[KP95DAO]

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/story.jsp?story=387227

Security guard arrested over death of robber
By Jason Bennetto Crime Correspondent
15 March 2003


A supermarket security guard could be charged with causing the death of an armed robber who was shot in the head with his own gun during a struggle.

The 36-year-old Tesco guard, who is being treated in hospital for a bullet wound to the leg, has been arrested.

The shooting happened on Thursday morning when three men robbed a Securicor van outside a Tesco store in Leytonstone, east London. The security guard and other staff intervened, and during a scuffle a 45-year-old robber was shot in the back of the head. Witnesses said five or six shots were fired.

The robber, who wore a boiler suit and balaclava, died in hospital five hours later.

One witness said the security guard was lying wounded on the ground shouting, "Call an ambulance", while two passers-by tried to revive the robber.

The other two robbers made off in a getaway car with thousands of pounds from the security van. The car was later found abandoned. It is believed the two robbers escaped in a second vehicle.

Detectives questioned the guard, who is not thought to be seriously injured, in hospital yesterday. Neither the guard nor the robber has been identified.

A spokeswoman for Tesco said: "A Tesco security guard is helping the police with their inquiries and we will continue to co-operate fully with the police investigation."

A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said a file would be sent to the Crown Prosecution Service after all the evidence had been gathered.

It will be for the CPS to decide whether the guard acted unlawfully and if it is in the public interest to prosecute. A spokeswoman said all the circumstances of the shooting would be considered before a decision was made. The process could take some weeks.

[Standing Wolf]

Rarely does a day pass when I fail to feel grateful to our forefathers for having rebelled against the English and founded a republic.

Frankly, I think England would have been much happier as a Nazi subject state.

[Beorn]

If the robber HAD survived, he'd hav sued, AND they'd have arrested the guard...

Ah, those clever British...

[Hkmp5sd]

I am sooooo confused. The guy's title is Security Guard. He is paid to function as a Security Guard. By what perverted logic can he be charged for acting as a Security Guard and risking his life to protect others by neutralizing an armed robber?

[Flying V]

"Lo, all our pomp of yesterday
Is one with Nineveh and Tyre!"

-Kipling

[fallingblock]

"British" and "insanity" in any statement involving firearms policy.:banghead:

[Baba Louie]

Mad dogs and Englishmen...

They've gone totally bonkers, the crazed bunch o pollywoggers

The queen herself should give this guy a medal... instead its' "OFF WID 'IS 'EAD"

I am soooo confused.

This IS the same nation that brought us "You're a better man than I Gunga Din"? "Charge of the Light Brigade?"

It must be the water they're all drinking.

"STOP, or I'll be forced to allow you to shoot me, steal whatever you want and go your way"

Yeah, thats the ticket.

Go figure. I'm really really glad that those farmers stood on the bridge in Concord (or was it Lexington?) and stood up to the crown. Damned Rebels.

Adios

[Marko Kloos]

The guy's title is Security Guard. He is paid to function as a Security Guard. By what perverted logic can he be charged for acting as a Security Guard and risking his life to protect others by neutralizing an armed robber?

Because he's not there to provide actual security, but merely the illusion of security for the benefit of the sheep.

That's the same reason why TSA employees can get you arrested for objecting to having your wife's breasts groped, and why the door goons at Sam's Club make a check mark on your receipt after looking at your 50-item cart for about three seconds.

[Blackhawk]

"Could be charged," etc., all boil down to the guard not being charged yet.

Think I'll hold my fire for now.... :rolleyes:

[D_Burchfield]

I'm with you, Blackhawk. There is the possibility that the authorities might get it right this time.:what:

[Don Gwinn]

Maybe. . . . but the fact that they even need time to think it over says something about that place. Nothing very nice, either.

Maybe the newspaper got it wrong.

Where's Agricola when we need him? I'm sure he could explain this. :banghead:

[longeyes]

After reading a pile of these posts about attitudes in the UK I'm reminded of that old phrase, "Well, excuse me for living!" One can carry good manners a little too far.

[Atticus]

Splains why Tony Blair is going against 99% of the popluation on something that really matters.

[cheygriz]

Being a great admirer of Winston Curchill, I'm happy that he didn't live to see how low his country has sunk.

I know I am going against the grain of this thread, but I truly think that we should all be praying that the mother country will be granted the Grace of having it's sanity restored.

God save The Queen? Well..yes. But more importantly, God save the British people from themselves.

[Mk VII]

security guards in this country are never armed nor may they carry weapons of any kind. Their powers in that regard are no different than any other private citizen. If something is regarded as a high risk (like the convoys of old banknotes being taken to Debden to be incinerated) then the police provide armed escort.

[Baba Louie]

So MkVII, then what I read into your statement is that, based on the above incident, no one is allowed to do anything but "give it up" when confronted by a criminal? Resistance is futile and will result in your arrest if anyone is injured.

Civilized behaviour perhaps, tho' contrary to certain mindsets prevalent herein and not one I'd be too willing to embrace... but then again I guess I'm an UN-civilized individual.

And I'd venture that the criminals do concur with this government philosophy of allowing crime to occur with no resistance on the part of their victims.

If so, I'd think that everyone there would want to take up the study and practice of "Highwayman 101".

I wonder at the usefulness of a philosophy where one is charged with homicide as a result of the criminals gun discharging into his own body during a scuffle, whilst breaking a law or two. I guess that you can't charge a dead man with a crime, but you can a living victim, eh?

At least the gene pool has had one unsavory character removed and I would hope that the security guard has decent representation upon trial.

Curiouser and curiouser

Adios

[Mk VII]

you could snatch up a improvised weapon which happened to be lying nearby but bringing one to the confrontation is a no-no (ignore the above for confrontations inside the home). The amount of force used must be proportionate to the threat.
Whether this guy will actually be charged is another matter. Plenty of people get arrested who never get charged.

[Marko Kloos]

The amount of force used must be proportionate to the threat.

This philosophy only exists to give prosecutors a handy tool to discourage self-defense.

Once a party in the confrontation resorts to force, an irreversible qualitative breach is reached. If you're offered lethal force of any kind, whether by gun, knife, screwdriver, or the bare fists of a 200-pound man against a 100-pound woman, the only appropriate response is lethal force. The "proportionate" doctrine completely ignores the fact that there is no "less or more deadly" in a lethal force confrontation, and that people are not really capable of asserting and quickly matching the "lethality level" of an attacker in a life-or-death situation.

[dev_null]

I have only one (rhetorical) question at this point...

Why wouldn't anyone choose to be a criminal in the UK? :rolleyes:

-0-

[CZ-75]

Where's Agricola when we need him? I'm sure he could explain this.

I think he's given up, as I saw him logged in earlier this AM.

[agricola]

i do pop in from time to time, but have conceded that i am, like mkVII, clearly lacking in knowledge about the UK because i actually live here rather than three thousand miles away from it.

besides, these questions come up all the time, with different people asking the same questions: yes this man has been arrested, no he hasnt been charged, yes self defence is still legal in the UK. its just boring to repeat the same points for six months and hear the same responses.... :rolleyes:

[Blackhawk]

Glad you popped in anyway, agricola! :D

[Quartus]

5 or 6 shots fired? How many went into the back of the robber's head? If it was all 5 or 6, I can see why there might be some question about necessary force.

'Course, in the U.S., we usually investigage a little before we charge someone.


Do they do it over there as a routine thing? Any question, arrest first and ask questions later?

[agricola]

quartus,

Here, if a policeman has reasonable grounds to suspect a person of having committed an offence for which he or she can be arrested, then that officer cannot ask any but the simplest questions (usually to establish ownership of property or that persons identity) without that person being cautioned (our version of your Miranda rights).

[twoblink]

I see that the Brits have started to import PRK water...

Or is it that the PRK imports British water?

Oh, I got it! The Brits and the PRK import PRNJ water..:rolleyes:

Rediculous...

The sad part is, the Security Guard would have been fired for job neglect if he didn't do anything.

What do you call a security guard that does nothing? The Maytag repair man? hehee... call him French.

[Quartus]

agricola, please explain a little more of the process that likely occured that resulted in the guard being arrested. I don't mean as to the facts of this particular case, just ususal procedures.

[CZ-75]

i do pop in from time to time, but have conceded that i am, like mkVII, clearly lacking in knowledge about the UK because i actually live here rather than three thousand miles away from it.


And, like residents of the former USSR, you will know all about standing in line for toilet paper and where to trade tractor parts for illegal vodka, but very little about what your government is doing in Afghanistan or Czechoslovakia, to make an analogy.

[Mk VII]

i would speculate that almost any case involving sudden death would result in at least the arrest of the admitted perpetrator. Papers will be passed to the Crown Prosecution Service (also known as the Can't Prosecute Service and the Cr*p Prosecution Service) for decision as to whether to take it any further.

[4570Rick]

Is this insanity or arrogant stupidity?:banghead: :banghead: :fire: :fire: