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.

 

Seattle Bank Teller Fired for Chasing, Apprehending Robber

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link   


SEATTLE — A Seattle bank teller has lost his job because he ran down a would-be bank robber and held him until police arrived.

Jim Nicholson, who worked at a Key Bank branch, says he understands the bank's policy that employees comply with robbery demands and avoid dangerous confrontations. But he tells The Seattle Times that his instincts took over when the man demanded money during the Tuesday incident.

Nicholson says he tried to grab the man, then chased him several blocks before knocking him down with help from a passer-by. The man turned out to be unarmed.

The 30-year-old Nicholson was fired Thursday. Key Bank officials declined to comment, but Seattle police and the FBI say they advise tellers against acting against robbers. Instead, police Sgt. Sean Whitcomb says, they should be good witnesses and comply with demands unless their personal safety is in jeopardy.

Source: www.foxnews.com...

This bank teller DID disobey his orders under that company, but he followed his instincts when an unarmed bank robber tried to get away. What if this would-be robber got away and learned to use a gun next time?




posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   
You know something just dawned on me.

You know why we have so much crime? Because we have police telling people to wait for them to come clean up after the crime is committed. Maybe if people would actually grow a spine and protect their businesses stuff like this wouldn't happen as often as it does.

Great news for would be robbers though, now they know people won't run after them if they rob a bank.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 08:29 PM
link   
in situations like this it's easy to riducule a rule like that. what you have to understand is that rules like that are in place for reasons. they're not drawn out of thin air. depending on the corporation you're talking about they will come up with more strict or less strict rules to correct mistakes from the past.

take the army for instance. ft benning GA. at some point in the history or ft benning a soldier fell out of the back of a pickup truck. now guess what, it is COMPLETELY forbidden to ride in the back of an open bed truck. end of story. there will NEVER be another accident like that again.

in the situation of the bank, i don't know in particular why they have this rule but it is probably one of the four following reasons or a combination.

1. the bank has been sued in teh past by employees that get injured while following criminals.
2. the bank has been sued by criminals that have been injured while being chased by employees.
2. employees are in league with criminals and fake hostage situations or further extort money.
3. banks know money is absolutely worthless

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Moodle]



new topics
 
1

log in

join