What does the video show? Was it a reasonable shooting?
No
The video is debatable. There was a confrontation over a handicapped parking spot. The shooter got pushed to the ground and pulled a gun. The guy who got shot starts backing away and gets shot in the chest (dies).
What complicates this is that the shooter has a history of pulling his gun and threatening people with it.
Honestly, it does NOT seem like a reasonable shooting. However, I probably need to check all the information that I am reading about is correct.
A blindside attack and knockdown of the shooter by the dead guy, who moved to stomp, just before the shooter drew and fired from the ground.
Dead guy had extensive violent criminal record and convictions, shooter clean record, valid permit.
Nope...
“What does the video show? Was it a reasonable shooting?”
A difficult one for me. If I got knocked down like that anger might kick in and make me overact but I’m not sure that’s wrong. On the other hand, he could have pointed the gun at his attacker, or fired it at the ground beneath him.
If he left the attacker uninjured could he have feared a revenge attack using a gun? I would have. His attacker couldn’t control his anger.
I’ve seen the video. The shooter moves over to the car to confront the girlfriend about parking in a handicap spot. Honestly, when the shooter approached there was plenty of parking spots closer to the door than the actual “handicap spot.” He probably should have minded his own business. There is some back and forth between the girlfriend in the car and the shooter. The shooter gets pushed down out of nowhere from the boyfriend coming out of the store. Not what I would do but probably deserves the benefit of the doubt. On the ground, the shooter pulls out his handgun. There was a measurable moment when the boyfriend backs away a step, then the shooter fires.
IMHO there was no valid legal or moral reason to fire in this case from the video I saw. He might have had a valid reason to pull his weapon but that’s it. I have no idea what was being said or what shooter saw from the angle he was at. Certainly, the boyfriend had no right to push him down but from the video, it looks bad for the shooter.
In my opinion, it looks like 3 trashy people creating trashy conflict with each other that ends up with a man being killed. Very sad and unfortunate.
I think there is a moral of the story for all perspectives here.
If you are in the shooters perspective: 1. People do crazy stuff. Avoid conflict but be friendly if you have to say something. 2. Unless you are a 90-year-old grandma and an assailant is a 300-pound man, the person 4-5 feet away you shoot at better be armed with a weapon of some sort.
For the girlfriends perspective: I’ve been confronted a few times for something that wasn’t really a big deal but that I knew was technically against the rules. Just acknowledge you’ll do something different next time and most people will move on.
For the Boyfriends perspective: People do crazy things. Avoid conflict if you can. There’s no reason to push someone down because they are being a jerk. All of us have been jerks at one time or another.
Yes, shooter was assaulted and battered by being pushed to the ground and while unable to retreat, you can see the “victim” move towards the shooter and only slightly backs up when the firearm comes out.
No this asshole was looking to shoot someone. He came up to the victim wife’s car (she was parked in a handicapped space, when not handicapped) the guy ran out, pushed the white guy to the ground, then the clown pulled out his gun and shot him dead. I would have done the same thing if he harassed my wife. The white guyis ( playing handi-cop) threatening to shot another person who also parked in a handicapped space.
Yes.
Probably not a reasonable shooting. The soon-to-be-dead-guy rushes out of a store, shoves Dejka to the pavement. Dejka, sitting, draws and the aggressor immediately backs up and continues backing up. There is about a 2-3 second delay between drawing and firing, and it looks like Dejka is thinking about his options. Attack has stopped, probably no reasonable fear of imminent bodily injury/harm at that point, aggressor is in retreat.
The only thing Dejka can argue is that while the original aggressor was backing up, from his perspective on the ground there is a moment where the aggressor seems to turn. At that moment, Dejka could have seen the turn as likely new aggression. This happens at about 10-12 feet, and the original aggressor could have renewed the attack quickly from that distance. But the jury is going to see the clear pause and the retreat. In my opinion, Dejka seems to be thinking “I can get away with this.”