Richmond ice cream store defender not indicted
Story here. He shot a fleeing robber, which is technically a no-no, but the grand jury did the right rather than the legal thing. (It is rather funny that the prosecutor said he thought he might at least get a misdemeanor discharging a firearm in a public place out of it).
Hat tip to reader Rudy DiGiacinto..
We need a lot more of this type of action by juries of both stripes to discourage overzealous prosecutors.
I am glad to see they did the right thing. When justice and the law are on collision course, the law should always give way. If that happens often enough the law and justice will become synonymous again.
Posted by: straightarrow at November 5, 2007 04:55 PM
I agree with the prosecutor.
The fact that the people returned "no true bill" on the prosecutor's attempt to discourage civic virtue does indeed show that the legal system can work, despite its ministers' best efforts to subvert the spirit of the laws.
As the prosecutor himself expressed it, "This is an indication that the system works."
Of course, I agree even more with the five-member panel that educated the prosecutor in how to do his job.
Posted by: Tarn Helm at November 5, 2007 07:02 PM
More details in this morning's paper here: [url]http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2007-11-06-0143.html[/url]
It did not look good for a while there - the clerk fired 11 shots at the guy as he was running away. The grand jury did not indict, apparently in part because nobody could prove whether the fatal bullet was one of the eight fired outside the store or one of the three fired inside the store.
The robber had an "extensive criminal history" including "several robbery convictions." Forgive me if I don't get too broken up over his demise.
Posted by: Bill at November 6, 2007 06:26 AM
Not only will I not get broken up over his demise, I want to dance a celebratory jig on the scumbag's grave. It's a great day -- one less bad guy in the world and the poor victim (who used poor judgment chasing him out the door) isn't further victimized.
Unfortunately, the poor victim will get screwed in a civil suit.
Posted by: Brian at November 6, 2007 08:44 AM
I think the important part of the story is that the young man is not some "trigger happy" cowboy as some in the media (let's say a certain female reporter in Dallas) would have you believe people that have a gun for personal defense are. According to his father, he is still dealing with the fact he took another life, even if that life was a worthless piece of human debris.
I bet that is the last time that ice cream shop (which had been robbed prior to this incident) is robbed again.
Posted by: David at November 6, 2007 09:04 AM
I bet you would have a different opinion if you had to pay the legal bill involved. People need to understand that altought the system "may" work from time to time it is very costly for the defendant in terms of money and stress.
My experience is that Pros. are more concerned with convictions then with doing the "right thing"
the fact that he "thought he might at least get a misdemeanor discharging a firearm in a public place" proves my point.
Posted by: David McCleary at November 7, 2007 06:38 AM