This is a discussion on SC tow truck driver claims self-defense in Christmas Killing within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; These new details don't sound too good. It sounds like a murder to me if it's true....
These new details don't sound too good. It sounds like a murder to me if it's true.
I American and I Ameriwill!
Proverbs 27:12 says: “The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and suffer for it.”
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member
And, in front of the victims wife to boot; what a loser!
In answer to some of the replies that followed my treatise on this case: 1) I agree that this is very similar to the pharmacist case and almost identical--as I said, testimony is very contradictory on van driver gun and I would think prosecutors can get 30 years on manslaughter and may lose on murder; there is little doubt that the last shot was an execution and a hate crime execution at that. 2) the tow guy is not a nice guy--he is trouble and has been for many years 3) the neighborhood was built with very narrow roads--probably someone in the town made a bunch of money allowing the developer to build more houses when land is not being used for normal standard roadways. This caused problems with emergency vehicles when cars are parked on the road. The homeowner association contracted with a tow company to police and tow. This tow driver booted because he is a sleaze and then he commands $300 to remove a wheel boot instead of going thru effort to bring car back to his yard. The van guy was only there for less than a hour dropping off xmas presents at his brother's house--more sleaze by the tow guy.
I would hope that in addition to to seeing this guy go away for 30 years , this family sues the town (it was their stupid roadway design contrary to standards), the homeowners association (no due diligence when they hired this sleazebucket with a history of problems), and certainly the tow company (who by now I am sure are out of business and long gone).
Right and wrong, legal and illegal, moral and ethical are all fairly blurred in this one. Whatever the circumstances, and whatever the outcome, one important lesson is glaringly re-iterated. In a confrontational situation, it is a terrible plan to threateningly display a firearm simply as a means of intimidating one's adversary. It is an equally-terrible plan to turn away from said adversary.
From what I have read on the Island Packet blogs (Disqus) there are many who are infuriated that murder is not the charge--particularly and exclusively on that last shot. I agree with two replies recently made. Van driver should never have turned his back on the tow guy--I do not think he thought that the tow guy was in fact going back for a gun. If I am not mistaken, the tow guy threw the keys to the boot on the ground and I think the van guy was in process of beginning to remove the boot--that is why he was not paying any more attention to the tow guy. My other comment is that brandishing has consequences---it easily rises to the level of presumption of imminent danger and if you brandish you can get yourself killed by the other party. You present your firearm when you are ready to defend yourself--period--end of story. Any other reason is not only a crime but in this case--fatal. As I said in my original comments and I have said on the blog in the paper--if I were on a jury and leaving aside the last shot, which hopefully puts this tow guy in jail for 30 years, all the other shots could easily be considered self defense, especially since the testimony by the van guys family (the only other "witnesses" there) seemed from what I read to be inconsistent and biased to the point of being discounted greatly. The whole story, considering it was xmas eve, is just one big tragedy.
What really gets me is that these idiots fail to make payments on the BANKS car; and then the BANK does the paperwork to recover it and these IDIOTS think it's their car. WRONG - not until you have a pink-slip! So, basically the property did NOT belong to the dead guy, he was using it illegally (not paying).
Hey DeathRales: With all due respect to your reply, your comments have nothing to do with Olivera's death and you seem to be discounting his death, which is improper and demeaning. The brandishing alone tells you he cannot be a "perfect citizen" even though he was legal CC. He did not deserve what happened even if the tow driver had been the repo man.
"Van guy" was wrong. 'Tow guy' was even more wrong. Everybody loses.
Olivera SHOULD NOT have put his hand ANYWHERE near is weapon. Definitely not shown it.
'Tow guy' (can't remember his name- sorry) should not have had to go back to his truck- if you're going to carry for defense, it does no good to leave it in the truck. Still, not the worst of what he did. If he was 'allowed' to get back to his truck, to get his weapon, he could have left safely; he had no reason to shoot. Then, getting to that final shot... There was no need for it. Olivera was down, and out of the fight.
No need for a final shot, delivered at close range for a kill; I think he just wanted to kill someone. AND the comment?
Nah. Put him away, and leave him there.
"Gun control should mean hitting your target every time."
Please try to remember- I have a very dry sense of humor. It usually sounds mean, but isn't meant to be.
Well assuming thats how it went down, the shooter needs to do life or the death chamber. That said, the dead guy would probably be alive today if he didn't have a "badass complex" by pulling and brandishing that weapon (unless he was fearing for his life). In my opinion, you NEVER pull that gun unless you are willing and have just cause to use it. If Olivera was in fear of his life and pulled it, then he should have shot the driver.