Posted on 05/20/2014 5:10:03 PM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
Sebastian County Prosecutor Daniel Shue has decided not to file charges against a man involved in the deadly Fort Smith mall shooting that occurred on May 10, according to a statement released by his office Monday (May 19).
Shue states it is the opinion of his office that Grayson Herrera was justified in his use of deadly force at Central Mall against Fadi Qandil, who died from injuries suffered in the shooting.
“This is a justifiable homicide which does not merit the filing of criminal charges,” Shue states.
Fadi “Frankie” Qandil, 34, died from injuries sustained from multiple gunshot wounds to the upper torso in a parking lot between the Malco Theaters and JC Penney, said Sgt. Daniel Grubbs with the Fort Smith Police Department.
Fort Smith police responded to a report of shots fired at the mall at 7:41 p.m. May 10.
Investigators said Qandil confronted his estranged wife, Tabitha Qandil, 31, Grayson Herrera, 23, and Dustin O’Conner, 27, as the three were headed to the movie theater.
“The victim raised his shirt and showed a weapon within his waistband, began to pull the weapon. The other two were concealed handgun weapon carriers, and they pulled their weapons,” Grubbs said. “And there was an exchange of gunfire.”
An off-duty officer was working security inside the Malco, and another off-duty officer was attending a movie, when both heard the shots and ran to the parking lot, Grubbs said. The officers were able to disarmed Herrera and O’Conner.
The main law that led to Shue’s decision not to file charges was Arkansas Code Annotate 5-2-607, which states:
“A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if the person reasonably believes that the other person is: committing or about to commit a felony involving force or violence or using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force.”
Shue says in his statement, “Considering all circumstances, Herrera had a reasonable belief that Qandil was committing or about to commit a felony involving force or violence (attempted murder or aggravated assault) and/or that Qandil was using unlawful deadly physical force upon Mr. Herrera or the other persons present at the scene.”
The statement continues, “It is clear from the investigation conducted that Herrera was lawfully exercising his rights under Arkansas law by defending himself and/or other persons when he took the action that resulted in the death of Qandil.”
Weren’t the anti’s asking who would need to take a gun to a movie?
Well... I'm glad the police could make themselves useful.
it all worked out just the way it was supposed to...
Sgt. Daniel Grubbs is an idiot. This guy was an assailant, not a victim.
Herrera was struck once and taken by ambulance to a Fort Smith hospital with a minor injury.
It’s noteworthy that there don’t seem to be any pictures of any of the involved on the Internet.
He needed killin’.
As an aside, the estranged wife seems to be smarter than average, in hanging out with not one, but two, cc holders. I suspect that her late husband had made it a habit of threatening her life.
Well, those people shouldn't have been walking with the estranged wife of the "victim" (/sarc), since they weren't immediate family members. She was supposed to be killed for his honor, and they shouldn't have interfered. /sarc
Mark
The fact that no criminal charges are filed for the justifiable use of a handgun in self defense warrants a news article.
F’lippin’ idiots also take more than a week to not press charges on the victims. Today’s “Law Enforcement” are just geniuses!
The sergeant is correct, in a narrow technical sense. However, when it comes to law all there is, is a ‘narrow, technical sense’. The deceased is a ‘victim’ of homicide - defined as the intentional killing of another. He is the ‘victim’ because he was himself the perpetrator of criminal attempt of homicide.
The law provides for justification for reason of defense of oneself or another, which was correctly applied by the authorities here.
So although it sounds in a first reading like the decedent is somehow not responsible for his own demise, that’s not the case. Bad guy tried to shoot his ex lady and her new friends. Intended victims shot better. Cops and prosecutor correctly investigated and applied a just law.
All is well.
Sounds like good cops running towards trouble. I bet the last sentence is more a reflection of the "journalist's" anti-self-defense attitude than a reflection on the officers...
Might want to check the Black's Law definition of, "Victim." A justifiable homicide is not a criminal act, and therefore in a, "narrow technical sense," it does not produce a victim.
Grubbs ran toward trouble, did not simply shoot anyone with a gun, and otherwise appears to have behaved properly. My bet is that theonly idiot here is the POS “journalist” who added his spin to the story.
“F’lippin’ idiots also take more than a week to not press charges on the victims. Today’s “Law Enforcement” are just geniuses!”
Somebody died and that deserves at least some thoughtful consideration. Many murders have been staged as “self-defense” killings.
File under: better you dead than me dead.
Even Marshall Dillon rarely took on two guys with guns at the same time.
Yes I quibble, but using the term 'victim' (and he may have been using "air scare quotes" when he was speaking) is not in itself proof of mental deficiency.
I also don't think it was inordinate to take a week to reach the prosecutorial decision. Collecting and analyzing the forensic evidence, interviewing the survivors, checking for surveillance footage, canvassing for witnesses, investigating the background and prior history - heck this was lightning speed.
Even the good DA's around here would screw around with this for 18 months. The bad ones (yeah I mean you Zappala) would charge murder and take you to trial and make you convince a jury that you were justified.
Well said.
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.