Taqueria robber shot dead by patron. video /bad shoot?

[BehindBlueI's]

I can tell you that if that was a police officer doing that (maybe off-duty), indictments would be certain.

And the tone here would be completely different. Something something executioner something something.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Perhaps. It will come down to the details of the shooter's statement. Hell, did he even realize he picked the gun up?

Agreed, but I'm going to go with yes he knew. Why else would he have bent down and picked it up prior to the last shot? But yeah it's going to come down to his statement. Which if they find out who he is and he does make a statement it will hopefully be after he's had a chance to have a lawyer involved.

And the tone here would be completely different. Something something executioner something something.

Perhaps from some.

 

[diver dan]

wouldnt that be a bad shoot because he was leaving the store , no direct threat at that time.? MHO. I am not sure.

 

[cg21]

I think it is pretty messed up someone can come in and threaten a dozen or so people with a firearm….. and we are concerned with HOW the threat was dealt with… sad sad world. The police want to ask if he was in fear of his life lol? we Have seen the story play out the other way far too many times with an armed perp against unarmed crowd and it never ends good.

 

[DadSmith]

I can't tell from my cellphone nor was the angle showing everything the bad guy was doing while on the floor.
I reserve judgment until authorities and those who can access the information and talk to the guy who defended everyone.

I'm no expert so I'll leave it to the professionals.

 

[Tryin']

I can tell you that if that was a police officer doing that (maybe off-duty), indictments would be certain.

100 percent.

 

[Cameramonkey]

wouldnt that be a bad shoot because he was leaving the store , no direct threat at that time.? MHO. I am not sure.

Negative. At least in IN, you may still shoot after a forcible felony to prevent others from being harmed. e.g. killing some poor soul who just happened to blindside him on the sidewalk as the perp was exiting.

You dont automatically get to run away just because you arent facing your victims and threatening them anymore. Its not a gentleman's duel.

 

[Sigblitz]

First 4 were good, he falls out, gun gets tossed, next 4 were bad, 9th was an execution

 

[Sigblitz]

Saw one on here before, cell phone robbery, guy is on the ground still holding his gun, still a threat. Cornered clerk shoots his way to the exit. Those were all good shoots.

 

[Cameramonkey]

First 4 were good, he falls out, gun gets tossed, next 4 were bad, 9th was an execution

I know upthread I said I'd have to see the whole picture. But I chewed on this all day. As others have said, under the circumstances, it may be jury nullification at least given how our legal system (isnt) works right now with prosecutors letting these guys walk, etc. (assuming it were a bad shoot in how far he took it)

Its not like its an Emmitt Till type case where bad guys did bad things to a kid and everyone looked the other way. This dude deserved to be smoked. Whether it was a one and done to the noggin like the famous video in the Brazilian Post Office, or this case, he deserved to take the room temperature challenge.

Just another example of play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

 

[Sigblitz]

First 4 were good, he falls out, gun gets tossed, next 4 were bad, 9th was an execution

5 counts excessive force with the last one being manslaughter. From hero to zero in 2.5 seconds.

 

[Ark]

Granted he looks pretty dead by the time it happens, but the last one looks like an obvious and intentional execution shot to the head. Certainly any police officer doing such a thing would immediately be subject to charges.

I'm not sad the guy's dead but, yeah man, you're not allowed to do that. Bugging out and not turning himself in tells me he knows it.

 

[Sigblitz]

Shots 5-8 he can say he didn't know the gun got tossed, but not the last one.

 

[flightsimmer]

Good shoot, now finish your dinner and don't step on him on your way out.

 

[kickbacked]

I can tell you that if that was a police officer doing that (maybe off-duty), indictments would be certain.

Shouldnt it be though? As a police officer you're (at least you're supposed to) be trained in those scenarios, you have your own ROE. Range time, special training, experience in those scenarios, etc that holds you to a higher ground than a regular civilian. A civilian with zero military or leo background can only hope they do the right thing. They dont have the mindset to go through the steps that a trained professional does. So anyone without that background has no idea how they will react. Dumping the magazine when you're scared doesnt sound like that big of a reach. Now I think this guy went too far because he did stop and then began again. If he shot the guy one time, sat down and started eating again couldnt a defense argue he must have not been very worried for his life because he did it so calmly? Not a lawyer but just spit balling here.

 

[Twangbanger]

A lot of this will depend on the city involved, but if it's true the shooter really bugged and didn't stay to cooperate with law enforcement, I don't envision too many big-city prosecutors wanting to play the "Herp-a-derp what did he see and when did he see it" game. If he paid for his meal and didn't use cash, he's probably going to get a knock.

The shooter did a good job laying low until the opportunity presented, and the first shot on presentation was dang quick, assuming it landed and wasn't just a reaction-jerk. If his sights were really on, that part was textbook.

 

[mark40sw]

wouldnt that be a bad shoot because he was leaving the store , no direct threat at that time.? MHO. I am not sure.

"no direct threat"

He is in the room that he has menacingly waved around a weapon. How long would it have taken him to look to the side and shoot? Also he may have headed that direction to -close- the doors.

He was still in the room/building with a weapon in hand. He was a threat.

 

[femurphy77]

He walks in my world. Bad guy chose a path that had limited options, the least desirable option was exercised.

 

[femurphy77]

Shouldnt it be though? As a police officer you're (at least you're supposed to) be trained in those scenarios, you have your own ROE. Range time, special training, experience in those scenarios, etc that holds you to a higher ground than a regular civilian. A civilian with zero military or leo background can only hope they do the right thing. They dont have the mindset to go through the steps that a trained professional does. So anyone without that background has no idea how they will react. Dumping the magazine when you're scared doesnt sound like that big of a reach. Now I think this guy went too far because he did stop and then began again. If he shot the guy one time, sat down and started eating again couldnt a defense argue he must have not been very worried for his life because he did it so calmly? Not a lawyer but just spit balling here.

I read an article one time where they interviewed cops after shootings and when asked how many shot were fired the shooters were surprised that the actual number was much higher than they thought. Adrenaline is a powerful thing and distorts things at time.

 

[Denny347]

Shouldnt it be though? As a police officer you're (at least you're supposed to) be trained in those scenarios, you have your own ROE. Range time, special training, experience in those scenarios, etc that holds you to a higher ground than a regular civilian. A civilian with zero military or leo background can only hope they do the right thing. They dont have the mindset to go through the steps that a trained professional does. So anyone without that background has no idea how they will react. Dumping the magazine when you're scared doesnt sound like that big of a reach. Now I think this guy went too far because he did stop and then began again.

In Indiana anyway, my use of deadly force (to protect myself or a 3rd party) is judged the by the same law as non-LE. "ROE"? IC 35-41-3-2 and IC 35-41-3-3. Those are what dictate YOUR and MY use of deadly force and for me to use force to make an arrest. You study those 2 laws and you will be as trained in this area as I am. Human physiological processes during stress are not any different. Training can mitigate some of the effects but not all.

If he shot the guy one time, sat down and started eating again couldnt a defense argue he must have not been very worried for his life because he did it so calmly? Not a lawyer but just spit balling here.

Do you mean prosecutor? They can argue pretty much ANYTHING they wish. It's a crappy argument.