• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Florida city commissioner shoots, kills alleged shoplifter, surveillance video shows

Was this a good shoot?

  • Yes

    Votes: 26 17.2%

  • No

    Votes: 125 82.8%
  • Total voters
    151
The video is ambiguous is to what went on before and what is actually happening. There's not enough information to judge
reliably whether they shooter was legitimately in fear for of death or great bodily harm.
 
drgrant said:
No, that's pure bullshit, the REAL reason for ALL of it is to reduce the perceived liability of the corporation.

It's cheaper to the ConHugeCo to write off the loss of the item than even a cheap settlement is arising from some unintended consequence of stopping the perpetrator. They could care less if you die or anything like
that.

Like let's say Joe Shitbird steals a TV from the local Target. A Target staffer takes a cart and tries to intercept joe shitbird with it. The Cart stops joe shitbird, but then he falls over and lands with the TV and knocks over 78 year old mary hairnet who then cracks her hip on the floor. Now Target is getting sued by mary hairnet and that costs a lot more than Joe Shitbird stealing the TV set would have. It's all based on perception of liability.

That's all the LP ConHugeCo things care about. If it was cheaper and less financially risky, somehow, for the ConHugeCo, somehow, to have you throw a grenade at the perpetrator, they would want you to do that. They don't care about you or your safety. [laugh]

-Mike
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, but there is almost no liability greater to a retail company than an injured employee. They can easily cost just as much as an injured patron, and the company could easily be on the hook for a lot of money for many years. The labor laws and the courts in these parts tend to be very protective of workers, even when they assume risks in a job. They are worried about your safety because it's expensive not to, but life and safety will always be just as important to an organization. There are tremendous costs to an organization that cannot keep it's employees safe and they range far beyond simple entries in the P&L.
 
Looks like there is more to this story.

CYA

Can You Articulate?
Can You Authenticate?

If the shooter can do the above to show he was justified to use lethal force - he will not go to jail.

It appears the video does not show the whole course of events.

Creative editing by the TV station is similar to what the "media" did to George Zimmerman.
 
Well, does the 21' rule apply? What happened right before the shot? Is it reasonable to say that this was a justified shooting, the store owner was waiting for a clean backdrop? Maybe the guy had just taken a swing with that hatchet and the store owner closed the distance to nullify the threat of the hatchet, and when the perp broke free that's when he had to shoot?

Seems to me the question here would be if the perp had crossed the desparity line before the interaction at the door.
 
whatluck said:
If the perp WAS trying to leave, why did he turn around? Almost looks like he tried to grab the gun.

View attachment 250927
Click to expand...
That's the most ludacris thing posted on this thread yet.

Perp clearly spun his arm to release the grip of the commissioner on his shirt, he was successful, his arm didn't even slow near the firearm nor was it in an open position. If you watch the video from :16 onward you'd clearly see the move.
 
Drix said:
That's the most ludacris thing posted on this thread yet.
Click to expand...

330px-Ludacris_2008.jpg


Well, that move was the last thing the perp ever did. He absolutely touched the gun. If he wanted to break the grip and he knew what he was doing, he wouldn't have , he would've gone the other way, blocked at the hand with the forearm and made a lever. Probably wouldve torn his shirt and won the grip battle. That wasn't a windmill parry into hyperextension grip break, it wasn't a leaf peel, it wasn't a step under/angle out, nor was it a hip escape. There's probably 100 different ways to break a grip, and this doesn't look like any of them to me. Instead he extended his arm into the store owner's workspace. He touched the gun because he reached for it.

How many people on NES would let a perp touch their gun when they were already drawn down on them?

Congrats on almost 2k posts BTW. Hopefully you've been around long enough to understand my love for an argument.
 
Last edited:
whatluck said:
330px-Ludacris_2008.jpg


Well, that move was the last thing the perp ever did. He absolutely touched the gun. If he wanted to break the grip and he knew what he was doing, he wouldn't have , he would've gone the other way, blocked at the hand with the forearm and made a lever. Probably wouldve torn his shirt and won the grip battle. That wasn't a windmill parry into hyperextension grip break, it wasn't a leaf peel, it wasn't a step under/angle out, nor was it a hip escape. There's probably 100 different ways to break a grip, and this doesn't look like any of them to me. Instead he extended his arm into the store owner's workspace. He touched the gun because he reached for it.

How many people on NES would let a perp touch their gun when they were already drawn down on them?

Congrats on almost 2k posts BTW. Hopefully you've been around long enough to understand my love for an argument.
Click to expand...

I'll give you a more rational support for your argument: owner thought he stole weapon if some sort to which was concealed in his front shirt, the hand roll would have been an opportunity to draw the weapon.
 
Some of the major retailers do in fact hire armed private security officers to work in their stores, depending on the location, local management, etc. They purposely hire outside licensed private investigative/security agencies to avoid liability issues. Some chain pharmacies do the same thing at some of their inner city high crime locations. Different policies exist at different retailers, and even at different locations with the same retailers, pharmacies, etc.

Avoiding confrontation with an armed shoplifter will not necessarily guarantee that the armed shoplifter will not harm anyone. Muggers for example, have shot and killed their victims that have cooperated with them in turning over their money and valuables, just for the hell of it. People robbing convenience stores, liquor stores, etc. at gunpoint have done the same thing. Being a passive victim does not necessarily guarantee safety.
 
Drix said:
I'll give you a more rational support for your argument: owner thought he stole weapon if some sort to which was concealed in his front shirt, the hand roll would have been an opportunity to draw the weapon.
Click to expand...

Exactly, an attempt to make space to bring the hatchet back into play. Either way, legal to draw down up to that point, right?
 
Last edited:
Drix said:
I'll give you a more rational support for your argument: owner thought he stole weapon if some sort to which was concealed in his front shirt, the hand roll would have been an opportunity to draw the weapon.
Click to expand...

That would makes sense, for sure, except the weapon was already in his other hand.
 
Excessive force by sworn law enforcement officer:

Walmart Shootings: Another policeman shoots and kills a Walmart shoplifter in Texas

Store clerk stops repeat shoplifting offender:

Clerk's fight with armed shoplifter caught on camera

More shoplifter killings of unarmed retail security personnel:

Walmart Shootings: Shoplifter at Florida Walmart shoots and kills employee

Not being armed did not save this person from being shot. Was he supposed to ask the shoplifter if he was armed before approaching him?

Armed citizen stops potential mass shooting:

Another Potential Mass Shooting Is Stopped By An Armed Bystander

Gun store owner stops robbery and the possible killing of himself:

Armed robber is killed on camera as he tries to hold up gun store in Georgia | Daily Mail Online

Kmart security officer killed trying to stop shoplifter that he obviously did not know was armed:

Suspected Shoplifter Kills Security Guard at Kmart - Police Forums & Law Enforcement Forums @ Officer.com

Should we put up signs, at stores, services centers, etc. stating that paying for merchandise and services is optional if you are an armed shoplifter? Or, should shoplifters be the ones that face possible injury and death for robbing and assaulting law abiding citizens?
 
Dadstoys said:
First , I would like to see the raw video before the news station edited the living crap out of it to make it look like what they wanted it to look like.
The guy did in fact have the hatchet in his hand when he got popped.
Had he just taken a swing at the store owner with it before the video we saw started?
Jury is still out with me.
Click to expand...

See post 6 above, video is clearer than the news clip and you can see the hatchet on the ground after he drops it. The store owner should sue the news for editing it the way they did
 
He’s screwed. This wasn’t a defensive shoot. He confronted, approached and then shot a fleeing shoplifter.

If man with hatchet is leaving, let him leave, he’s the boys in blue problem now. Follow at a distance if you feel so inclined, aside from that, he’s not your problem. If man with hatchet is coming in, or moving towards you in an aggressive manner, by all means, light that Christmas tree up.

Unfortunately, this doesn’t end well for the shooter.
 
Watching the uneditied video I am wrong in my original opinion of a dirty shoot.

While the store owner was far more emboldened than I would be, I would absolutely have regarded the arm roll as a precursor to a swing with the hatchet in his other hand which is convieniently cut out of the news video.

 
Originally the shoplifter put the hatchet down his pants but here, as he’s ready to exit the store, he has it in his right hand.

At 00:16 in the video the shop owner moves back away from the shoplifter.

He may have perceived a threat at that point.
 
Shooter needs a good attorney and self defense expert witness.

A good attorney would be able to put so much reasonable doubt in this case that there is no way the shooter gets convicted.

Probably a hung jury.
 
Gun is drawn. Why confront petty shoplifter at door?
What’s going to put the shooter away is that he grabbed and held on to the shirt, pulled him back, as he was trying to exit.

It’s not defensive at that point, he becomes the aggressor by trying to pull him back.
 
Tinkermatic said:
Gun is drawn. Why confront petty shoplifter at door?
What’s going to put the shooter away is that he grabbed and held on to the shirt, pulled him back, as he was trying to exit.

It’s not defensive at that point, he becomes the aggressor by trying to pull him back.
Click to expand...

Under Florida law, “defense of property” is an affirmative defense that justifies the use of non-deadly force to protect a person's land, home, vehicle, or other personal property.

Dunn Grabs Lopes' shirt to prevent escape.

Florida does not recognize a right to use deadly force in the protection of property interests alone.

Lopes swings arm out of hold, with hatchet in his right hand, mimicking the only option he would have had if Lopes' intent were to strike Dunn with said hatchet.

I'm just not sold either way. This is a great example of what *not* to do, but I'm not convinced that if I were on a jury I'd find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt that he thought he was protecting himself from a potential violent attack with a hatchet after lawfully attempting to detain a person with non-deadly force. Lopes was not shot in the back, and the ability to detain is alwfully relevant apparently under FL law.
 
it is all in the hands of a jury now, they will see the tapes, they will hear the eyewitness accounts of the people in the store, the investigators findings, etc.

We all have opinions based on our training.

I am a person who many years ago, picked up and read, then re-read Massad Ayoob's book "In The Gravest Extreme", and it is a big part of my self defense philosophy.

I will never carry a weapon for compensation.
I will never discharge a weapon to protect property.
I will never escalate a situation when I have the option of diffusing it.
I will not aim a weapon or discharge a firearm at anything that is not trying to do harm to me, my family, or a person who I feel is in imminent danger.

I will use my weapon to stop the threat of death or serious injury. I will shoot until the threat is stopped.

Some of you will have a different philosophy, and that is OK, we all make our own choices, and if so, have to deal with the consequences and ramifications.

I won't brandish a weapon as a deterrent. If I am going to display it,
I have every intention of using it. To do otherwise risks arrest, trial, bankruptcy, and incarceration.

IMHO all these "stand your ground" claims, with Zimmerman being the poster child of the Anti's, are not doing us any favors. Granted Florida is a different world, God knows I've seen that from 25 years of home ownership there, but shootings like this one, and others in that state that are questionable are going to be used nationally to strip us of our rights.

How much was that hatchet really worth? About what a good lawyer is going to charge the store owner for 5 minutes of billable time?

What is it going to cost the rest of us?
 
Florida law allows a merchant to detain in a "reasonable manner for a reasonable length of time". I'm not sure holding at gunpoint and using physical force is what 812.015 (3)(a) has in mind for petty theft. That law provides penalties for resisting in section (6). I think the way this was supposed to go down according to the law is that the merchant was supposed to let the guy go when he resisted and tried to flee, and when the guy was eventually caught, there would be additional penalties for that, in addition to the theft.

Secondly, if Lopez wished to strike with the ax, he did not need to release his shirt from Dunn's grasp. That would have been counterproductive. Instead, he needed to shift his weight at least a little bit from wholesale leaning out, move slightly to his left to clear the obstruction of the door (which was between Dunn and the hatchet), and rotate his body to bring his right arm into play. That would have brought Dunn in closer for the strike. That he did no such thing is proved by the video and by the way he fell after he was shot. The right hand and hatchet were positioned more or less stationary outside the door during the critical time frame, i.e. the hatchet was actually on the other side of the door, so it's awfully hard to argue that anyone could reasonably have interpreted Lopez's actions in the doorway as threatening. It isn't even as if the shot would have prevented such an attempted strike, anyway, though it might have prevented it from landing had it been attempted. And arguing about whether Lopez's hand made contact with the gun or not during that isn't going to help Dunn very much, either, because Lopez's hand was positioned exactly wrong to make a grab for the gun. Finally, Dunn did not fire until after Lopez escaped his grasp. Everything in the video is consistent with the notion that Dunn's intent was to prevent Lopez's escape by any means necessary, including deadly force.

If they offer him a good plea deal, he should take it.
 
meh said:
Florida law allows a merchant to detain in a "reasonable manner for a reasonable length of time". I'm not sure holding at gunpoint and using physical force is what 812.015 (3)(a) has in mind for petty theft. That law provides penalties for resisting in section (6). I think the way this was supposed to go down according to the law is that the merchant was supposed to let the guy go when he resisted and tried to flee, and when the guy was eventually caught, there would be additional penalties for that, in addition to the theft.

Secondly, if Lopez wished to strike with the ax, he did not need to release his shirt from Dunn's grasp. That would have been counterproductive. Instead, he needed to shift his weight at least a little bit from wholesale leaning out, move slightly to his left to clear the obstruction of the door (which was between Dunn and the hatchet), and rotate his body to bring his right arm into play. That would have brought Dunn in closer for the strike. That he did no such thing is proved by the video and by the way he fell after he was shot. The right hand and hatchet were positioned more or less stationary outside the door during the critical time frame, i.e. the hatchet was actually on the other side of the door, so it's awfully hard to argue that anyone could reasonably have interpreted Lopez's actions in the doorway as threatening. It isn't even as if the shot would have prevented such an attempted strike, anyway, though it might have prevented it from landing had it been attempted. And arguing about whether Lopez's hand made contact with the gun or not during that isn't going to help Dunn very much, either, because Lopez's hand was positioned exactly wrong to make a grab for the gun. Finally, Dunn did not fire until after Lopez escaped his grasp. Everything in the video is consistent with the notion that Dunn's intent was to prevent Lopez's escape by any means necessary, including deadly force.

If they offer him a good plea deal, he should take it.
Click to expand...
A 5 year plea deal would be my over under.

To do more than 5 years, the shooter might as well risk getting 10 years by a conviction from a jury.

I don't recall any case like this that can go either way - guilty or not guilty.
 
At this point I think we all see what we want to see. I see a bad shoot, given the tiny piece of what happened we are seeing in the video, and the law as it is.

I also see an HK sticker in the window.
 
I see this way more simple than trying to determine if it is a good shoot vs bad shoot. Precedent has shown again and again that any cop in that situation would not even be charged therefore this guy should not be charged. I do not see that any cops life is more important than any one elses so either he does not get charged or cops do. If I am a lawyer, I bring up as evidence the thousands of cases where people are shot by cops simply because the cops feared for his/her life.
 

Similar threads

St. Louis Apartment Resident Shoots Alleged Naked Intruder
Replies
3
Views
113
ralphs
R
14-Year-Old Home Alone Shoots, Kills Alleged Robber
Replies
2
Views
205
Hogie1
H
Homeowner Shoots Alleged Portable Generator Thief
Replies
0
Views
140
Reptile
Reptile
Concealed Carrier Kills Alleged Robber in Chicago Shootout
Replies
3
Views
179
Rocky Mosasaurus
Rocky Mosasaurus
Texan Shoots, Kills Man Who Allegedly Stole His BBQ Pit
Replies
22
Views
510
Scuderia
Scuderia
Back
Top Bottom