Bad Tactics, Bad Journalism

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry, I was looking for specific examples of "reasonable non-deadly physical force" to repulse multiple thieves lest they get violent
The only place(s) I've seen that work is in Jack Reacher novels & films.
(and I'm only being half humorous)

Multiple attacker beatings can, and will, leave you maimed for the rest of your life.
Those who advocate Take-the-Beating/Don't-Take-a-Life have never seen the results,
much less ever been the object of same.
 
Some sources besides NY Post:
Las Vegas: https://www.8newsnow.com/news/local-news/las-vegas-police-arrest-3-juveniles-in-smoke-shop-robbery/
Colorado Springs: https://www.kktv.com/2022/08/08/graphic-smoke-shop-owner-fights-back-stabs-attempted-robber/


As far as the opening post referring to "bad journalism", the Wikipedia editors guide on reliable sources says:
"There is consensus that the New York Post is generally unreliable for factual reporting especially with regard to politics, particularly New York City politics. A tabloid newspaper, [Wikipedia] editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including a number of examples of outright fabrication. Editors consider the New York Post more reliable in the period before it changed ownership in 1976, and particularly unreliable for coverage involving the New York City Police Department."
So I am not including a link to the Post story.

Wasn't the NY Post the paper that first reported on Hunter Biden's laptop? The story that was ignored and ridiculed and covered up by all the serious news operations like CNN, NYT, etc?
Anyway, who knows how the case of the smoke shop employee vs the candy thief will go. I wouldn't want to be the prosecutor, trying to convince a jury that the masked thief who jumped over the counter, while his masked accomplice was stealing the tip jar, was just some hungry fellow who needed a bite to eat. He had a backpack on his front, half open, that could have contained a weapon. Or maybe it was just to make stealing candy easier. But the thieves sure tried to make themselves look tough and scary.
 
I wouldn't want to be the prosecutor, trying to convince a jury that the masked thief who jumped over the counter, while his masked accomplice was stealing the tip jar, was just some hungry fellow who needed a bite to eat.
That comment is ridiculous. The men were thieves. That would not justify deadly force anywhere in the country.
He had a backpack on his front, half open, that could have contained a weapon.
"Could have" doesn't cut it. That would apply to anyone wearing more than a thong.
 
That comment is ridiculous. The men were thieves. That would not justify deadly force anywhere in the country.
"Could have" doesn't cut it. That would apply to anyone wearing more than a thong.

I'm just saying that the clerk behind the counter could have seen it that way. I'm pretty tired of this forum and all it's legal experts mouthing off and insulting and threatening people. I quit. Remove me from your forum.
 
I never realized there were so many attorneys and experienced knife fighters here. When I compare myself to others who I have been privileged to work with for all of my adult life, whether in the military, as a contractor, or in the dojo/cage, I consider myself "average" in the various spheres of defense. I also assume anyone who is a threat to me or mine is probably at least as skilled as I am, not to mention more "willing"- after all, I'm no spring chicken and I am totally disabled. That being said, anyone who would let me have a "free shot" at them with anything with the intention of "reacting accordingly afterwards" would likely be in a bad position trying to play "catch up". Based off of this risk assessment, I would be tactically foolish to not seize whatever initiative I could exploit when reacting to a threat.
 
"…I'm just saying that the clerk behind the counter could have seen it that way…"
Exactly correct. Why should a decent, honorable, and peaceful shopkeeper have to allow THREE masked robbers, who already stole money, cornered him in his own store, then have to still have to await to see if the thug (who vaulted over the counter) finally pulls a weapon from his impromptu chest rig?

It makes one wonder why an array of posters place such little value on the innocent retailer's life?
Those three dirtbag robbers could have saved themselves from trouble at any point along the way.
All they had to do was WALK AWAY. There is nothing to suggest the shopkeeper would pursue them.
 
Why should a decent, honorable, and peaceful shopkeeper have to allow THREE masked robbers
Thieves...makes all the difference.

then have to still have to await to see if the thug (who vaulted over the counter) finally pulls a weapon from his impromptu chest rig?
He doesn't--none of us would, but we would need a basis to believe that there was an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm..The mere possibility does not cut it.
 
Burglary- non confrontational stealing from an unoccupied place.

Theft- stealing where the owner is present but subterfuge is used. If confronted, this can go to the next level if the thief does not disengage.

Robbery - Theft with the implicit threat of force, whether verbal, or by display of a weapon, or verbal and disparity of force.

IANAL, I'm sure Frank or Spats has a better definition.

In my personal opinion, aggravated robbery is a redundancy. ;)
 
This is Nevada specifically.
https://www.shouselaw.com/nv/defense/nrs/200-380-robbery/

Gives examples too. Aggravated robbery is if they had a weapon and the victim knew it. If you are a purse snatcher in Nevada, that’s robbery. Flip out a knife and tell her to give it to you, that’s aggravated robbery.

Not sure it matters, now that they have already plead guilty to robbery though. I guess they could say they didn’t do it and the lawyer messed them up but all that appears to be left on the matter is being sentenced for the crime of robbery, they have already plead guilty to.
 
I often wonder the details, especially when it comes to use of force. The details are often few and far between. Dishonesty in “news” is an entire subject too.

I was just using what little information I could find on the subject and provided the source.

Says “guilty to robbery”.
 
This is from the same news story.

Attorney Carolina Griffin who represents the teen who remained at the door said there was no indication any of the teens had weapons. “…especially my client: no guns, no knives, nothing of the sort, but unfortunately, things happened the way that they did,” she said.

A juvenile probation officer at the hearing said that the teen who remained at the door may have tried to previously rob the same store and he may have been aware that the owner kept a knife.

Probably won’t get a response this weekend but you could call and ask his lawyer Monday.

58C71EC3-F17F-4D7B-AC7A-CA364A11DD7B.jpeg
 
Earlier on someone asked about a statute of limitation regarding charging in this instance... Pretty sure each state has one for different level crimes - and that each state does it differently... The only exception I'm aware of is that there is no limit on homicide - you can charge that crime at any time - even fifty years afterwards in every state... Now I'll wait to see how accurate this statement is - and will be interested to see exactly what the time limit is in Nevada - for the crimes shown in the video...

As you can guess in many instances over the years whenever we (law enforcement, south Florida, 100 man department - without an in-house counsel...) had a legal question our first move was to contact our local state's attorney's office during normal work hours - or the on-call individual after hours. You learn very early on to ask about this sort of stuff - before charging, if there's the slightest doubt. Once it gets to court if you're wrong it's tough to clean up the errors without penalties...
 
Multiple attacker beatings can, and will, leave you maimed for the rest of your life.

Multiple attacker beatings can and COULD leave you maimed for the rest of your life. As to whether or not that WILL leave you mained for the rest of your life will depend on the severity of the beating. Single attacker beatings can and could leave you maimed for the rest of your life as well. Again, depends on the severity.
Earlier on someone asked about a statute of limitation regarding charging in this instance... Pretty sure each state has one for different level crimes - and that each state does it differently... The only exception I'm aware of is that there is no limit on homicide - you can charge that crime at any time - even fifty years afterwards in every state... Now I'll wait to see how accurate this statement is - and will be interested to see exactly what the time limit is in Nevada - for the crimes shown in the video...

Nevada Laws for which there is not statute of limitation.
NRS Section 171.080 et seq.
Felonies
  • Murder: No time limit.
  • Acts of terrorism or attempted acts of terrorism: No time limit.
  • Sexual assault arising out of same circumstances as murder or terrorism: No time limit.
  • Sexual assault if identity of accused person is established through DNA: No time limit.
  • Sexual assault or sex trafficking if written report filed with law enforcement during period of limitation: No time limit.
Other laws and limits...
  • Theft: 4 years time limit.
  • Robbery: 4 years time limit.
  • Burglary: 4 years time limit.
  • Forgery: 4 years time limit.
  • Arson: 4 years time limit.
  • Sex trafficking: 4 years time limit.
  • Security fraud: 4 years time limit.
  • Fraud: 4 years time limit.
  • Sexual assault: 20 years time limit.
  • Any other felony: 3 years time limit.
  • Child sexual abuse:
    • Until victim turns 36 years old if the victim discovers that they were a victim of sexual abuse or trafficking by the date they turn 36.
    • Until victim turns 43 years old if the victim did not discover and reasonably should not have discovered they were a victim of sexual abuse or trafficking by the date they turn 36.
Misdemeanors
  • Gross misdemeanor: 2 years time limit.
  • Other misdemeanors: 1 year.
Crimes in Which a Child Is a Victim Child sexual abuse:
  • Until victim turns 36 years old if the victim discovers that they were a victim of sexual abuse or trafficking by the date they turn 36.
  • Until victim turns 43 years old if the victim did not discover and reasonably should not have discovered they were a victim of sexual abuse or trafficking by the date they turn 36.
This is all from https://www.findlaw.com/state/nevada-law/nevada-criminal-statute-of-limitations-laws.html
 
Multiple attacker beatings can and COULD leave you maimed for the rest of your life. As to whether or not that WILL leave you maimed for the rest of your life will depend on the severity of the beating. Single attacker beatings can and could leave you maimed for the rest of your life as well. Again, depends on the severity.
`Tell you the truth, I don't believe that the "reasonable" man will (or SHOULD) wait until after the fact to assess the damage and decide what he SHOULD have done.
But I believe you (PROBABLY) believe that as well. :thumbup:

.
 
Last edited:
Multiple attacker beatings can, and will, leave you maimed for the rest of your life.
Those who advocate Take-the-Beating/Don't-Take-a-Life have never seen the results,
much less ever been the object of same.
That is why they constitute deadly force.
But the question was about theft.
 
The clerk was supposed to channel Kreskin, Uri Geller, and Nostradamus that two masked men who invaded the store, invaded his personal space will then just leave in s couple of seconds during the vautl. I'm glad the moderators have such psychic abilities.

Next, no weapons were apparent. Well, fans - yesterday this fat old, nice looklng man went to the store. He wore cargo shorts, a t-shirt (Support Ukraine!) and a Bass Pro floppy shirt over that. Under this was a Glock, extra mag, pepper spray and two Delicas. All invisible. Easily deployed in seconds. Maybe the Delicas could be used to slice tendons as the fat old guy learned in class. Recall, a case I've mentioned where an old man facing a young man had a paring knife in his pocket, not apparent, pulled it, stuck it in the chest of the young man who dropped stone cold dead.

As far as the hindsight AOJ analysis, go read the defense of Bernhard Goetz - the defense took apart the similar pro prosection claims made here. The clerk might have had an escape route, maybe not. The idea that a criminal case against him is a guarantee is just baloney.
 
`Tell you the truth, I don't believe that the "reasonable" man will (or SHOULD) wait until after the fact to assess the damage and decide what he SHOULD have done.

That’s pretty much all this forum is. :)

We are always Monday morning quarterbacks here, generally with even less information about everything except hind sight, that the subjects we talk about.
 
That’s pretty much all this forum is. :)

We are always Monday morning quarterbacks here, generally with even less information about everything except hind sight, that the subjects we talk about.
Actually, juries work about the same way. They evaluate things after the fact, and take into account the law, evidence that is never complete, and personal feelings.

None of those who decide the outcome were present at the scene.

They do have the advantages of hearing the tone of testimony, seeing facial expressions, and seeing just how nicely the defendant cleans up in a nice suit.

Their conclusions, though, are extremely important.
 
The clerk was supposed to channel Kreskin, Uri Geller, and Nostradamus that two masked men who invaded the store, invaded his personal space will then just leave in s couple of seconds during the vautl. I'm glad the moderators have such psychic abilities.
He was expected to decide, based on what hw way, whetheer he faced an imminent deadly force threat, and what to do about it. He didn't actually have to be right. All defensive use of force incidents occur that way.
The idea that a criminal case against him is a guarantee is just baloney.
I do not recall any such statements.

I learned long ago to not try to predict charging decisions or the outcomes of jury trials or even bench trials.
 
Take this for what it’s worth and from a cynical cop’s personal experience… In 22 years in and out of courtrooms I only saw real justice once or twice…
Much more commonly I saw various sides and interests in conflict with “justice” purely secondary if it was on the agenda at all…

My conclusion? Staying out of courtrooms is a really good idea… and that’s why we review these kinds of incidents…
 
I was raised by people that, if allowed the first blow with or without weapons, would have already won the fight and probably would have killed you if they wanted to.
Once I was cornered by an attacker I wouldn't want to wait around to see if he's feeling merciful - especially if he's backed up by a couple of masked friends... .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top