Welcome to Aftermath, a portion of our First Line email newsletter where Attorney Anthony L. DeWitt walks you through a real-life self-defense incident and shares his key takeaways.
An armed citizen stopped an ATM robbery at a convenience store in Tennessee. The thieves smashed a window with a sledgehammer and hooked up a guy wire to the ATM, with the aim of hauling it out with a stolen pickup truck. That plan went out the window, when the armed citizen opened fire, killing one thief and setting the others to flight.
What legal consequences could arise if you use deadly force in a situation where no clear threat of serious bodily harm exists? How should the defender have responded?
Congratulations to the armed responder for stopping the theft. Maybe the bank owning the ATM will pay his court costs. Insert eye-roll here.
If there was no clear threat of serious bodily harm the best thing the armed citizen could do is to collect visual evidence and be a good witness for law enforcement. Unless he (she?) was directly threatened, his (her?) weapon should not have ever cleared the holster.
As with many Aftermath posts, there is not much evidence for us to go on.
What legal consequences could arise if you use deadly force in a situation where no clear threat of serious bodily harm exists? How should the defender have responded?
The answers to these questions are independent of the scenario.
Legal consequences: Arrest; criminal charges ranging from assault to First Degree or Aggravated Murder, with multiple lesser charges and included charges thrown in; conviction on some or all of the charges; prison; civil suits from the prime miscreant (if survived) and by the miscreant’s family; public ignomy & shame (not withstanding the folks who praise the action).
Should do: First, hide from the miscreants so they cannot see you. Next, call 911. Video record IF you can do so safely without being seen.
An armed citizen stopped an ATM robbery at a convenience store in Tennessee. The thieves smashed a window with a sledgehammer and hooked up a guy wire to the ATM, aiming to haul it out with a stolen pickup truck. That plan went south when the armed citizen opened fire, killing one thief and setting the others to flight.
In Review: Though many details remain unclear, this is how the situation appears from a defensive perspective:
Legal: Defense of self and others does not permit the use of force against a person who is merely taking property. While news reports do not mention if the thieves were armed, the narrative from the press calls this into doubt. Absent being under a clear threat of imminent bodily harm or death, an individual should never use a firearm to protect property.
While a sledgehammer can certainly be a deadly weapon, it seems unlikely to have been deployed as such.
Tactical: News reports do not mention if the thieves were armed. If they were, a three-on-one gunfight is often a losing proposition. The best tactic here would have been to call 911 and wait for help to arrive.
Training: The individual who killed the thief likely did not have adequate training on the legality of shooting at people who are unarmed and engaged in what appears to be a property crime.
My concern about this article, given all of the stories online about how USCCA which I have been a member of for several years, look for a way to not provide defense. The article was written in a way to indicate that maybe they would find a way out if you or I were in this situation.
As a former prosecutor and contributor to this magazine you are right on point! I always live by the adage: Never use your weapon unless its your life (or loved one) or the bad guys. Then I dont think you can go wrong!
Nope. that action is firing a deadly weapon in the direction of people who do not need to be shot. Even a strong conservative prosecutor is highly likely to charge you and pursue to trial. You might be acquitted by a jury in parts of Texas, but even that is not likely.
This is the same as why you should never fire a warning shot.
Texas IS different. Use of deadly force is justified when protecting persons OR property when failure to stop the aggressor may result in permanent loss.
Whether the suspects were armed will depend on if the armed citizen was threatened with a weapon ie sledgehammer or a gun. If neither were present then this would be an unauthorized shooting, no threat was present. Unfortunately stealing property is not a shooting offense, and the citizen most likely will get hammered for this one.
This Shooting depends on whether or not the suspects threatened the citizen with either the sledgehammer, a gun, or use of their vehicle to run him over. If no imminent threat was issued then the citizen opened himself up Criminal charges from that state attorney if he so chooses. You cannot use deadly force on property crimes/theft. I’ve seen exceptions to this rule over my 25 years as an LEO, but they are an anomaly. God bless him for trying to stop the crime and I hope he gets off. The Bank will most likely disavow themselves from this shooting.
