Store clerk charged after taking thief's baseball bat and beating thief

[bullwinkle]

it's Canada. the thief will have psychological support, a lifetime pension and a medal. and the clerk will be prosecuted.

It's happening here in Cincinnati too-

Police: Final arrest made in deadly Delhi vape shop burglary

Police have arrested the final suspect they believe was involved in the burglary of a Delhi vape shop that turned deadly.

www.wcpo.com

Guess they felt the manager was too aggressive in going after/shooting the burglars... Amazingly I've heard of ZERO smoke shop burglary/smash & grabs occurring since this one!

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Or not enough

Dead criminals tell no lies

 

[walterjay]

Too many criminal rights now days.

 

[Mainia]

Dead criminals tell no lies

I guess.............One man's criminal is another collage educated suburban female's freedom fighter........... No...? Insanity repeated.

 

[JavierH19]

Texas court? How'd Texas get in here?

Ah. Meant to reply to gcsrj's comment.

 

[bbhero]

Clerk must have hit him one time too many.

Well…. What it dipnumber2 jr aka the robber armed with the baseball bat had done that before that clerk disarmed him ?

And let’s remember… dipnumber2 HIT the clerk first…

 

[Pew]

This happens when common sense and the law aren't on the same ground.

Criminals now have laws that protect them. I often think about all the stupid litigation somebody would have to go through in a self-defense case.

 

[OVERKILL]

This happens when common sense and the law aren't on the same ground.

Criminals now have laws that protect them. I often think about all the stupid litigation somebody would have to go through in a self-defense case.

That's Canada. If a meth-head breaks into a house, armed with a machete/crowbar/bat or gun, if he ends up getting shot by the homeowner in a purely self defence scenario, the homeowner gets charged. Then, the homeowner gets to go to court to fight the charge, even if it's obvious that it was self defence. You are assumed guilty (charged) until you prove yourself innocent, regardless of how clear the circumstances of the incident, and this can be very expensive, and take a very long time.

It's a very backwards system.

 

[bbhero]

It’s a backward system due to the following….

1) People don’t believe in private property rights…

2) They don’t believe people have the natural right to defend themselves…

It’s a very, very, dangerous belief pattern… Proven by what happened in the 20th century.

 

[JavierH19]

This story reminds me of the diner who shot an armed robber in a Houston taqueria. Who knows what the outcome was there?

The Texas court declined to press charges on him and rightfully so. This being Canada I wouldn't have high hopes.

 

[ecotourist]

The clerk may have gone too far. We don't know. He's been charged but the prosecution will still have to convince a jury.

Several years ago a shop owner was charged after he attacked a thief who had robbed him a few hours earlier (took a bunch of plants I think) and who was back for more. The evidence was clear enough but a jury didn't convict him.

And there is the famous Saskatchewan case where a farmer apparently accidentally shot a young native who had been a passenger in a vehicle being driven by 2 friends who were apparently trying to steal a vehicle from the farm. The young man was suddenly awakened and tried to drive away, had a bit of a wrestle with the farmer who was trying to stop him, and he was shot and killed. The farmer was charged with 2nd degree murder. There are several ways to look at this case. One thing for sure, it was a sad case for everyone involved. A jury didn't convict him.

Saskatchewan farmer not guilty in fatal shooting of Indigenous man

There were sobs of despair and cries of 'murderer' in a Saskatchewan courtroom Friday night as a jury found a white farmer not guilty in the shooting death of an Indigenous man.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Peterborough store clerk charged with assault after allegedly beating would-be robber with the latter’s own baseball bat

Police say he allegedly stole a baseball from a would-be robber and hit the suspect several times with the bat.

www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com

Peterborough, Ontario, Canada:

---

A convenience store clerk in Peterborough has been charged with assault after he allegedly took a baseball bat from a would-be robber and hit the suspect several times with it.

According to the Peterborough Police Service, officers were dispatched to a convenience store in the King and Bethune streets area around 2:30 a.m. on Friday, Jan. 5. Upon arrival, police say officers learned that the male clerk was helping a customer when a second man came into the store demanding money and brandishing a baseball bat.

Police say a struggle ensued and the clerk was allegedly struck with the bat before taking it away from the suspect. Police say the clerk followed the suspect out of the store and allegedly struck him several times with the bat on the sidewalk.

The suspect suffered head injuries and is in a Toronto hospital receiving treatment while the 22-year-old clerk was treated at the scene by EMS, police say.

As a result of the investigation, an arrest warrant was issued for the 37-year-old man, who is wanted for robbery, assault with a weapon and possession of a weapon.
The 22-year-old clerk from Peterborough was also arrested and charged with aggravated assault. He was held in custody and appeared in court Saturday, Jan. 6.
Peterborough Police would also like to speak with a male customer who was in the store at the time.

---

This is insane

Not insane. For this property crime the error of the store clerk began with his pursuit of the robber. You can't do this in the US either.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

The Texas court declined to press charges on him and rightfully so. This being Canada I wouldn't have high hopes.

Completely different scenario and circumstances. What the clerk did would be illegal in Texas as well. You can't pursue an alleged criminal and beat him with a bat or shoot him. You can restrain but in many states you better have good probable cause rather than just a "feeling".

Look up the Ahmed Aubrey case.

 

[IndyIan]

Yeah, you can't chase the guy down the street and beat him on the head bad enough he has to go to a brain injury hospital and claim its self defence or theft prevention...
I suspect that unless this clerk has a history of assaults, he'll get the charges lowered or dismissed, and a warning...

 

[vwmaniaman]

When wife and I had concealed carry training they told us that if you have to shoot somebody make sure you finish the job.

 

[OVERKILL]

Not insane. For this property crime the error of the store clerk began with his pursuit of the robber. You can't do this in the US either.

Yes, though I think this is complicated by the fact that the clerk was beaten with the bat first. He then managed to seize control of it from the assailant, and when the assailant fled the store, I assume being chased by the clerk, he was struck with the bat repeatedly.

I think most people in a situation where they've been assaulted by a crackhead wielding a bat, if they managed to get control of said bat, would be naturally inclined, due to the nature of the situation, to use this bat on the perpetrator, even if he turned tail after his "plan" went sideways.

This is where there's a clear divide between what many feel is "right" and what is legally "right". The idea that in an armed robbery, the perp can somehow become the victim because their plan was poorly executed and/or they weren't prepared for resistance, seems preposterous. They were the one who made the decision to undertake this criminal exercise in the first place, one would expect that they should bear the brunt of the fallout from that decision. But of course that's not how the law sees it.

I must assume that the clerk, freshly assaulted, had no training, legal or otherwise, on proportional response or how to temper his emotions and maintain self control while under duress. After all, if he was trained as a peace officer, he wouldn't be manning the counter of a convenience store at 1:45AM. I think this should have been factored into the decision making process that resulted in him being charged and held. I certainly hope it is factored into his court case.

 

[Wheel]

A good read on the general subject is 'In The Gravest Extreme' by Mas Ayoob or 'Close Quarter Combat' by Just David Meyers. Typically the laws allow for force until there isn't a threat of violence for the defender any longer. If you apply force beyond that, you're in the wrong. You might feel better about it, but that's often wrong in the eyes of the law.

 

[wpod]

A "certain" "thought process" of people "who have control" think the criminal should have more rights then the person they accost. Yet people seem to always have "them" around deciding and keeping these laws twisted so the aggressor is the righteous one. With this backing of freedom for accosting, you just keep getting more of it. Insanity at it's finest. Yet people seem to like these insane freedom givers to accoster's. And somehow fell good about it. Insanity.

We need to open our eyes to whom the most dangerous criminals actually are.

 

[4WD]

Clerk must have hit him one time too many.

What was batting average ?

 

[spasm3]

When wife and I had concealed carry training they told us that if you have to shoot somebody make sure you finish the job.

If that's true, there's a lot of bad advice out there.