16-year-old shot by security guard dies
Posted on 11/04/2002 6:13:26 AM PST by MeekOneGOP
16-year-old shot by security guard dies
Teen theft suspect dies; security guard charged
11/04/2002
A 16-year-old who witnesses said was shoplifting died Saturday night, several hours after being shot in the head by a shopping center security guard.
Leshard Wilson was shot about 2:15 p.m. in a parking lot behind a shopping center as he and two other boys ran from the security guard. Dallas police Sgt. Gary Kirkpatrick said Sunday that the two other boys fled from the shopping center in the 1500 block of South Buckner Boulevard and have not been identified. Leshard died about 8:50 p.m. at Baylor University Medical Center.
WFAA-TV Police take security guard Bernie Pointer Jr., right, into custody. |
The private guard, Bennie Franklin Pointer Jr., 50, of Dallas, was charged Saturday with aggravated assault, but the charge was changed to murder on Sunday after Leshard died. Mr. Pointer remained in custody at Lew Sterrett Justice Center on Sunday, awaiting arraignment on the murder charge.
Mr. Pointer's family declined to comment.
Family members and friends gathered Sunday at Leshard's home, less than a mile from the shopping center. They declined to comment on the incident but said that funeral plans were still pending.
A representative of Mr. Pointer's employer, North American Security Group, said Sunday that the company would make a statement Monday afternoon.
Police said that the three boys were thought to have been shoplifting at the Family Dollar store on Buckner, just north of Lake June Road. Sgt. Kirkpatrick said that there was no evidence behind the store to show that Leshard had stolen anything.
Although state law allows security guards to use deadly force to protect property, Sgt. Kirkpatrick said that Mr. Pointer appeared to have overstepped his authority as he fired the single shot that hit Leshard.
E-mail imccann@dallasnews.com
Really? We're meting out the death penalty for shoplifting now? Remind me to stay far away from whereever you are; people like you scare me.
Please note that the article stipulates A 16-year-old who witnesses said was shoplifting
In other words, he was seen by more than one witness to be shoplifting - i.e., stealing.
Now, I'm all for people being punished for stealing,
Seemingly not. Please see the short excerpt from the article above. Also, in your post #82 you object to the action by the guard for the offense of shoplifting. This appears to impeach your statement above, to at least some degree.
but what this thug robocop did was shoot someone he suspected of stealing; he had no evidence.
Your use of the term "robocop" is mere hyperbole. Actually, the guard looked more like a middle aged black man trying to earn a living.
And yes, he had the evidence of witnesses. Please see article excerpt above.
Is shooting suspected thieves okay with you?
Please note from the article: Leshard Wilson was shot about 2:15 p.m. in a parking lot behind a shopping center as he and two other boys ran from the security guard.
A total of three perps were fleeing. While the letter of the law may not support the use of deadly force against 3 theives fleeing the scene of their crime, I most certainly do support it. Were I on a jury, I would not convict the guard.
I thought we had juries to mete out society's punishment for wrongdoers.
You'll find that the law is not as clear on this as you seem to believe. In Texas, theft during the night is a situation wherein one can lawfully use deadly force. This situation happened at 2:15 PM, so I suppose it was during daylight - as such, deadly force would not be authorized by statute.
You may view the Texas Penal Code HERE
See section 9.42 under deadly force to protect property.
As I mentioned above, I would not convict the guard of any crime; my only complaint against the man is that he only had a 33% success rate!
Then what's the point? We can save a fortune
by having no laws at all.
Yup. By killing this vermin and scaring the
hell out of two others, this guard probably
saved the life of some future victim.
Better reread the article.
but their equally to blame.
Equally? Equally? One person is dead. The other is charged with MURDER. The person who is dead hasn't even been accused of anything. Suspected, with no evidence. Suspected, not even accused. Equally? Someone is inhaling, and it ain't me.
Cops are scary enough, rent-a-cops are the scariest things going. Some goof who couldn't make the grade, gets a job for just over minimum wage, they give him a gun, and guess what happens? The only thing scarier than that is ILLBAY being put in charge of ANYTHING.
LOL!
This entire story is just human tragedy, 16 year old is dead and 50 year old will have the rest of his life ruined. There is no good in this story at all, only lesson that hopefully other 16 year olds will find something better to do with their time than attempting to rob stores or people.
So place me in the column of hoping the security guard is acquitted.
That's the spirit! Now let's go gun down some jaywalkers!!!!!
Did you get all that? No evidence.
It seems like, in your twisted world, if someone walks up to a rent-a-cop, and says, "The woman in the red shirt just put something in her purse," then the rent-a-cop has the right to shoot the woman as she's walking out the door. After all, he has a witness, right?
Witnesses are unreliable. Witnesses can be mistaken. Sometimes, witnesses lie. This is why we have juries to evaluate the evidence and weigh all the facts. Shooting the accused denies him or her the benefit of due process, which is guaranteed under the Constitution.
You wrote: In Texas, theft during the night is a situation wherein one can lawfully use deadly force.
We aren't talking about a situation where the crime was committed at night; this happened in broad daylight. This bumbler took the law into his own hands, and will pay for it. You state that if you were on the jury, you would not vote to convict. Luckily, most people on juries are vested with common sense, and would not agree with you.
By the way, where do you live? I heard from a witness that you were planning to rob a bank in the middle of the night, and I thought I'd come over and shoot you before you could commit the crime.
Hell, litterers are the worst. Just think how great it'll be when anyone tosses an apple core out their car window. KA-BLAM!!!!
Not only litterers, I'm also for going after those SOBs who are late returning their library books. .38 in the temple! Teach those m-f'ers what freedom really is......
I think you need to read a little more carefully before posting. These boys were suspected of shoplifting, not robbery. Big difference. Everyone is merely a "suspect" until convicted. This kid wasn't convicted; he was shot in the back while running away.
I agree that killing suspected shoplifters is a good deterrent, however I'm not sure all of us would want to live in a society where we could be killed because someone suspected us of a crime. I'm sure all of us have been, at some time, trailed around the store by store security for whatever reason; it's happened to me, and I've never stolen anything in my life. Everyone is protected by due process, and we need due process to have a fair and civil society.
I agree, though, that this was a tragedy, one brought on by overzealousness and a loss of priorities. I feel sorry for this guard's family; they will likely have all they own taken from them when the kid's family sues them. I hope the guard goes to prison. It will serve as a deterrent to other guards who might have similar violent proclivities.
Shot in the head. They only shoot those whose parking meters have expired in the back....
Tut, tut. Let us not be silly! Everyone knows that jaywalkers are, more properly, used as speed bumps. (/sarcasm)
Ahh, but being the compassionate sort that I am, I'd want to give the accused every possible consideration. And although most of the members of the panel might vote to convict, it only takes one determined individual to hang the jury. (Grin)
By the way, where do you live? I heard from a witness that you were planning to rob a bank in the middle of the night, and I thought I'd come over and shoot you before you could commit the crime.
It appears that you didn't read the statute, since your proposed actions are not in compliance with the law.
As I pointed out earlier (and you chose to ignore), there was more than one witness. The deceased asipiring perp didn't happen to have any stolen goods on his person, but that doesn't prove that he didn't steal anything. He may have disposed of the item(s), or transferred the property to his associates. We also can note that he and his fellow theives ran.
Or, to paraphrase the illustrious Mr. Cochran, "If the perps tried to split, you must acquit!"
I have good news for you! In Texas, the homestead, as well as $30,000 in auction value of household goods (including computers, jewelry, a couple vehicles, and so forth!) are all exempt property. The little asipiring criminal's family is unlikely to see a dime from the guard's estate.
The nice thing is that if they do sue, the guard can countersue. It's unlikely that the aspiring criminal's family has anything either, but they would have to defend against the (possibly frivolous) countersuit. With a little effort, the guard could tie everything into a veritable pretzel!
I knew you'd enjoy hearing all this....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
