Robber Killed-- Pharmacist Charged

Jermyn Davidson · #1 06-10-2009, 11:37 AM

I don't have mixed emotions about this case, but what are some of the other opinions out there about this situation?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,522461,00.html

ManOfWord · #2 06-10-2009, 11:48 AM

All I have to say is, "If you can't do the time, don't commit the crime!"

Maybe some of these scum bags will begin to think twice before they rob places.

Jermyn Davidson · #3 06-10-2009, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

All I have to say is, "If you can't do the time, don't commit the crime!"

Maybe some of these scum bags will begin to think twice before they rob places.

Maybe.

So you think the Pharmacist should not be charged in this case?

KWSS1976 · #4 06-10-2009, 11:50 AM

Was he shot in the back or front of body I always have heard never shoot someone in the back cause they cannot harm you if there back in facing you..

Jermyn Davidson · #5 06-10-2009, 11:59 AM

He was shot in the head initially.

The Pharmacist got a 2nd gun, stood over the boy, bleeding from his head but still alive, and shot him in his stomach and abdomen 5 more times....

And he did this while the boy laid there, facing him.

n david · #6 06-10-2009, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

He was shot in the head initially.

The Pharmacist got a 2nd gun, stood over the boy, bleeding from his head but still alive, and shot him in his stomach and abdomen 5 more times....

And he did this while the boy laid there, facing him.

That's why I think the Pharmacist should face charges. This was no different than a cold-blooded execution.

The first shot disposed of the threat, nothing else was needed. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out this Pharmacist had some past issues with anger or something. It seems he thought he would be cleared of the shooting, so the last 5 shots were "free" ... more info needed, but if he really was standing over the kid when he fired the last 5 shots ... the man has serious issues that need to be dealt with.

And he certainly should do time.

RandyWayne · #7 06-10-2009, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by n david

That's why I think the Pharmacist should face charges. This was no different than a cold-blooded execution.

The first shot disposed of the threat, nothing else was needed. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out this Pharmacist had some past issues with anger or something. It seems he thought he would be cleared of the shooting, so the last 5 shots were "free" ... more info needed, but if he really was standing over the kid when he fired the last 5 shots ... the man has serious issues that need to be dealt with.

And he certainly should do time.

I am not saying he should get off scott free. But in a robbery situation, especially armed, the adrenalin starts flowing and the robbers are a threat that must be dealt with. They are not people anymore to the person who is being threatened.
I think he DOES need to be charged, but not the same way as if he randomly picked a "good kid" minding his own business and proceeded to shoot in the same way.

Jermyn Davidson · #8 06-10-2009, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

I am not saying he should get off scott free. But in a robbery situation, especially armed, the adrenalin starts flowing and the robbers are a threat that must be dealt with. They are not people anymore to the person who is being threatened.
I think he DOES need to be charged, but not the same way as if he randomly picked a "good kid" minding his own business and proceeded to shoot in the same way.

Could it be that this Pharmacist was actually saving this kid from his suffering?

Would anyone want to prosecute this man if his intent was to make sure the kid didn't suffer?

After the actions of the Pharmacist, the kid was no longer suffering.

n david · #9 06-10-2009, 11:51 AM

Hmm ... the first shot is justified in my opinion.

However, after the perp was down and out of commission ... the 5 additional shots to the torso went too far. The perp wasn't a threat at that time, so if he died from those injuries, I would agree the Pharmacist should be charged.

There was a case where I live where a convenience store clerk chased some kids who stole some beer and shot one in the back of the head. Same feelings with that case - excessive force. The kid was running away and wasn't a threat.

Yet another case was a man who heard someone breaking into his car during the middle of the night, surprised the would-be thief and then chased him 2 blocks before shooting him dead.

All three are examples of excessive force where the shooter should be held accountable for their actions.

It's one thing to protect one's self or another ... but quite another to use excessive force.

Esther · #10 06-10-2009, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by n david

Hmm ... the first shot is justified in my opinion.

However, after the perp was down and out of commission ... the 5 additional shots to the torso went too far. The perp wasn't a threat at that time, so if he died from those injuries, I would agree the Pharmacist should be charged.

There was a case where I live where a convenience store clerk chased some kids who stole some beer and shot one in the back of the head. Same feelings with that case - excessive force. The kid was running away and wasn't a threat.

Yet another case was a man who heard someone breaking into his car during the middle of the night, surprised the would-be thief and then chased him 2 blocks before shooting him dead.

All three are examples of excessive force where the shooter should be held accountable for their actions.

It's one thing to protect one's self or another ... but quite another to use excessive force.

Perhaps this attitude is why crime is so prevelant???