1. I understand the first shot; I don’t understand the four or five after that.
   Not quite as puzzling but still curious: why did the clerk leave the store?

   1. The crim still had the gun in his hands and was still moving until one, or more, of those last 2 or 3 shots went through his head and scrambled his brains.

      Just because you’ve shot someone doesn’t mean the whistle has blown and the play is over. Forget that at your own peril.

      The clerk left the store for the same reason(s) I would have.
      1 It still may not have been over.
      2 He was out, and my bet is he didn’t have spare mag to reload.

      He grabbed his phone and GTFOOD to call it in.

      3

      1. Distance is your friend

         5

   2. Within the limits of the camera footage, I see 4 maybe 5 shots in the initial volley. Those are probably all defensible. The 7 or 8 in the second volley could be construed as a second separate engagement legally speaking, where there was no reason for deadly force. The perp was clearly down, gun underneath him, and gone fetal. Other than moving one leg a few inches he gave no indication of even being alive, much less aggeession.

      I feel like the defender made a decision to reengage while the perp was upright, then his OODA loop came to a screeching halt and his brain probably didnt even consciously see the perp until he shot the mag dry.

      Adrenaline is a hell of a drug.

      1

      1. Here’s the thing — if he decided to continue shooting while the threat was still standing, I’d find for it being self-defense. If he says the threat made a move that appeared to be an attempt to bring his gun into play from the ground, I’d find for self-defense. What we can see from a security camera, without an adrenaline rush and fear for lives, doesn’t have much bearing on what the guy on the spot sees.

         Idiot brought a gun and tried to commit a felony. His death should be ruled a suicide.

         3

2. Consider this, could the perp be bluffing, he wasn’t injured or even if slightly injured and could retaliate ?

   2

   1. That would be a good reason to stay behind the counter, weapon ready. But I don’t see it as a reason to leave — much less a reason to keep shooting.

      1

3. As long as a person has a weapon still in his hand, he is still a threat. This isn’t like TV where a person automatically stops being a threat simply because he was shot. More than a few cops have been killed because they forgot that concept.

   3

   1. Yes, I see what you’re getting at. The bad guy’s weapon is not visible. It might be under his body, or it might be in his hand about to be fired.

4. I would have a hard time defending his last few shots, however if I am on the jury, I would vote to acquit. I can see enough reasons for him to fear for his life.

5. Zenfucious say, If you not wish to meet Death, then you no carry weapon into shop to harm others. Or as one of my all time heroes – Clint Smith – says, shoot until the target stops moving or catches fire.

   1

6. I can see locking the door and then taking cover to keep an eye on the perp. There could have been additional threats still outside; meaning he could have walked through the door from the frying pan into the fire.

   Any more details on when/where this occurred? Curious to know what come of it.

Comments are closed.