Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Strong Arm Robbery, My A**... [View all]jeff47
(26,549 posts)111. Who touched who first?
Despite your efforts to turn the clerk into a hero, one person touched the other person first. Who was that? That was the person that legally started the assault.
That was the clerk. The shoplifter was walking out of the store.
How was the clerk required to touch the shoplifter? What forced him to do that instead of calling the police and letting them find the shoplifter?
The clerk used his legal right to assault the shoplifter in response to the crime, in order to assault the shoplifter. The shoplifter, by resisting the assault, can be charged with a more severe crime. But the shoplifter can not be charged with assault. Because the shoplifter didn't start the physical confrontation.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
114 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Robbery or Larceny in 2nd Degree and "Strong Arm" robbery are used interchangeably
Lee-Lee
Aug 2014
#9
I stand corrected. It doesn't make releasing this report any less sleazy and defamatory.
6000eliot
Aug 2014
#43
Execution is the appropriate punishment for grabbing an arm and stealing $49 of cigars
randys1
Aug 2014
#60
I thought sunshine laws are for governing bodies, not citizens who own their own security tapes.
ancianita
Aug 2014
#38
Is it common knowledge? I thought I was paying attention. Guess I missed the fact about warrants.
ancianita
Aug 2014
#44
But aren't sunshine laws applicable only to governing bodies? Not private owners of tapes?
ancianita
Aug 2014
#39
For that excuse to fly, they'd have to release the incident report for the shooting too
jeff47
Aug 2014
#54
Agreed. Which is why we shouldn't have even been told about this separate incident. nt
conservaphobe
Aug 2014
#17
+1. The video might explain the initial encounter with policeman, but not shooting him in the back.
Hoyt
Aug 2014
#35
I think the incident is relevant, although not a justification for shooting. And, it appears
Hoyt
Aug 2014
#104
Ummmm, parents have already acknowledged that it was their son in the video. nt.
IronGate
Aug 2014
#26
Each "side"? I think the cops dehumanized themselves when they started acting like violent, mindless
redqueen
Aug 2014
#64