Posted on 08/18/2009 6:30:34 AM PDT by Bubba_Leroy
A clerk at a Ben White Boulevard convenience store has been charged with murder after police say he shot and killed a man who was stealing a 12-pack of Budweiser early Sunday morning.
Jorge Luis Vielma, 22, and another man were on a "beer run," according to police, and attempted to flee after taking the beer. Police say Juan Romero, 23, a clerk at the Shell gasoline station at Ben White and South First Street, fired about a dozen shots at Vielma outside the store as he ran for a friend's waiting Mitsubishi Eclipse.
Vielma later died inside the car; his body was found early Sunday in the 1000 block of Mansell Avenue in East Austin.
Romero was charged Sunday with first-degree murder and was being held Monday at the Travis County Jail. His bail has been set at $250,000. If convicted, he could face up to life in prison.
According to an arrest affidavit, Vielma and a friend, David Campos, 30, were looking for a store to take beer from and settled on the Shell station. Campos told police that he parked the car while Vielma went inside for the beer. Campos said he then saw Vielma emerge running from the store and a short man with a limp in pursuit firing at him.
After Vielma made it back to the car, Campos said that he went "into shock" and drove mindlessly to Mansell Avenue, abandoned the car and fled. He later called 911 to anonymously report the shooting, according to the affidavit.
Police found the car, which was registered to Campos, shortly after 1 a.m. Sunday. When police arrived at Campos' apartment on East Oltorf Street, he was in the process of reporting his car as stolen, according to the arrest affidavit, but police said he soon admitted his role in the incident. Police didn't say whether Campos would be charged.
Police said they later interviewed Romero, who said he fired a pistol about 12 times at Vielma, picked up the shell casings and put them in his vehicle.
He also told police that he picked up the beer dropped by Vielma and threw it into a trash bin, and he deleted images of the incident from the store's video surveillance system.
Sgt. Joseph Chacon said that although Texas law allows residents to take reasonable measures to defend their property, officials determined that, "at least on the face of it," the shooting was not reasonable.
He said it did not appear that Vielma was armed at the time of the theft.
Chacon said police are still trying to determine who owned the gun used in the shooting. The store's owner, José Carranza, told police that he had not authorized Romero to use deadly force to protect the store's property.
Carranza said Monday that he did not know where Romero got the gun and that firearms are not kept in the store.
Theft, however, has been a constant problem for Carranza and his clerks, he said.
A sign taped to the door of the store addresses beer theft: "Due to the high number of dishonest people grabbing and running away (and) stealing our beer, we must require prepayment for beer."
Carranza said that people have stolen from the store at least 10 times this year and that store clerks were robbed at gunpoint four times in the past two years.
Each time, Carranza said, he was unable to get the attention of police, even though his workers were being threatened.
"I'm frustrated with police," Carranza said. "They told us that's not our priority. Now it's a priority because somebody got hurt."
Statistics from police on incident reports at that address were not immediately available.
Consulting police records, Cpl. Scott Perry said there have been several thefts, but only one report of a robbery at the store in the past two years — in November — and that the suspect in that case was not armed. A robbery is defined as threatening or causing injury in the course of committing a theft.
I'm guessing that his employer makes him clean and police the parking and common areas several times as day (shift) as part of his job description.
You nailed it.
I used to believe it was just property until I thought it throught more (and paid taxes etc). That being said, I would not shoot someone over a case of beer, but can understand this guy doing so, especially if he had been robbed before.
Two places I ALWAYS carry without exception: convenience stores and ATM’s.
I agree, to shoot someone in the back as he is running away from you.. in a store.. is cowardly..
On the other hand, I don’t see it as murder.. clerk must have went temporarily nuts..
It’s not just a pack of beer. It was today’s pack of beer, followed by tomorrows pack, and the next day’s stolen groceries, and the following day’s clothing heist. Innocent.
So when thieves steal, they are essentially stealing a part of our lives, as we traded our lives for the paycheck.
That is EXACTLY how I see it. The concept of "insurance" aside (which the poorer citizens generally can't afford), when someone steals from you they are essentially stealing some of your limited time in this world.
I think we have John Lindsay to blame for that.
ML/NJ
I don’t know Texas law, but I can’t see this being 1st degree. No way. They probably want him to plea to a lesser charge.
Seems like voluntary manslaughter to me...unless the thief had a weapon and threatened to use it (self defense).
When to shoot.....this piece was NOT written by me, but some excellent thoughts are included therein on when to use force, especially when discussing dollar amounts etc:
I’ve read through the thread here, and I have seen some things with which I agree, and some I don’t. The one sure thing that has been written here is that no plan survives first contact. It will always be different than you envisioned it to be.
To those who have written that it is not worth shooting someone over $25.00, I ask you this. At what level of money in your pocket is it worth shooting somebody? $100? $500? Do you carry more than $500 in your pocket? Next question for you. How do you know that the bad guy is going to stop bothering you once you give him money? Perhaps you just emboldened him to take more of whatever you have. Maybe he thinks you didn’t really give him all your money. Maybe he wants your watch and your jewelery too. Maybe he will want you to perform an unnatural sex act on him. I’m sure that will draw some snickers, especially coming from me, but I remember years ago when I read in the paper about a guy being carjacked and forced to go down on his carjacker. How far are you going to go so as not to have to shoot him?
Here is my point of view. It is not about how much money I have. It is about someone invading my space and trying to take what I have by force or threat of force. I give a lot of money, time, and other possessions to people freely, but I will not let someone take it. It is that simple. And I am not talking about some drunken stumblebum begging a few bucks so he can buy his next bottle of Thunderbird. Those requests usually come in the form of asking for money to buy food. I have bought food for people like that in the past. But that takes being able to read a person, and even then there is the chance that someone may be playing you for a fool to get close to you. You always need to keep your guard up and be ready for anything.
But the guy who comes to take what I have by force or intimidation? No. He isn’t getting anything but the bum’s rush, and if he gets nasty, he is going to be met with violent hostility. I will be in fear for my life, you can be guaranteed of that. There was a comment made about the worth of a human life, or something to that effect in the early part of this thread. If someone is going to have so little regard for his own life that he will attack strangers (and this is an attack), then why am I responsible to see that he is not hurt? The answer is, I am not. He is engaging in a risky business, and so he is the one who bears both the risk and the responsibility for the consequences to his person.
And pulling your gun does not mean you have to shoot someone with it. I know. I have been there. Twice. It is an amazing thing to look at someone whose attitude has just been radically adjusted with the knowledge that you now have a gun in your hand and appear to be ready to use it. If that doesn’t scare them into retreating, then you are genuinely in danger of your life, since they obviously have no regard for their own.
In the end, it is all about me. I very rarely say that, but if I am in a confrontation with someone who is intent of relieving me of my worldly possessions, I have a judgement to make. I am a steward of the things God has given me. I have the responsibility to determine how best to use those things. Giving them to someone truly in need is one thing, but again, someone who tries to take them by force is going to go home very unhappy, if indeed he ever makes it home again. Rich has pointed out, and rightly so, that there may be an accomplice. Situational awareness is very important, and you need to be paying attention to what is going on around you. I also happen to think that open carry is a huge deterrent to these kinds of things. People who pull this stuff aren’t looking for a fight, they are looking for an easy score. My gun visibly displayed on my hip tells the world that I am armed, and that I probably know how to use that arm, and that I am not afraid to use it. Really, who wants to mess with someone like that? I know I don’t.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention escalation. I will escalate someone right off the planet if that is what it takes to go home alive and safe. I am not going to be standing there worrying about what some DA or some judge is going to say about what I did. I am going to be concentrating on surviving. All the rest of that stuff can be sorted out later. It really wears me out to see people worrying about escalation. You only need to worry about escalating a situation if you started it, at least in my not so humble opinion. If and when someone confronts me, I am going to respond in such a way as to demonstrate that I am capable of escalating things to the point of his demise in order to protect myself and my family. But the big key here is not to get into situations where it might look like you started something. And the easiest way to do that is, don’t start stuff!
http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-carry-145/42115-when-draw-page-3.html
And makes him erase the video tape at the end of the day too?
I don’t buy it.
(I wouldn’t steal it either!)
:)
There seems to be a problem with Freeper gun owners who don’t know the Penal Code concerning deadly force. Here is the Texas handbook which is issued with the Concealed Carry License:
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/ftp/forms/LS-16.pdf
The easiest way to stay out of trouble is to remind yourself you should only use deadly force to prevent death and bodily harm to yourself and others. The use of deadly force should be stopped when the threat is over.
I guess you didn't read the article. The store is constantly robbed of beer. Beer costs money and the continued loss of beer would eat into a convenience stores profit since that is one of their biggest money makers. Their very lively hood depends on it. Plus the clerks were being threatened by some of the thieves.
You can't just let people come in off the streets and take your products, a store owner must be able to use what force is necessary to stop this kind of theft. Police were unwilling to act on the thefts according to the store owner and I would imagine the clerk had just finally had it.
As far as I am concerned this was a justified shooting. If a cop had been on the scene he could have shot and killed the perp while he was running away and it would have been a "good" shoot. Let a citizen do it in defense of their property however and suddenly it is murder.
all we need is a ten and five-er,
a car and key and a sober driver.
B double-E double-R U N beer run
Thanks........ I think the situation, events of the moment, etc. probably would have more to do with it than a dollar value to me. Apparently this store had been robbed several times in the past and that may have played into the clerk’s decision. It will be interesting to see what a jury would find in this case. The clerk’s decision to clean up the crime scene and not report it will work against him most likely. Take care.
***Kill a man over a pack of beer? I really don’t get that mentality.***
A misisionary couple told me this story.
Many years ago, during the Papa Doc and Baby Doc years in Haiti, this missionary couple were walking through a market place there. A man stole some food from one of the stalls.
Before he could get ten 20 feet, the Ton Tons were upon him and beat the man senseless. The missionary couple were horrified.
A stall owner told them that this had to be done, because if people were not immediatly punished for their theft, then anarchy would rule and marketplace commerce could not take place as everyone would steal everything the stall owners had.
I saw a whole shopping center close many years due to theft, then the thieves nearby complained about having no place to shop.
“If a cop had been on the scene he could have shot and killed the perp while he was running away and it would have been a “good” shoot.”
That may have been true 50 years ago, but not today. These days I’m not sure a cop can shoot a non-violent fleeing felon, let alone a petty thief.
I didn’t say anything about the evidence issue. For all we know the clerk might have seen this guy multiple times before and even been threatened by him, shot him in the heat of the moment of the theft, and then his brain turned off when he realized what went down.
Stupid for sure, but it’s a lesser subject in the overall incident.
What is your cost between the case of beer and the cost of a lawyer? How much of your life are you willing to spare to the police, the D.A., the Grand Jury and your lawyers?
Could'a been a package of Huggies a'la Raising Arizona.
FMCDH(BITS)
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.