Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FL: Lakeland Shooting Video Released, Reasonable Belief of Deadly Threat?
Ammoland ^ | 19 October, 2018 | Dean Weingarten

Posted on 10/22/2018 5:16:57 AM PDT by marktwain

FL: Lakeland Shooting Video released, Reasonble Belief of Deadly Threat?

On 3 October 2018, Michael Dunn shot and killed Christobal Lopez, during a struggle where Lopez was attempting to steal a hatchet from Dunn's Vets Army Navy Surplus store. The store is located in Lakeland, Florida.

Dunn, 47, was attempting to stop Lopez, 50, from leaving the store while he was holding the hatchet he was stealing. Surveillance video from inside the store showing the last part of the struggle, which ended in a fatal shooting. From tampabay.com:

Still pointing the gun at Lopez, Dunn tries to grab Lopez’s shoulder from behind with his left hand as Lopez makes it out the door, the video shows. Dunn’s hand slips off Lopez’s shoulder but Dunn is able to grab a fistful of the man’s t-shirt. Lopez raises his left arm in an apparent attempt to break free, and then Dunn appears to fire.

Lopez falls to the pavement just outside the door. He appears to shake for a moment, then lies still as Dunn keeps the gun trained on him.

At the moment Dunn fires, Lopez is holding the door with his right hand and appears to be holding an object in that same hand. It’s unclear if the object is the hatchet that Lopez is suspected of trying to steal when he was shot.

The standard for justifiable self-defense, in Florida, is that the defender may use deadly force if the defender reasonably believes it to be

(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: banglist; fl; lakeland; shooting
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
More than the video will be presented to the jury.

Everything that happened before the video is also important to understand the store owner's mindset.

1 posted on 10/22/2018 5:16:57 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Link to Video
2 posted on 10/22/2018 5:18:23 AM PDT by marktwain (President Trump and his supporters are the Resistance. His opponents are the Reactionaries.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

A fifty year old man should know better.


3 posted on 10/22/2018 5:24:49 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

It seems to me we are quickly reaching the point where we must answer the question of whether a law abiding citizen is responsible for preserving the life of their assailant.

The store owner has every right to confront a shoplifter. If Lopez had been stealing an oven mitt there would be no question. As he was stealing a deadly weapon when he was confronted this is less a case of shoplifting than a case of “human-shielding.”


4 posted on 10/22/2018 5:37:30 AM PDT by papertyger (Trump, A president so great, that Democrats who said they would leave America if he won, stayed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The thing that makes a civilization successful is not military force. It is property rights. If you have no right to your property and to protect your property, you have no rights and we don’t have civilization. This is true at all levels, whether it’s the government taking your land or an individual taking your property. People only steal because they believe they can. Giuliani demonstrated in NY that you have to enforce the law and rights at the lowest possible level and that improved law and order all the way to the top crimes.


5 posted on 10/22/2018 5:42:39 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

You are correct.

In this case, the water is muddied because the shoplifter was stealing a deadly weapon.

The shoplifter had previous convictions for non-violent crimes.

No threats were uttered by either man.

All Lopez had to do to avoid the shooting was to drop the axe.


6 posted on 10/22/2018 5:56:33 AM PDT by marktwain (President Trump and his supporters are the Resistance. His opponents are the Reactionaries.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I will be surprised if this man gets acquitted.

It is going to be interesting to see how this plays out.


7 posted on 10/22/2018 5:57:03 AM PDT by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60's....You weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

youtube wanting a signin - they’ve gotten lame

but, from the written description and the one photo, I’m sorry, but in my view, the shopkeeper didn’t have cause. The guy was out the door with the tool, not charging the shopowner trying to scalp him. His stance at the door was escape, not assault. His face was on video, and so could be identified by the cops who could get him. And yes, you are supposed to be able to protect your store from shoplifters, but the appropriate response is to call the cops, turn over the video, file a report, write off the loss on your taxes and go to court as a witness if needed. Now, if the thief had stepped back into the store, that might have been a different story. Or maybe the video I can’t watch tells a different story, but I’m just going on what I have. And the days of shooting horse thieves riding off in a cloud of dust are long gone.


8 posted on 10/22/2018 6:00:27 AM PDT by blueplum ( "...this moment is your moment: it belongs to you... " President Donald J. Trump, Jan 20, 2017)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueplum
You have stated the prosecution case.

I believe the defense case will be something like this:

The shoplifter was armed with a deadly weapon. He was resisting the shopkeeper, who was trying to stop the theft.

When the shoplifter tried to knock the shopkeeper's arm away, the shopkeeper believed he was under assault, and fired.

He only fired once, and when it was clear there was no more threat, he did not fire any more.

The standard is what the shopkeeper knew and believed as a reasonable man.

9 posted on 10/22/2018 6:07:31 AM PDT by marktwain (President Trump and his supporters are the Resistance. His opponents are the Reactionaries.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

For me it’s the left hand of the thief that is key. He had no fear and moved his hand aggressively toward the gun and that’s when he was shot. The store owner actually moved the gun away a little bit as the hand approached.

Justified shooting.


10 posted on 10/22/2018 6:11:49 AM PDT by Moonman62 (Give a man a fish and he'll be a Democrat. Teach a man to fish and he'll be a responsible citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Honestly I think I would have let the guy go rather than go through all the trouble and expense of shooting him. If you shoot someone it has to be a rock solid reason and its not in this case. He wasn’t threatening the owner, he was trying to escape and the cost of a $10 hatchet will be a lot less than potential jail time, lawyer fees, and the realization you killed a guy under questionable circumstances.


11 posted on 10/22/2018 6:13:50 AM PDT by Brooklyn Attitude (The first step in ending the war on white people is to recognize it exists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueplum

Regardless of whether you believe in it or not, the law in almost all jurisdictions is that you must not shoot or shoot at a thief who is running away.

The store owner in this case will not be prosecuted on the basis of what should be, he will be prosecuted on the wording of the law.

Those who own and carry guns should be very careful that they do not act as cops.


12 posted on 10/22/2018 6:14:03 AM PDT by old curmudgeon (There is no situation so terrible, so disgraceful, that the federal government can not make worse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: blueplum

but, from the written description and the one photo, I’m sorry, but in my view, the shopkeeper didn’t have cause.


And if you later find out that he sold this ax not to chop down a tree, but instead took it home to hack up his wife and kids?


13 posted on 10/22/2018 6:26:14 AM PDT by chaosagent (Remember, no matter how you slice it, forbidden fruit still tastes the sweetest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I could see that, too.

Now, in Calif, we’re supposed to just let shoplifters walk. It’s petty theft up to $400 and it remains a misdemeanor the DA likely won’t prosecute unless it’s over $950

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2016/05/14/shoplifting-california-prop-47-reduced-penalties/


14 posted on 10/22/2018 6:30:52 AM PDT by blueplum ( "...this moment is your moment: it belongs to you... " President Donald J. Trump, Jan 20, 2017)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: chaosagent

Since when do courts convict on imaginative images of future events rather than the facts of the crime?

The shooter must be tried solely on the basis of what occurred in his store.

Anything else is a travesty.


15 posted on 10/22/2018 6:32:41 AM PDT by old curmudgeon (There is no situation so terrible, so disgraceful, that the federal government can not make worse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Brooklyn Attitude
the cost of a $10 hatchet will be a lot less than potential jail time, lawyer fees, and the realization you killed a guy under questionable circumstances.

I am sure the store owner agrees with you.

Hindsight is easy.

Making the decision in real time is not.

Many stores are driven out of business because of thefts. I do not know how bad the theft problem was at this store.

It looks to me as if both store owner and shoplifter miscalculated.

16 posted on 10/22/2018 6:42:27 AM PDT by marktwain (President Trump and his supporters are the Resistance. His opponents are the Reactionaries.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: chaosagent

Then I will rightly say I was mistaken. But dude was in the store with his dad, the hatchet fell down the guy’s pantleg and clinked on the ground, he allegedly offered to pay for it before skipping out on Dad and the store. So you and I both know that the shopkeeper probably wasn’t thinking, this guy is going to kill somebody with a hatchet I need to stop him - he was probably thinking, he’s got my stuff, give it back. But dad was still in the store. That is a problem. A big one. Maybe he could have collected from an embarrassed Dad? Or maybe an embarrassed Dad would have marched dude back into the store to apologize? And (( just found the video) why did he keep his back to the Dad even after the shooting? If the guy was a hatchet murderer, wouldn’t Dad maybe be one too? And why didn’t shopkeeper render assistance instead of just standing there? bad bad optics. He’s toast.

video at WaPo:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/10/20/florida-official-indicted-murder-charge-after-state-rejects-stand-your-ground-claim/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.17981d15f307


17 posted on 10/22/2018 7:06:32 AM PDT by blueplum ( "...this moment is your moment: it belongs to you... " President Donald J. Trump, Jan 20, 2017)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

“Hindsight is easy. Making the decision in real time is not.”

That’s the key. The store owner was working in real time but the prosecutor and lawyers (and internet posters) get to judge things frame by frame. I dont see how that can be avoided other than having no video.

I think the prosecutor may decide this based on the fact the owner was pulling the guy into the store and the perp was pulling away. The owner could have ended this incident just by just letting go of the guys shirt. That looks bad and shows that the owner didnt really feel threatened.


18 posted on 10/22/2018 7:50:37 AM PDT by Brooklyn Attitude (The first step in ending the war on white people is to recognize it exists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Brooklyn Attitude

It isn’t the ‘value of the $10 hatchet’ that is the problem. It is that too many people think they can take something that isn’t theirs, and the owner has NO RIGHTS to keep their possessions.

Looters are of the same ilk.


19 posted on 10/22/2018 8:04:00 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Apparently it was worth it to Lopez to steal a $15 hatchet and get killed over it.


20 posted on 10/22/2018 11:29:53 AM PDT by ChuckR163
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson