FAFO. Not surprised. Citizens are expected to just accept unjust laws and bought DA’s that protect criminals. There is some real anger out there.
Unless the shooter’s life was being threatened by the car thief, I suspect he’s going to be charged with something.
That would be my opinion also. I think it would depend on “Castle Doctrine” or “Stand your ground” laws if applicable in that state. Allegedly the perp was shot driving away which means he was not a threat to the victim at that moment. Hope the shooter had insurance.
Here’s a fresh, new similar case:
NYC garage worker charged with attempted murder after shooting armed thief | Fox News
Assault #1: Rhodie shoots unarmed Diarra.
(Then Diarra disarms Rhodie and possesses his gun.)
Assault #2: Diarra shoots unarmed Rhodie.
Two assaults on unarmed victims, both with the same weapon, arguably both chargeable offenses.
Unless more data comes out showing Rhodie was still a threat to Diarra…we’ll see how this ends up.
IMHO, once a threat ends, you cannot shoot the perp!
The suspected thief shot this man twice before the victim was able to get the gun away to defend himself.
The benefit of the doubt should be going with the garage worker on this one. Unless there is clear evidence he was illegally threatening the suspected thief forcing the suspect to draw his gun and fire to legally defend themself. And/or very clear evidence the suspected thief was no longer a threat after he got the gun away.
I would be assuming that someone who just shot me twice and who I just had to wrestle a gun away from to keep from getting shot again is an imminent threat if I allow them to get their hands on the gun again. The threat hasn’t ended just because the firearm has temporarily changed hands.
This being NY City though, it is likely the suspected thief who is also charged with illegally possessing a weapon and likely has a mile long criminal record will be allowed to walk out of the hospital while the garage worker gets stuck in jail for defending themself.