Jewelery store robbed.... owner arrested?? - Page 5

billdeserthills · November 2nd, 2009, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KralBlbec

I dont know the legal definition, but I disagree. To me, burglary is after or during a forced entry into a building. Robbery is taking an item from somebodies person or from their immediate control (like out of their hand). Theft is covertly taking an item from the suroundings, in the presence of the owner or not.

I don't think he should have fired (much less missed) but I hope he is cleared.

You forgot Larceny, I had guns stolen from out of my cases at a gun show, turned out it was Larceny!

mcp1810 · November 2nd, 2009, 06:21 AM

I am still getting used to Texas law. ( I do LOVE Texas law!)
I would have to review the specific wording but I am pretty sure TX-JB called it exactly right.
Under Maryland law you had a couple of different kinds of stealing from people. Burglary specifically required an illegal entry into a dwelling or structure primarily intended to be occupied by people.
Larceny was shoplifting, purse snatching,(without a struggle with the victim) theft out of vehicles or storage sheds.
Robbery required the use of or threat of physical force or violence to put the victim in fear.
I imagine Texas law is similar but perhaps worded a little differently.
So in this case (as I read it) the business was open, so it is not a burglary, and there was no physical force used or threatened against the victim so it is not a robbery. If it occured more than thirty minutes after sunset the guy's lawyer could try to argue it was a theft during the nighttime, but that would be reaching. Looks to me like emotion maybe over ruled logic and the shop keeper crossed the line. Hope he gets a good lawyer.

MitchellCT · November 2nd, 2009, 09:38 AM

But...

It...

Texas...

HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

Guess Texas isn't so different after all...

Majorlk · November 2nd, 2009, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagleks

Charges will be dropped, unless he has the worse attorney in the world.

I wouldn't want to bet MY freedom on this statement.

mcp1810 · November 2nd, 2009, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MitchellCT

But...

It...

Texas...

HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

Guess Texas isn't so different after all...

Well there is always the "He needed shooting" defense.

It is very similar to the "He needed killing" defense but involves fewer billable hours!

TX-JB · November 2nd, 2009, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcp1810

Well there is always the "He needed shooting" defense.

This is for when you shoot the BG, but he survives...

Quote:

It is very similar to the "He needed killing" defense but involves fewer billable hours!

This is when you shoot the BG and he dies... actually less billable hours, no one to testify against you...

But they don't apply.... because he missed...

jonahex · November 2nd, 2009, 10:45 PM

Here in North Carolina, you cannot use deadly force to protect property

Sportsterguy · November 3rd, 2009, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonahex

Here in North Carolina, you cannot use deadly force to protect property

Darn shame! Another thing I miss about living in Florida. LOVE their castile doctrine laws! After hurricane Isabel hit us (NC) in 03 the theives/dirtbags were all over the place. Everyone was packing. I rigged up a security system to my generator and was ready for em to try and take it.

This gent is in for some serious times and money I'm afraid!

CommonMan101 · November 3rd, 2009, 10:15 PM

Castle Doctrine in Texas is about your HOME, CAR - PERSONAL property that you are defending. The Day/Night thing won't apply here for that reason too. C.D. shouldn't apply to this situation at all. Will be knocked over by a feather if it does apply.

That said, without further details, I can't imagine firing in such a public place. If you are always concerned about what is behind your target - what was the layout of the scene? I have shopped at Town East Mall since it was built in the 70's. It has many levels of courts and such so that he may have had a wall for a background but if his life was not in danger I am hard pressed to justify this shoot if I was on a jury with only this information to go on. He was not at home having his car stolen or home broken into or his dog being stolen (happens a lot here) or getting jacked at an intersection or parking lot. Lots of Castle Doctrine applications to go around but not on this one.

I have seen plenty of top notch security protocols in place with jewelry stores around Dallas with locking double-door antechambers at the push of a button, etc.. What the heck did they have? ( besides a bad-aim clerk )

It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out.

Lessons to be had here.

November 2nd, 2009, 06:21 AM	#42
mcp1810 VIP Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 2,099	I am still getting used to Texas law. ( I do LOVE Texas law!) I would have to review the specific wording but I am pretty sure TX-JB called it exactly right. Under Maryland law you had a couple of different kinds of stealing from people. Burglary specifically required an illegal entry into a dwelling or structure primarily intended to be occupied by people. Larceny was shoplifting, purse snatching,(without a struggle with the victim) theft out of vehicles or storage sheds. Robbery required the use of or threat of physical force or violence to put the victim in fear. I imagine Texas law is similar but perhaps worded a little differently. So in this case (as I read it) the business was open, so it is not a burglary, and there was no physical force used or threatened against the victim so it is not a robbery. If it occured more than thirty minutes after sunset the guy's lawyer could try to argue it was a theft during the nighttime, but that would be reaching. Looks to me like emotion maybe over ruled logic and the shop keeper crossed the line. Hope he gets a good lawyer. __________________ Waiting on the research and verification.......

November 2nd, 2009, 10:45 PM	#47
jonahex New Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Carolina Posts: 10	Here in North Carolina, you cannot use deadly force to protect property __________________ People sleep peacefully in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. George Orwell Republic Arms R.A.P. 440-Ruger SP101 Member GOA, NRA and USCCA

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

November 2nd, 2009, 09:38 AM	#43
MitchellCT Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 1,005	But... It... Texas... HA HA HA HA HA!!!! Guess Texas isn't so different after all...

November 3rd, 2009, 10:15 PM	#49
CommonMan101 Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Dallas Posts: 23	Castle Doctrine in Texas is about your HOME, CAR - PERSONAL property that you are defending. The Day/Night thing won't apply here for that reason too. C.D. shouldn't apply to this situation at all. Will be knocked over by a feather if it does apply. That said, without further details, I can't imagine firing in such a public place. If you are always concerned about what is behind your target - what was the layout of the scene? I have shopped at Town East Mall since it was built in the 70's. It has many levels of courts and such so that he may have had a wall for a background but if his life was not in danger I am hard pressed to justify this shoot if I was on a jury with only this information to go on. He was not at home having his car stolen or home broken into or his dog being stolen (happens a lot here) or getting jacked at an intersection or parking lot. Lots of Castle Doctrine applications to go around but not on this one. I have seen plenty of top notch security protocols in place with jewelry stores around Dallas with locking double-door antechambers at the push of a button, etc.. What the heck did they have? ( besides a bad-aim clerk ) It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out. Lessons to be had here.