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.
Please, breaking into a persons home at night with a family there is in no way the same situation as shoplifting a case of beer from a gas station quickie mart. There is a reason he is being charged with murder and not getting a clap on the back and a high five from the cops like he would in the situation you imagined.
He owned a convenience store, just like my father in law does. No one likes a thief, but when the guy is running from you with a case of beer and he makes it out the store he is not a threat to you, so the use of deadly force is not warranted imho.
What I WOULD like to see is for first time offenders who are caught be sent back to the guy they hurt and be forced to do a couple of days hard labor while wearing a sign around his neck telling everyone who sees him he is nothing but a common thief.
Second offense I am all for taking them to the public square, stripping his shirt off, and giving him 10 lashes deep enough to require stitches. Keep increasing the amount of lashes per offense and he will stop stealing, guaranteed.
Pain is the best motivator there is to change a person’s view of right and wrong, somewhere along the line we seemed to feel its inhumane to use it. Had this guy known he was facing lashes if he was caught I doubt for a second that case of beer would be worth it.
There are libertarian and "free traitor" type economists who know what a trade deficit is and acknowledge we have one --unlike you. Unlike me they think it is no big deal....But they admit we have one. Unlike that idiot freeper mase
“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?”
Anyone who advocates shooting a petty thief as he runs away has no idea what he is getting into. I strongly suggest that everyone who owns a gun for defense read “In the Gravest Extreme”, by Massad Ayoob.
Campos was an accomplice in a felony that involved murder, and they can’t decide whether to charge him or not???
I thought Austin, weird as they are, still had to abide by Texas law???
PC 59.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41 ; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
I should add though, that I agree with your last sentence there...
LOL
Lives were saved, but not Jorge’s.
It is easy to rationalize and do the situation ethic thing. The issue was never about the 12 pack of beer. The core issue is that a crime was committed.
Do I let a stranger break into my house and steal 25,000 dollars of personal belongings. One might say that is more relevant than someone breaking in and stealing a 12 pack. By the way ... I have been broken into twice. And yes I did lose 25,000 dollars worth of belongings.
The belongings mean nothing to me .. tell that to State Farm that paid the claim. What did MATTER was having my own private space violated. What did MATTER was a 12 year old that discovered the robbery .. her entire room was trashed as the burglar went through her bedroom taking a DVD player, Ipod and some inexpensive jewelry that probably didn't amount to 100 dollars. But her space was violated. Her trust and security was shattered. What cost is that.
Yet we focus on the amount taken, when we should focus on the crime committed.
I'm sorry the jerk felt a 12 pack of beer was worth being shot. But there is consequences to actions.
We seem to rationalize that away.
Not a 12 pack of beer ... a crime by a dirtbag. A crime committed by one that has ZERO conscience.
Time to take back and rethink what the MAIN issue is here.
That person that breaks into my house is not one that is there to admire my belongings, he is there for one purpose .. to take which he is too lazy to work for.
We have fallen a long long ways with the bombardment of situation ethic around us. Next the liberal mindset will try to convince us it was our fault that the perpetrator did what he did.
Oh ... I forgot .. we are already at that point.
And criminals depend on it.
The clerk should claim temporary insanity.
The incredible stress of being robbed perhaps caused him to blackout momentarily....works for me because IT WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE TRUE.....sorry for all caps...
You’re right. A twelve pack of beer is NOT worth your life; so don’t steal.
Are the police allowed to shoot at fleeing suspects? If they are, then I can’t see why this would be murder. Murder should not be defied by who commits the act, but whether the act is justified.
If the police are not allowed to shoot at fleeing suspects, then there is a case.
If you were unarmed and running away I would hesitate to use deadly force on you, but there is a big difference between community service for stealing beer and 10 years for stealing valuables if you are caught, and I still believe in being judged by a jury over one guy. I guess it all depends on what you could sleep at night with, killing an unarmed man who stole a case of beer from me and posed no threat is over my own line I draw, you may be different.
I will agree that situations like this need to be dealt with, but allowing some store clerk the right to send a dozen shots down a street at the back of a fleeing drunk who never threatened him is going too far. Now had he caught up with him and kneecapped the guy with his Louisville Slugger on the other hand, I think I could sleep at night with that. :)
If by trade deficit you mean Americans buy more foreign goods from foreigners than the American goods we sell to foreigners, I don't know anyone who denies that. I certainly don't.
Unlike me they think it is no big deal....But they admit we have one.
Unlike you, they don't confuse the government budget deficit with the trade deficit.
Unlike that idiot freeper mase
If you're going to say stupid things about freepers who are much smarter than you, at least be polite enough to ping them. Clown.
The use of deadly force has to be justified, running from the cops with stolen beer is no way justified unless he was armed with a weapon and the officer feared for himself or others.
If cops shot at everyone who ran from them while being arrested for petty theft or shoplifting they would have writers cramp from filing all that paperwork they had to fill out every day.
From the article "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."
I could understand being fed up with being an easy target.
Ah, but the sting probably generated lots of tickets per hour. Nabbing a beer thief wouldn't generate any revenue.
Revenue is a priority.
Thanks for the backup.
Massad Ayoob also was in trouble by some people when he advocated tossing a couple of dollars to the scumbags so they would leave him alone. Not exactly a Jeffersonian millions for defense but not a penny to tribute.
Everyone has to have a distinct idea just what will it cost to get out of a particular situation. Whether they weigh their morals or their pocketbook they better understand it all before they strap on the old hogleg.
nothing good happens after midnight
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.