This is BAD journalism--very bad.
"Las Vegas smoke shop owner defends himself by stabbing would-be robber."
That's from the New York Post.
I do not mean to single them out. Maybe a dozen reports say about the same thing.
The incident was recorded on video with audio.
First, there was no "would-be robber". Robbery involves a threat of injury to the victim. Again, robbery involves a threat of injury to the victim. I first learned that years ago when Mary Tyler Moore's character Mary Richards was so informed when she reported that her apartment had been robbed. No, they told her, it was burglarized.
Second, it sure seems that the Las Vegas smoke shop owner was not threatened.
Thus, he was almost certainly not being robbed.
This article says the man "defends himself".
It sure doesn't look like it.. The man he stabbed did not even look like he was about to put the smoke shop owner in any physical danger.
Rather, it appears that the store owner initiated the attack. That would defeat any legal defense of self defense.
What we have here is simple shoplifting--theft.
Two people came into the store. One grabbed the tip jar and departed. The other jumped over the counter and reached for some merchandise on the shelf. That is shoplifting.
The use of deadly force to prevent shoplifting is not permitted in any state in the union, or in any
US territory or possession...not even in Texas, which alone among US jurisdictions, does allow the use of deadly force to prevent theft in some very limited circumstances,
But the storeowner grabbed a knife, advanced on the shoplifter (who was not facing him), grabbed and held him, and played sewing machine on him.
Even if the circumstances would have justified the use of deadly force in self defense, the man held the shoplifter and kept stabbing as he tried to escape. That will destroy a legal defense of self defense very quickly.
He is being treated as a hero in some circles, but he is likely in a heap of trouble. It is a very good thing for him that the victim survived.
The man's stupidity did not end there. He spoke to the media. Whatever possible strategy his attorney might have been able to salvage to defend him, he undermined it--big time.
What a dope!
He said he was "afraid for his life". He probably heard that somewhere. But a legal defense would require evidence supporting a reasonable fear. There appears to be none. "Bare fear" does not suffice. The Nevada Criminal Code spells that out in language that even a five year old could understand.
Take-aways?
One more thing: prosecuting attorneys are elected officials, and whatever the law and the facts of a case may be, they can and do sometimes use their discretion to decline to charge a suspect. That may have played a part in a case in St. Charles County, MO last week. Might it happen here? We'll see.
The reverse happens, too.
"Las Vegas smoke shop owner defends himself by stabbing would-be robber."
That's from the New York Post.
I do not mean to single them out. Maybe a dozen reports say about the same thing.
The incident was recorded on video with audio.
First, there was no "would-be robber". Robbery involves a threat of injury to the victim. Again, robbery involves a threat of injury to the victim. I first learned that years ago when Mary Tyler Moore's character Mary Richards was so informed when she reported that her apartment had been robbed. No, they told her, it was burglarized.
Second, it sure seems that the Las Vegas smoke shop owner was not threatened.
Thus, he was almost certainly not being robbed.
This article says the man "defends himself".
It sure doesn't look like it.. The man he stabbed did not even look like he was about to put the smoke shop owner in any physical danger.
Rather, it appears that the store owner initiated the attack. That would defeat any legal defense of self defense.
What we have here is simple shoplifting--theft.
Two people came into the store. One grabbed the tip jar and departed. The other jumped over the counter and reached for some merchandise on the shelf. That is shoplifting.
The use of deadly force to prevent shoplifting is not permitted in any state in the union, or in any
US territory or possession...not even in Texas, which alone among US jurisdictions, does allow the use of deadly force to prevent theft in some very limited circumstances,
But the storeowner grabbed a knife, advanced on the shoplifter (who was not facing him), grabbed and held him, and played sewing machine on him.
Even if the circumstances would have justified the use of deadly force in self defense, the man held the shoplifter and kept stabbing as he tried to escape. That will destroy a legal defense of self defense very quickly.
He is being treated as a hero in some circles, but he is likely in a heap of trouble. It is a very good thing for him that the victim survived.
The man's stupidity did not end there. He spoke to the media. Whatever possible strategy his attorney might have been able to salvage to defend him, he undermined it--big time.
What a dope!
He said he was "afraid for his life". He probably heard that somewhere. But a legal defense would require evidence supporting a reasonable fear. There appears to be none. "Bare fear" does not suffice. The Nevada Criminal Code spells that out in language that even a five year old could understand.
Take-aways?
- Do not ever use deadly force, or the threat thereof--with a blade, bat, tire iron, 9 iron, or gun--to stop an act of theft. (Night-time in Texas? You're on your own.)
- If you are ever involved in any kind of a use of force incident, do not talk to the media--let your attorney do that.
One more thing: prosecuting attorneys are elected officials, and whatever the law and the facts of a case may be, they can and do sometimes use their discretion to decline to charge a suspect. That may have played a part in a case in St. Charles County, MO last week. Might it happen here? We'll see.
The reverse happens, too.
