# Gang robs man, he chases them & rams their car. One robber dies now he is charged with murder **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 9, 2013, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367 "2013-09-09T00:14:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/61 "2013-09-14T12:16:00Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Some random citizen playing TJ Hooker in a pickup truck is doubly dangerous to all of those around him. He was damn lucky it was only one of the bad guys that died. Bottom line, it is illegal to kill someone over property regardless if you are the police or a regular citizen. No one should be allowed to use deadly force against another unless they are currently in danger of death or serious bodily harm. Sorry, but I think that statement is incorrect according to the T.J. Hooker Act of 1986, AKA the “Loose Canon Doctrine”. The law specifically states: "A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked or otherwise the victim of a forcible felony has the right to pursue, capture and possibly kill his or her attackers by whatever means necessary, including, but not limited to automobile, boat, helicopter, airplane, hot air balloon or parkouring across rooftops. Any collateral damage or injury resulting from such pursuit, including but not limited to explosions, fires, damaged vehicles, smashed store fronts, ruined produce, or plate glass windows broken while carried across the street by two men shall be deemed the responsibility of the party or parties committing the original felony, and the pursuing party shall be absolved of all blame or responsibility, so long as the felons are apprehended or killed in a suitably public and spectacular manner (such as tossing off a bridge, building or other high structure (possibly onto a sharp object), exploding, colliding with a larger vehicle or shooting between the eyes, so long as the words “Don’t. It’s not worth it” are invoked by a third party). In the event the pursuing party is a member of a law enforcement agency and fails to apprehend or kill the party who committed the felony, they may be subject to actions ranging from a stern rebuke to confiscation of their issued firearm and badge/shield until such time as they capture or kill the felon as a private citizen." I think the law is very clear on this. ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/62 "2013-09-14T16:30:01Z")
> [@handsomeharry](#): > > 1. Yep. > 2. Yep > 3. I’d bet my right testicle that this scenario is 100% what didn’t happen, and hasn’t it the last 50,000 committed robberies in America. > 4. Yep > 5. You tell me. What is fair for keying a car, and stop trying to act as if it has any bearing on a robbery > 6. Death by ramming is death, so, what crimes are punishable by death? Apply same to your question. Rather than killing a robber while the felony was ongoing, the killing was delayed by the thieves flight. > 7. Nope. But, maybe more simple. So, let’s change the nope to the maybe. And, the whole Constitutional thing about trial by peers wasn’t created for ‘vigilantes’, it was a directive for state/court behavior. Irrelevant to this thread. > > The fucks had it coming, and justice was served. Why should the prosecutor force his wrath onto the victim? Jesus, man. You’re sick. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/63 "2013-09-14T16:33:52Z")
> [@handsomeharry](#): > > Well, we don’t all have the iron courage that you would do, to laugh in the face of being robbed (see dictionary for definition of: **robbed** ) with a gun, so, pussies such as me will say that there may be some modicum of terror involved. I am sure there is. But armed robbery isn’t terrorism. It makes no sense to use the word that way. ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/64 "2013-09-14T16:38:03Z")
So I could just blow your head off, and when the police arrive I can just tell them, “It’s fine officers, he took my thing.” You guys really don’t see any problems with this? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/65 "2013-09-14T17:55:00Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > Regarding a driver chasing a crook, I’m considering that on a case by case basis. If the truck smashes into the bad guys on a gravel driveway or empty road, that’s different than if he chases him through a school zone at 2:30 pm. If no one else get’s hurt but the home invader, I say give the hero a reckless driving ticket and let his insurance pay for the thief’s car. This is a case of bad or good facts making bad law. I know you can’t have a bright line rule here, but citizens need more guidance on whether they can chase a fleeing felon: not just “Go for it so long as you don’t hurt someone.” The difference between a pat on the back and a murder conviction is huge. I’m sympathetic to this guy, but if you let him off, the next guy might run over a pedestrian doing it. ---
**Author:** ![Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/4af34b/32.png) [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeke_N.Destroi)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/66 "2013-09-15T10:29:44Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Well sure. But I don’t think you know how it works. > > 1. You only have a certain number of challenges. > 2. It’s not up to the defense to determine how much of the robbery would be relevant. I would guess that if the defense tried to make it all about the robbery it will be shut down by the judge. > 3. Getting an affirmative defense such as insanity into a trial isn’t quite as easy as you think it is. > 4. He said “I was trying to kill them.” That’s pretty clear. 1. So use them advantageously 2. The robbery, as a robbery, no. The attendant physical and psychological effects of repeated whacks-to-the-skull and plausible death threats, yes. See below 3. The effects of concussions on rationality are well documented. The immediate emotional effects of trauma on rationality are well documented. I wouldn’t think it would be hard to produce reasonable doubt - or exculpatory mitigation - sufficient to hang a decently selected jury. \<– I say this with no law training and an equal number of trials under my belt 4. Stupid thing said in the heat of the moment by a distressed victim; see above. How many victims have said, “I want to kill them” or the like in the immediate aftermath? How many have been hit with uttering threats? > [@VinylTurnip](#): > > There’s little question that in a court of Internet Tough Guy law, “the fucks had it coming” is a defense even more iron-clad than an alibi. Yes, on the internet and in life. The law may say that this was excessive, and the law may be right, but I think most people would say that immediate vengeance is not only acceptable but warranted. I think he should be hit for driving offenses and danger to the public but the actual death should be a pass. > [@mhendo](#): > > Of course, the ridiculous assumption behind this post is that, had the guy not run them off the road with his car, they would have gotten away with it. I’ve read recently that only something like 10% of burglaries are solved. The assailants had masks, surprise and concussions on their side. Chances of escape seem fairly good to me. > [@lawbuff](#): > > The Felony murder rule is say you kidnap a person and while in commission you “accidentally” kill them, meaning, legally, not meaning to kill them. That is felony murder. > > I do know, and I believe it was a bank robbery case, the SC ruled the NON trigger man in a death resulting from it, can not be charged with murder if it can be proven he had no prior knowledge of it, unlke the tigger man. I thought the rule, in some states at least, is that you are culpable for any “crime” coming as a direct result of a felony you were involved with. For example: I steal a car and the owner comes out guns-a-blazing’ causing the death of an innocent. I am guilty of the death because had I not stolen the car the owner would not have fired and the death would not have occurred. > [@babygoat666](#): > > So I could just blow your head off, and when the police arrive I can just tell them, “It’s fine officers, he took my thing.” You guys really don’t see any problems with this? there is a big difference between, “He stole my Ipod” and “The five of them jumped me, robbed and beat me and threatened to kill my wife and I.” ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/67 "2013-09-15T14:07:17Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Sorry, but I think that statement is incorrect according to the T.J. Hooker Act of 1986, AKA the “Loose Canon Doctrine”. The law specifically states: > "A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked or otherwise the victim of a forcible felony has the right to pursue, capture and possibly kill his or her attackers by whatever means necessary, including, but not limited to automobile, boat, helicopter, airplane, hot air balloon or parkouring across rooftops. > > Any collateral damage or injury resulting from such pursuit, including but not limited to explosions, fires, damaged vehicles, smashed store fronts, ruined produce, or plate glass windows broken while carried across the street by two men shall be deemed the responsibility of the party or parties committing the original felony, and the pursuing party shall be absolved of all blame or responsibility, so long as the felons are apprehended or killed in a suitably public and spectacular manner (such as tossing off a bridge, building or other high structure (possibly onto a sharp object), exploding, colliding with a larger vehicle or shooting between the eyes, so long as the words “Don’t. It’s not worth it” are invoked by a third party). > > In the event the pursuing party is a member of a law enforcement agency and fails to apprehend or kill the party who committed the felony, they may be subject to actions ranging from a stern rebuke to confiscation of their issued firearm and badge/shield until such time as they capture or kill the felon as a private citizen." > I think the law is very clear on this. I stand corrected. > [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > 1. > > there is a big difference between, “He stole my Ipod” and “The five of them jumped me, robbed and beat me and threatened to kill my wife and I.” You left out “then they left and we were no longer in danger.” ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/68 "2013-09-15T14:28:40Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > This is a case of bad or good facts making bad law. I know you can’t have a bright line rule here, but citizens need more guidance on whether they can chase a fleeing felon: not just “Go for it so long as you don’t hurt someone.” The difference between a pat on the back and a murder conviction is huge. > > I’m sympathetic to this guy, but if you let him off, the next guy might run over a pedestrian doing it. The next victim of a pistol-whipping may hit a bystander … but the fellow who got killed by the homeowner’s truck in the OP will NEVER invade anyone’s home. I risk it. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/69 "2013-09-15T14:45:31Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > The next victim of a pistol-whipping may hit a bystander … but the fellow who got killed by the homeowner’s truck in the OP will NEVER invade anyone’s home. I risk it. So it’s OK to risk (or end) the lives of dozens of civilians because some actual robbers might get hurt in the process? ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/70 "2013-09-15T14:57:21Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > So it’s OK to risk (or end) the lives of dozens of civilians because some actual robbers might get hurt in the process? That’s funny. I’m only answering to be polite … but that’s funny. You could line the civilians up facing forward and get as many of them as possible on your way to the robber. You’d need a big car … oh yeah, you probably have a pick-up. Wait til he gets to Disneyland and you could really get dozens of 'em, then go on some rides afterward. Why do they have to be civilians, couldn’t they be heroes? “Sir, why did you end the lives of so many police and firefighters in your quest to hurt that robber?” Well, I just have to ask, do you have a cite for a victim of home invasion and a beating running over dozens of civilians while trying to catch a criminal immediately after the crime? We have at least one example of a homeowner capturing one robber and killing another with no collateral deaths. I wonder if most grown-up courageous homeowners would make a judgement call and curtail their chase if bystanders were in the way? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/71 "2013-09-15T15:12:20Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > Well, I just have to ask, do you have a cite for a victim of home invasion and a beating running over dozens of civilians while trying to catch a criminal immediately after the crime? I was picturing this kind of chase happening dozens of times, not one person running over a dozen people. The more this happens, the more innocent people would be hurt. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/72 "2013-09-15T15:13:45Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > 1. Stupid thing said in the heat of the moment by a distressed victim; see above. How many victims have said, “I want to kill them” or the like in the immediate aftermath? How many have been hit with uttering threats? Plenty of victims say that. I bet i’d probably say it, or at least think it, if my family and i had been victims of a crime like this. But here’s a basic question for you, and your answer will help me determine whether you’re grasping the issue here: Scenario 1: victim of a home invasion says “I want to kill them.” Scenario 2: victim of a home invasion says “I wanted to kill them” when asked by police why he ran a vehicle off the road, killing one occupant and injuring the others. Do you understand the difference between these two scenarios? Do you believe that they are functionally equivalent, for the purposes of this discussion? I can imagine plenty of situations where, as the victim of a crime, i might want to kill or injure the person responsible. But that’s why, in a rational and civilized society, we don’t let distressed victims in the heat of the moment decide what constitutes a just punishment for crime. If someone hurt my wife, i’d want the person dead, but i also recognize (and like to think that i would still recognize, even if that happened to me) that i am not the person best qualified to evaluate the situation and carry out the punishment. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/73 "2013-09-15T15:15:00Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > That’s funny. I’m only answering to be polite … but that’s funny. You could line the civilians up facing forward and get as many of them as possible on your way to the robber. You’d need a big car … oh yeah, you probably have a pick-up. Wait til he gets to Disneyland and you could really get dozens of 'em, then go on some rides afterward. > > Why do they have to be civilians, couldn’t they be heroes? > > “Sir, why did you end the lives of so many police and firefighters in your quest to hurt that robber?” > > Well, I just have to ask, do you have a cite for a victim of home invasion and a beating running over dozens of civilians while trying to catch a criminal immediately after the crime? We have at least one example of a homeowner capturing one robber and killing another with no collateral deaths. I wonder if most grown-up courageous homeowners would make a judgement call and curtail their chase if bystanders were in the way? Sorry, it’s already been argued that his defense should be that he wasn’t in his right mind because of injury and the trauma of the event. But now we are to believe he will have the judgement to break off if it gets too dangerous to others? Can’t have it both ways. ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/74 "2013-09-15T15:21:24Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I was picturing this kind of chase happening dozens of times, not one person running over a dozen people. The more this happens, the more innocent people would be hurt. I know, but the image of a crazed conservative gun owner plowing through a crowd to get to the robber was too good to pass on. He could be leaning out of the window and shooting indisciminately all the while. But seriously, I think the results of each individual instance of rabid vigilantism should be judged on it’s own merits. We may find that most homeowners will give up the chase if bystanders are present. Someone, perhaps not you, should endeavor to compile a list of cites that prove (or challenge) your position that innocent lives are lost during citizens’ arrests involving home invaders and victims giving chase in automobiles. Where are the studies? ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/75 "2013-09-15T16:59:18Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > I know, but the image of a crazed conservative gun owner plowing through a crowd to get to the robber was too good to pass on. He could be leaning out of the window and shooting indisciminately all the while. > > But seriously, I think the results of each individual instance of rabid vigilantism should be judged on it’s own merits. We may find that most homeowners will give up the chase if bystanders are present. Someone, perhaps not you, should endeavor to compile a list of cites that prove (or challenge) your position that innocent lives are lost during citizens’ arrests involving home invaders and victims giving chase in automobiles. Where are the studies? Thankfully it doesn’t happen often enough for there to be a lot of data. There are however plenty of cases in which innocent bystanders have been killed during police chases. That’s with trained personnel who are not blinded by emotion and thoughts of vengeance. There is a reason why police chases are highly controlled and usually ordered to be stopped except under extreme cases in most states. ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/76 "2013-09-15T17:39:44Z")
It was wrong, but as a jury member I’d be loath to convict on any but the smallest charges. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/77 "2013-09-15T17:51:37Z")
The very reason we have a justice system is that vengeance is unacceptable. Murder is murder. It wasn’t in self defense. Convict him. ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/78 "2013-09-15T18:00:58Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Thankfully it doesn’t happen often enough for there to be a lot of data. There are however plenty of cases in which innocent bystanders have been killed during police chases. That’s with trained personnel who are not blinded by emotion and thoughts of vengeance. There is a reason why police chases are highly controlled and usually ordered to be stopped except under extreme cases in most states. If it doesn’t happen very often, then there’s no reason to make an example of this particular victim and no reason, IMO, to even address the potential for dozens of civilians’ lives being senselessly risked by pick-up driving vigilantes. Could be that police tend to be so self-confident after all their specialized training that they have insufficient self restraint to engage in safe and effective car chases. ---
**Author:** ![Tequila\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a6a055/32.png) [@Tequila\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tequila_Party)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/79 "2013-09-15T18:26:41Z")
> [@GusNSpot](#): > > I think those kinds of laws are wrong. > > Yes my stuff is more important to me than your life. > ( just in case you are confused about what will be my reaction to your theft. ) > Either all life is sacred or no life is sacred. > > The horror… > > I am more than willing to live in a world where everyone has the same attitude as mine… I keep reading your posts, man, and they always crack me up. Walker Texas Ranger in 5! ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367/80 "2013-09-15T18:50:02Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > If it doesn’t happen very often, then there’s no reason to make an example of this particular victim and no reason, IMO, to even address the potential for dozens of civilians’ lives being senselessly risked by pick-up driving vigilantes. > > Could be that police tend to be so self-confident after all their specialized training that they have insufficient self restraint to engage in safe and effective car chases. The law does not exist simply to make an example of someone. Vigilantism is bad for society as a whole. Whether its done with a gun, a bat or a car. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gang-robs-man-he-chases-them-rams-their-car-one-robber-dies-now-he-is-charged-with-murder/668367.md?page=5)