Remember the surveillance video of Michael Brown intimidating the Korean store clerk? Calling Brown "unarmed" was pathetic then, and disregarding the size of this perp is pathetic now.

Speaking of goldfish...…...We're still talking about goldfish, right?

Anyway, goldfish are just small carp and I absolutely hate carp!! Carp ruined 2 of my favorite crappy and bluegill fishing holes. They're nothing more that wet ghetto dwellers; they breed like rabbits and you can't eat the boney sumbitches. Anyway, anybody that steals and kills carp, small gold ones or larger will get a salute from me.

8 year old appliances however are a nuther thing. You can fix them, but you can't fix stupid carp.

Jim

We’re not taking any carp off you bud!

If someone had been fast enough to block the thief's exit and the thief had attempted to either knock the owner down or run over him (as suggested above) this would have been a "good" shoot. As it is, it was a mistake, although the owners sacrifice would have been to the public good..

Not many FL prosecutors are going to no-bill this case as it is, given the demonstrations that certainly would follow.

HOLD ON!

Another poster said the Prosecutor overcharged the shooter here.Not at all. The prosecutor probably hasn't even seen the paperwork yet. It's unlikely that all the reports are done yet.

The shooter has been arrested, that's all. Now the cops will finish their investigation and the results will be forwarded to the State Attorney's who will then meet with the cops and any witnesses, take testimony under oath and file whatever charge, or no charge, they feel warranted by the facts.

In the interim, the Prosecutor's Office may be involved in bond hearings for the shooter and, if the "victim" survives, any court proceedings involving him.

Not saying the Prosecutor won't charge what the cops charged the shooter with, just saying it ain't happened yet.

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by oldRoger:
If someone had been fast enough to block the thief's exit and the thief had attempted to either knock the owner down or run over him (as suggested above) this would have been a "good" shoot. As it is, it was a mistake, although the owners sacrifice would have been to the public good
Not many FL prosecutors are going to no-bill this case as it is, given the demonstrations that certainly would follow.

That was my question. Had the clerk stood in front of the car and fired as the thief drove towards him, would it have been a good shoot?
On the other hand, could it be argued that the clerk was responsible to have gotten out of the way? I can see the thief slowly ease forward to push the clerk.

quote:

Originally posted by straightshooter1:
HOLD ON!

Another poster said the Prosecutor overcharged the shooter here.Not at all. The prosecutor probably hasn't even seen the paperwork yet. It's unlikely that all the reports are done yet.

The shooter has been arrested, that's all. Now the cops will finish their investigation and the results will be forwarded to the State Attorney's who will then meet with the cops and any witnesses, take testimony under oath and file whatever charge, or no charge, they feel warranted by the facts.

In the interim, the Prosecutor's Office may be involved in bond hearings for the shooter and, if the "victim" survives, any court proceedings involving him.

Not saying the Prosecutor won't charge what the cops charged the shooter with, just saying it ain't happened yet.

Bob

According to Fox,

quote:

Mehedeun Hasan, 22, was charged with attempted murder after deputies with the Polk's County Sheriff's Office said he shot 43-year-old Rennie Defoe, Jr., Fox 13 reported.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018...ef-deputies-say.html

Yes. Charged by the cops. In Florida, our Constitution requires the State Attorney to take Sworn testimony from witnesses before He/She can file an Information charging someone. That takes time to get it done, get witnesses in, get the reports finished, etc.

As an aside, I expect the State is trying to figure out how to get rid of this without charging Murder.

I had several cases where the shooting was, well, just not exactly in compliance with the Florida Statutes on Use of Force, some arguably not even close, but where the Shooter didn't deserve to go to prison for a zillion years.

Taking it before a Grand Jury is a great way to let the People express their view of the case. I had one case where the GJ No True Billed a Shooter, then most of them came out in the hall and hugged the Shooter. A win for Justice, a win for the Shooter and it's very difficult to criticize the Prosecutor for letting the People decide.

Bob

Something that’s seldom, if ever, recognized in discussions about protection of property is what property truly is. As was pointed out to me by the only real mentor I ever had long ago, much of our personal property is equivalent to a portion of our life. If someone steals a rifle that it took me a month of labor to purchase, he has in effect stolen a month of my life. What would the law say about a person who murdered someone who was dying of cancer and had only a month to live? How about killing an inmate on death row a month before his scheduled execution?

There are of course social reasons why there are restrictions on killing someone merely in defense of property, but they don’t change the fact that someone who steals my property is stealing part of my life.

quote:

Originally posted by Ken226:
The old saying, "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" fits.

I love when a stupid game wins the player, a stupid prize.

Its just my personal opinion, but with > 8 billion people on earth, some lives definitely aren't worth more than some property. Its a shame the legal system hasn't caught on to that.

If anything, we need to shoot every fucker who behaves this way. We'd have less theiving, fewer theives, reduce the population, and the remaining population would behave.

and if your going to use an extreme-end analogy, you gotta expect one in return! I wouldn't shoot the 8 year old, hes probably just stealing the 36pk of schlitz for his shithead uncle. He doesnt even understand what hes doing.

A goldfish who has the foresight to uparmor with a washing machine has definite nefarious intent. He needs shot immediately.

That was good, Ha !

I have no idea why I'm all of a sudden thinking about this book...

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Something that’s seldom, if ever, recognized in discussions about protection of property is what property truly is. As was pointed out to me by the only real mentor I ever had long ago, much of our personal property is equivalent to a portion of our life. If someone steals a rifle that it took me a month of labor to purchase, he has in effect stolen a month of my life. What would the law say about a person who murdered someone who was dying of cancer and had only a month to live? How about killing an inmate on death row a month before his scheduled execution?

There are of course social reasons why there are restrictions on killing someone merely in defense of property, but they don’t change the fact that someone who steals my property is stealing part of my life.

This reminds me of a case we covered in law school.

There were Tong Wars in the Chinese community in San Francisco, violent gangs wars. One fellow was mortally wounded, laying in an alley one night. Another fellow came along and finished him off, and was charged with his murder. His defense was the victim was about to die anyway, all he had done was “accelerate the inevitable.”

He was convicted. Accelerating the inevitable is what murder is all about.

Monday morning QBing, but the store owner should have had an ice pick or something like that. He could have run out and punctured the sidewall on a tire or two, then retreated back into the store.

If the guy drives off, he's out a couple of tires that will cost him more to fix than the beer he stole. If he gets pissed off and goes back into the store to get even with a beat down, then it's a self defense scenario.

quote:

He could have run out and punctured the sidewall on a tire or two, then retreated back into the store......... If he gets pissed off and goes back into the store to get even with a beat down, then it's a self defense scenario.

I'm fairly certain it's not considered self defense when you've taken overt action to escalate the situation.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

He could have run out and punctured the sidewall on a tire or two, then retreated back into the store......... If he gets pissed off and goes back into the store to get even with a beat down, then it's a self defense scenario.

I'm fairly certain it's not considered self defense when you've taken overt action to escalate the situation.

And I'm fairly certain that he's just attempting to stop a shop lifter/thief. After popping the tire and by retreating inside, the initiative is back on the perp. He can choose to leave. If he comes inside and attempts to do bodily harm, sounds like self defense to me. Is he allowed to assault the store owner because of a popped tire? Of course I'm no lawyer, but it would seem to be a far better course of action than what the store owner actually did do on the tape.

As I understand our FL law, I can certainly attempt to stop a thief in the act of stealing my property as long as I do not use lethal force.

If I passively stand in front of his vehicle and he attempts run me down, or I have a reasonable belief that he using force, I can then resort to lethal force, in my case that would be a firearm given my obvious mismatch with a apparently young healthy male.

Yes, this guy obviously believed that no one would attempt to stop him, and has probably pulled that stunt before.
Personally I believe he would have used force had he been thwarted.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Accelerating the inevitable is what murder is all about.

Nice summary.

Had a friend who shot his goldfish with a 1911 to end its suffering. Swimming upside down, couldn't eat, fins torn up. Couldn't bear to flush it down the toilet, and it's what he had at hand. Hadn't stolen anything as far as I know though.

After watching the video, I don't believe I would fired on the fleeing thief in his car.

Now if that had been Heineken ...

Meanwhile, how is this guy charged "only" with assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury?

"Winston-Salem police said in a statement that Parral was shot early Sunday in the Cook Out parking lot and died Wednesday at a hospital. The shooting appeared to stem from an argument between Parral and Kinzer, who were waiting in separate vehicles in the restaurant's drive-thru lane."

Link to Story