It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Wallet Snatcher Dead - Jumped By Bystanders

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
[But apparently you think it's worth killing for. If it was a choice of my life or his, I'd kill him. My DVD player or his life? He can have the freakin' DVD player.


Just how do you find out if he plans to kill you? Have him fill out a questionnaire before he robs you? If I find you in my house I will blow your brains all over the nearest wall and wonder about your intentions later




posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:56 PM
link   


This man probably has a family, mother, father, maybe children now they may grow up without a father......


Then he should have thought of that beforehand. I feel no pity for him.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:56 PM
link   



Police said Freddie McCray walked into the store and grabbed a customer's wallet. In an attempt to get the wallet back, witnesses said the victim was thrown to the ground. That's when a female store clerk hit McCray over the head with a metal bottle, officials said.


The store clark was not "defending" herself and so should be charged with manslaughter.

I do not think some of you have actually read the article.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neodaemon
So say you have a son. He goes and robs someones wallet and gets killed.
Would you still have this view?

This man probably has a family, mother, father, maybe children now they may grow up without a father......

Regards,
Neo!


Yes I would. I have taught my kids to know trying to take what belongs to someone else is a crime. If they tried and got shot of course I would feel bad but I could not blame those that shot him.

I could only blame him, you know the guy who STARTED the whole mess?

[edit on 8-12-2004 by Amuk]



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Just how do you find out if he plans to kill you? Have him fill out a questionnaire before he robs you? If I find you in my house I will blow your brains all over the nearest wall and wonder about your intentions later


Damned skippy....


I'd like to say some words to the dearly departed...in the immortal words of that kid fromt he Simpsons...

"HA HA!!!"



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk


Yes I would. I have taught my kids to know trying to take what belongs to someone else is a crime. If they tried and got shot of course I would feel bad but I could not blame those that shot him.

I could only blame him

EXCELLENT! I have done the same with my children. I love them, but I told them.....if they go out commit a crime, I will still love you, no matter what...but I will stand by the law for you to serve the consequences of your actions...I have never understood parents that hold that to others but not their own children!



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:02 PM
link   

you know the guy who STARTED the whole mess?

[edit on 8-12-2004 by Amuk]


No i don't i just dont agree with this mostly one sided argument.

This man did not know he was going to lose his life that day, these people should not have hit this man i am sure that a mob could have restrained this man without mindless violence...

Regards,
Neo.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I still do not think you all quite get it. Please read my previous post.

The person that was robbed, did not kill the offender.

A bystander did, that person should be charged with manslaughter. The victim did not kill him in self defence.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Neo ' . . .restrained without mindless violence'

Come on from the story we know the store clerk hit the guy. All the crowd did was maintain his attendance. He died, sad but one of the prices of crime.

What is really sad is that the clerk will probably be fired and be charged.

Vigilantism has its place. People may not like it but they are usually removed from the incident.

This story is a minor robbery. What if it was 'rape' or violent assault? Then should the crowd have stoically stood by while someone dialed 9-1-1?

The criminal was adjudged by witnesses- they became his instant jury. If he had not died chances are we wouldn't even know this story.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
Just how do you find out if he plans to kill you? Have him fill out a questionnaire before he robs you? If I find you in my house I will blow your brains all over the nearest wall and wonder about your intentions later


I've actually been in that situation. I went to Spain for vacation for about three weeks. When I came back to my apartment in NYC, almost all of my furniture was missing. I guess the guy was taking a little bit every day, and didn't expect me back so soon. When I walked in, he had my headboard halfway out the window (I lived on the first floor). I cornered him and wrestled him to the ground but he broke free and got away. I didn't have a gun, and I really don't see how killing him would of helped out the situation. Eventually, I did get my furniture back. The people in the neighborhood (Lower East Side) recognized him, and the cops found all of my furniture in his apartment.

How did I know he wasn't going to kill me? Granted, it takes some smarts. You have to be able to think quick on your feet. You have to be able to grasp a situation quickly. Being a reactionary, will cause you more harm than help, IMHO. Just follow your gut. If you feel threatened, you're probably are being threatened. If you're scared, follow your instinct. If you feel threatened easily? That's a personal issue.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:26 PM
link   


Just follow your gut. If you feel threatened, you're probably are being threatened. If you're scared, follow your instinct. If you feel threatened easily? That's a personal issue.


Good advice.

I've always been a "follow your gut" kind of guy. Your instincts are usually right.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoeDoaks

What is really sad is that the clerk will probably be fired and be charged.



I dont find this sad, The clerk is as much of a criminal as the theif. The only difference is the clerk will live...

Ok so the croud were watching, they could have restrained this man. (or maybe not, i don't know enough of the story) but im sure there was no need to hit this man on the head.

Regards,
Neo!



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Without knowing more of the details, you can't draw absolute conclusions. Assuming that the thief was struggling with whomever was the wallets owner, and it's getting heated. The clerk comes up behind him and "bang" over the head. There are many plausible reasons why this could have happened.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:58 PM
link   
It seems that many are missing the POINT -- which is -- these people took justice into their own hands, resulting in the death of an unarmed ALLEGED assailant. This person was NOT proven to be guilty in a court of law and whether or not you THINK this person should have rights doesn't matter because they DO.

This crowd acted injustly without authority and with little cause. They should all be punished. What if I yelled "THIS GUY STOLE MY WALLET!" about an innocent person just because I didn't like them? They could end up dead, guys. And YOU KILLED THEM!


Zip



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I am now hearing locally additional details were heard on the news last night about this incident.

Additional details include that the wallet snatcher did in fact have a gun, the clerk wacked him over the head while he had it pointed at others and he died from a heart attack, not the blow to the head. (Also, that after the initial blow to the head no other injuries were dealt to him.)

I will do my best to try to confirm these updates, but so far I have not found an internet source.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 04:19 PM
link   
In that case, way to go! Pop a cap in that fool! Funny that he would rob a store with so many witnesses and grab wallets Pulp Fiction style... While this isn't exactly a candidate for a Darwin Award, the concept is still the same.

Zip



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Relentless
I am now hearing locally additional details were heard on the news last night about this incident.

Additional details include that the wallet snatcher did in fact have a gun, the clerk whacked him over the head while he had it pointed at others and he died from a heart attack, not the blow to the head. (Also, that after the initial blow to the head no other injuries were dealt to him.)

I will do my best to try to confirm these updates, but so far I have not found an Internet source.



And just to think i was trying to defend this man! Considering he was in fact carrying a gun changes my whole perspective of this situation.

Regards,
Neo!



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Reading through this thread reminds me why my desire to avoid jumping to conclusions is something to stay with. Much of what is being assumed by various contributors to this thread doesn't even agree with the minimal details found in the source article.

I find it impossible to imagine how comments that contain false statements about this incident could possibly be considered morally correct if they aren't even factually correct.

Here are the pertinent facts the source article gives us about the incident:


From the source article:
Police said Freddie McCray walked into the store and grabbed a customer's wallet. In an attempt to get the wallet back, witnesses said the victim was thrown to the ground. That's when a female store clerk hit McCray over the head with a metal bottle, officials said.

McCray walked outside and collapsed, and a crowd held him down until police arrived. But when they got there, McCray was unconscious and paramedics couldn't revive him.

That's basically all the facts the story gives us regarding the actual incident. The rest is commentary.

What the story does not tell us:

- Whether or not Freddie McCray was armed.

- Whether or not he injured the customer when he took the wallet.

- Whether or not anyone else was injured during the struggle.

- Whether or not McCray physically or verbally threatened anyone.

- What injuries McCray received, aside from a blow to the head with a metal bottle.

- What actually killed Freddie McCray.

McCray could have died from a heart attack or drug overdose for all we know. The article doesn't tell us what actually killed him. How can we possibly moralize about this when we don't even know something as basic as that?

So far, I have been able to find only one other article about ths case, although I would expect it to be picked up by the major networks for its "social commentary" value. But even the networks seem to be waiting for more details (how rare).


From The Daytona Beach News:
Police: Man died in robbery attempt

A witness said a fight ensued, scattering merchandise across the store, but quickly ended when the woman clerk used a bottle to stop McCray.

Witnesses held McCray down until police arrived, Godfrey said. Police took McCray into custody and were investigating when McCray went limp, Godfrey said.

EVAC paramedics arriving on the scene found McCray in cardiac arrest and after several attempts to revive him, pronounced him dead at 10:40 p.m., said EVAC spokesman Mark O'Keefe.

Note that in this version, McCray went limp after he was in police custody. We also discover that the fight scattered merchandise across the store. And we still don't know enough to intelligently comment on the moral underpinnings of the case -- in my opinion, anyway.

I understand the desire to comment on events like this even when facts are scarce. It's human nature, and I do it too. But when you float moralisms and opinions in ignorance of the facts, it shows.

What's my opinion on this case? That it is best to withhold jugment until I know enough to decide one way or another. And there's nothing wrong with that.

Deny Ignorance.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I think i am going to have to avoid these forums for a while
.

I now feel so small it is unbelievable.

Regards,
Neo!



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Relentless
Additional details include that the wallet snatcher did in fact have a gun, the clerk wacked him over the head while he had it pointed at others and he died from a heart attack, not the blow to the head. (Also, that after the initial blow to the head no other injuries were dealt to him.)

Thanks for the additional details! I was unable to find much while researching my diatribe above, but feel somewhat vindicated that more details have already emerged -- even in the course of composing my post.

I still think it is way too early to be able to develop an informed opinion one way or another about this case, but as more facts emerge, at least the possibility of being right becomes more likely.

Again thanks, Relentless!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join