure out when "Not my monkey...." does and doesn't apply. Seems very subjective.
If I witness a violent felony in progress, I will insure the safety of me and mine first, then I will attempt to use any means necessary to stop the attack.
Doubt I could sleep if I just hot footed or whistled Dixie on by.
Having said that... if he was in fact attempting to flee, shooter is hosed.

 

[Aus_Schwaben]

Theft really has no legal consequences anymore so this behavior is acceptable unless you are the victim. The shooter hopefully finds someone on the jury that will find him innocent. I would find him innocent and have no problem with lethal force for theft. If you deprive the store owner the ability to make a living and feed their family isn’t that theft of an irreplaceable item? The financial ability to survive?

Not to mention the fact that when the theft becomes too much the business will have to shut down and leave the community with one less option. Which means folks will have to go farther to shop in all too many cases.

 

[toddnjoyce]

TPC 9 covers protection of others.

Did the ‘good guy’

(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

If yes, then, was the bad guy:

(C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;

This will be interesting.

The lawyer doesn’t appear as smart as he thinks he is telling the “aim for the legs” story to the press. Hope that lawyer wasn’t one provided by one of the legal defense/carry ‘insurance’ plans.

 

[Aus_Schwaben]

Just trying to figure out when "Not my monkey...." does and doesn't apply. Seems very subjective.
If I witness a violent felony in progress, I will insure the safety of me and mine first, then I will attempt to use any means necessary to stop the attack.
Doubt I could sleep if I just hot footed or whistled Dixie on by.
Having said that... if he was in fact attempting to flee, shooter is hosed.

In the unlikely event that I see someone trying to commit carjacking and there are any Obama, Clinton, or Biden bumper stickers on the vehicle I would feel obligated to walk away. I am not going to interrupt a transaction for which they voted.

Because the only thing worse than being prosecuted would be getting prosecuted for trying to stop the crime and the "victim" testifying against the person trying to stop the crime.

 

[oldag]

...

Just going by what is said in the article.

As I said, we really don't really know what happened. {unless you have full faith in the news coverage}

 

[deemus]

I seem to recall that “aggregated” level involves weapons? Yes?

 

[toddnjoyce]

I seem to recall that “aggregated” level involves weapons? Yes?

Depends on the charge.

For robbery, see TPC 29.

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.

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.

 

[Lonesome Dove]

So if one of the women were getting raped, "Not my wife....."?

That wasn't the case don't change the story to your liking.

 

[GeauxLSU]

That wasn't the case don't change the story to your liking.

No it is wasn't. It was about two women (presumably somebody's wives), getting attacked by a thug in the commission of another crime and whether or not an armed grown man is going to do anything about it or walk on by.

 

[gll]

Don't never speak to them, cops have questions they need confirmed or negated to understand if a crime was committed.

Know why and what you did well enough to not say something stupid, especially if you did something stupid.

I really don't think its the talking to cops thats the issue, but its idiots that get caught AND say idiot things that lock them into a crime. I talk to cops all the time and have yet to be arrested.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

You're a cop..., it's like a brotherhood...

 

[Lonesome Dove]

No it is wasn't. It was about two women (presumably somebody's wives), getting attacked by a thug in the commission of another crime and whether or not an armed grown man is going to do anything about it or walk on by.

Look where pulling a gun got him. That's the point nothing else. He fuckd up. End of story!