Robbed ex-cop kills suspect

Detroit Free Press ^ | 6/6/03 | Ben Schmitt and Cecil Angel

[Mulder]

If this guy were not an ex-cop, you can bet that the D.A. would be looking very hard at criminal charges for the victim for shooting his attackers in the back while they were fleeing (which is basically revenge, not self-defense).

Yep. Especially in a metropolitian cesspool such as Detroit. They'd probably charge the serf with murder-2.

But despite the double standard, nothing should happen to this guy for defending himself.

[Mulder]

Didn't think it would take long for the cop haters to find a problem with this.

The problem is that there is an obvious double standard.

Several people have pointed that out, but I haven't seen any posts by "cop haters" suggesting the guy should be arrested or charged.

On the other hand, there would be lots of cops (a minority, but still a lot) lining up to arrest a serf who did exactly the same thing as the ex-cop did.

[xm177e2]

Well... assuming the Glock was a G26 with a 10-round magazine and one in the hole (for 11) then his .25 would have had 5 in the magazine and one in the hole. There are .25 handguns with 5-shot magazines, so this is a possible configuration.

[AdamSelene235]

But despite the double standard, nothing should happen to this guy for defending himself.

I agree. They pretty much shot this guy for sport. To hell with the law, gunning these three punks down was the right thing to do.

[marktwain]

Yes, I realize that he was shot first. But once your life is no longer in danger, you don't get to shoot the perp.

Look, I agree that society is better off because these scumbags are off of the street. The point of my post is that if an ex-cop can do this, why can't the ordinary Joe? If this guy were not an ex-cop, you can bet that the D.A. would be looking very hard at criminal charges for the victim for shooting his attackers in the back while they were fleeing (which is basically revenge, not self-defense).

They mistake being made here is to assume that they were "fleeing". They had already shot him. No citizen can or should assume that a criminal with a gun is "fleeing". It is just as likely that they are merely attempting to get in a better tactical position from which to fire at you some more.

If a person with a club is running away from you, you might be prudent to assume that he is "fleeing". It is not prudent to assume so if they have a gun. In general, the courts have held that you should not shoot a person who is fleeing from you. However, juries generally do not expect you, as a reasonable person, to be able to shoot someone in the direct front in a dynamic gun fight. If you legitimately fear for your life, as this CCW holder did, the police and jury will almost always find your actions to be reasonable.

[paul51]

The story smells just a little fishy to me but to be honest, I like it when the CCW guy cleans up some scum that tried to victimize him. My advice, look into .40 cal

[Springman]

He's a retired Detroit Cop, SOP
he can carry. BTW MI became a shall issue state couple of years ago, you should have heard the libs when it passed. They cried
like babies. People shooting after traffic accident, ect. Well guess what nothing happened.

I guess real people can handle firearms!!

[lawdude]

"I have no problem that he shot them as they were running away. They did rob and shoot him. But....... technically, he was no longer protecting himself."

Fleeing felon!

[Atlas Sneezed]

"They mistake being made here is to assume that they were "fleeing"."

What? You think the scumbag "teens" (thanks, Mr. Reporter!) were running toward him backwards?

More likely, they were facing away from him because they were fleeing him after he pulled out the guns. Common sense.

That said, I think that the proper take on this is that such a shooting (direct immediate deadly revenge for deadly force on onesself) should be legal, is moral, but would leave an ordinary citizen in deep legal trouble.

[waterstraat]

I thought citizens with ccw permits could not enter a bar while carrying a gun. There was no exceptions to this rule when ccw was passed 2 years ago, why any private citizen should be given more rights than other private citizens. What is up? Why was someone(doesnt matter if he used to be employed as a cop) not arrested for carrying a gun in a bar?

[Waco]

In England he would get life,,,in the electric chair if they have one.

[Leisler]

Some rights are more equal than other rights.

[marktwain]

"They mistake being made here is to assume that they were "fleeing"."

What? You think the scumbag "teens" (thanks, Mr. Reporter!) were running toward him backwards?

The assumption is that just because they were moving away from him, they are no longer a threat. This is a bad assumption for any threat that is armed with a gun. I don't know how many cases that I have read of where people were shot by someone who was "fleeing them" but there have been several.

These people showed they had the ability to use deadly force, they continued to have the opportunity to use it as long as they were within gunshot, and the wounding of the CCW holder shows that he was reasonable to conclude that his life was in jeopardy because of it.

Those three things make the shooting justified.

[trussell]

It is possible that they were running away from him to get behind a wall or some other object so that they could fire at him while they were protected.

[orchid]

What? The third suspect was shot in the head and killed and ALL three were expected to live ???

[Drew68]

No "ordinary" citizen would get away with shooting an assailant in the back. Nice to know that ex-cops get a "pass," though.

Keep in mind that he complied with the robbery and was still shot. Who's to say the suspect wouldn't have returned to finish him off?

I'd think anyone could shoot someone in the back under these circumstances. No DA in his right mind would try to bring charges up on this man (or anyone in a similar situation).

[trussell]

The two suspects and the victim was expected to survive. The third suspect is dead.

[G.Mason]

"Maybe he thought he would die and was just "marking" them for evidence."

Excellent!

[trussell]

"was" should be "are"

[btcusn]

It depends on the state, in PA there is no restrictions on carring in bar, drinking or getting drunk. Not real smart though.
Jack