Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge
-
Yeah it’s a bit more obvious if you imagined the clerk seeing him after work and pulling out his gun and starting to shoot.
@jon-nyc said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
Yeah it’s a bit more obvious if you imagined the clerk seeing him after work and pulling out his gun and starting to shoot.
One can often fashion reductios which make questions obvious, without addressing the complexity of the real question. For instance, in this case, if the clerk had pulled his gun and shot while the robber's gun was pointed at him, then the robber shot back, we'd think aggravated robbery and murder.
-
What was the proximate cause of the death? Once one has set these events in motion, can they claim to be exempt for the consequences? I don't think so. While he was fleeing the robbery he was still in the commission of a felony, hence felony murder. A claim of self-defense in those circumstances is pretty weak.
-
What was the proximate cause of the death? Once one has set these events in motion, can they claim to be exempt for the consequences? I don't think so. While he was fleeing the robbery he was still in the commission of a felony, hence felony murder. A claim of self-defense in those circumstances is pretty weak.
@Mik said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
What was the proximate cause of the death? Once one has set these events in motion, can they claim to be exempt for the consequences? I don't think so. While he was feeling the robbery he was still in the commission of a felony, hence felony murder. A claim of self-defense in those circumstances is pretty weak.
That would seem to be an accurate description of the real complexity of this case.
Which is not to say Jon or 89th are wrong, just that this is what we pay lawyers for and what we conscript juries for. Except when Soros DAs refuse to press charges, I guess.
-
The alternative is to further victimize businesses and their employees.
At some point we should decide which team we are on - rights for law abiding citizens or criminals. My own feeling is that once you have crossed that line into threatening another in a robbery, well fuck you. You get what you get. Turning the store owner into the criminal is just wrong.
-
If the theft rises to the level of a felony, perhaps he could be charged with felony murder?
I dunno.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
If the theft rises to the level of a felony, perhaps he could be charged with felony murder?
I dunno.
@George-K said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
If the theft rises to the level of a felony, perhaps he could be charged with felony murder?
I dunno.
Yeah the funny thing is that we have laws, not sure about CA but in some states, where if you use a gun in the commission of a felony and someone dies, you get a murder charge regardless of the circumstances of the death. Those sorts of laws are meant as bandaids around the legalities of situations like this, to conform more to common sense.
-
If the theft rises to the level of a felony, perhaps he could be charged with felony murder?
I dunno.
@George-K said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
If the theft rises to the level of a felony, perhaps he could be charged with felony murder?
This might be a stretch, but if there were no witnesses to the robbery, then he could not be charged with robbery. The law would only see him being chased by a guy shooting at him.
-
It has a certain logic to it. If the clerk came out shooting after the robbery had ended and the guy left then he was committing attempted murder. I don’t see how the robber loses his right to self defense because he robbed a store a few minutes earlier.
Of course if it all went down together it would be far more complicated.
@jon-nyc said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
It has a certain logic to it. If the clerk came out shooting after the robbery had ended and the guy left then he was committing attempted murder. I don’t see how the robber loses his right to self defense because he robbed a store a few minutes earlier.
Of course if it all went down together it would be far more complicated.
What would the logic be if we replace "clerk" with "police"?
-
@jon-nyc said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
It has a certain logic to it. If the clerk came out shooting after the robbery had ended and the guy left then he was committing attempted murder. I don’t see how the robber loses his right to self defense because he robbed a store a few minutes earlier.
Of course if it all went down together it would be far more complicated.
What would the logic be if we replace "clerk" with "police"?
@Axtremus said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
What would the logic be if we replace "clerk" with "police"?
Presumably, the fleeing robber was not a threat to anyone's life. Unless I missed it, he was, after all, fleeing, and not shooting at anyone. No threat to life means use of deadly force is not justified.
Hell, in Chicago, the police would even be allowed to chase him.
-
@Axtremus said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
What would the logic be if we replace "clerk" with "police"?
Presumably, the fleeing robber was not a threat to anyone's life. Unless I missed it, he was, after all, fleeing, and not shooting at anyone. No threat to life means use of deadly force is not justified.
Hell, in Chicago, the police would even be allowed to chase him.
@George-K said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
@Axtremus said in Fleeing Armed Robber Kills His Pursuing Victim, No Murder Charge:
What would the logic be if we replace "clerk" with "police"?
Presumably, the fleeing robber was not a threat to anyone's life. Unless I missed it, he was, after all, fleeing, and not shooting at anyone. No threat to life means use of deadly force is not justified.
Hell, in Chicago, the police would even be allowed to chase him.
By the law, not justified. Does not meet the "imminent danger" threshold.
OTOH, shooting thieves is fine by me. And for killing a guy who was chasing the thief, I'd still like to hang the thief.
