Man attacked by robber, fights back, is charged with murder

It was pretty clear that the robber wasn't intent on killing him as he had opportunity but didn't. The murderer went out of his way to kill this guy.

I think muggers should be fearful of dying. If they kill the victim, they would gain massive heat. So, regardless of them knowing they'd probably die, they would not kill on sight as this would make it more likely for them to be arrested due to the most serious nature of the crime.

However, robbers, muggers, ect. take the risk of dying into their own hands when they attempt to steal your property with a weapon. If he didn't have a weapon, i wouldn't kill him, i would attempt to stop him, though.

If he has a weapon, id kill him as fast as possible. Just because he threw his wallet doesn't mean the robber wasn't going to kill him for making him " fetch " the wallet. I'd kill you in a heartbeat if you draw a weapon on me, or i'd kill you at the first opportune time if you didn't shoot me on the spot.

The mugger took the risk, and lost. He deserved it.

I don't fault anyone for self-defense. I also don't mourn the loss of someone who does violence to another person. However if there is no investigation it makes it possible to murder people while claiming self-defensive which isn't right either. Everyone could get away with murdering whoever they wanted under that system. Without additional evidence it can be difficult to ascertain what occurred when the only witness is the one that did the killing.

With that said, I would not want to jail the driver for how he dealt with the situation if the account is accurate. Just as people should not be free to commit violence on others, they also need to feel secure
that they can defend themselves without having to do everything perfectly. How can you be expected to
be perfect when someone has initiated a physical assault on you? It's on the perpetrator for what unfolds when the seek to harm others.

I've read the first 10 pages of this pretty carefully and given out some stars for some really fine posts.
I'm amazed that anyone could imagine that in the driver's situation they could/would have done anything differently.

Put yourself in this guy's shoes for a bit....please.
There's a man with a gun in an enclosed space. I know of no sort of "tow-lot" that isn't enclosed, gate locked upon entry and exit.
Other folks are about the place hiding after seeing the thug attack.
You've been beaten about the head so there's a lot of pain at the least, probably some blurred vision, facial bleeding...lots of confusion...you've tried to run away and gotten beaten over the head for your effort so....you think to distract the guy and throw your wallet--- crawl into your truck to get away....and suddenly realize you now have a means to overcome this threat to life. Isn't it your duty to your fellow citizens to use whatever force is necessary to stop him? I honestly believe I would probably have taken the same action. (Even if I had my "legal" gun at my side, I would hope to think beyond wildly firing at him and perhaps hitting the innocent.) The truck provided him with decent protection against the bullets and allowed him, even in his weakened state to focus on the thug.

Now, put yourself in the shoes of the person hiding from the gunman, after witnessing this thug's attack. Are you going to be sitting there saying, "Hey dude, get in that truck and drive away....I've called the police." Seriously?

reply to post by tothetenthpower

I guess, judging by your comment, you have never been attacked by an assailant with a gun. You know, in Brazil, Crime of Passion is official. It would probably make criminals think twice before attacking people too.

tothetenthpower
reply to post by SonsOfTheMeek

 

I'm a bit miffed. I've not fired many kinds of firearms in my life, but it seem like it would be relatively hard to shoot through the back of something like this and hit somebody.


~Tenth

No, don't let the big truck confuse you. That's a pretty easy shot. You should definitely get some experience with firearms.

It sounds like you are unknowledgeable about things such as what a bullet, from a gun, can do to a face, and how fast, and how far, a projectile travels; materials penetration, fatality statistics for crime victims and such. I can tell you....it's actually pretty hard, without nitrous, to out-accelerate a bullet volley, even while enhanced by the traumatic shock, in a red, heavy, slow-moving, tow truck. They are vehicles built for slow steady power, not drag racing.


Do you see the boom and tool boxes and stuff? Do not aim at them. Do not even look at them. All you are looking for is the driver. Look for the big panes of glass in back, front, and on each side of the vehicle. Now, look at those panes, and look for the driver. He can see you, and everything that's outside. Very likely, you can see him, and even if he's ducking, bullets will go right through doors and door decals and stuff. He'll be there, right near the steering wheel.

If your eyes aren't working really well on that day (maybe you didn't think you'd have to do any shooting today; maybe you didn't want to bring your glasses to a crime scene), there's a real good chance you can hit him just by emptying everything into the cab, or, if you're the brainy type, then you might scramble right up to the rig in places where he cannot turn and hit you, and take out a tire or two so's to get a fatal shot at the guy who just experienced you, pistol whip and rob, him, 30 seconds earlier, and then leisurely use whatever rounds you have left to make sure that there will be no one to provide a perp description (you).

Should you decide to shoot on the driver, his enhanced senses would see (perceive) the bullets coming at him in slow motion! The effects of the tunnel vision might make the exit gate seem like an interminably far distance away. And bullets travel further than that, hundreds of yards, with ease, miles even, depending on the style of ballistic, but lose accuracy with distance, so make sure you keep this in mind. He is unarmed. You have robbed him, but he saw you. Now you have the money....and he is In a truck.

Every strand of your DNA is all over that guy like you just screwed him at a rodeo. You do not want want him to get away....close....closer....kill him, and drive away in a tow truck which contains all the DNA evidence...? Kill him and burn the evidence here and now and walk away?

I know, Jesus, it is beginning to sound like work, so for Christ's sake don't forget the guy's wallet!

# 106

reply to post by Common Good


Come on...obviously in the story it would have said what type of gun it was. If it was just a standard .35mm it probably would put a couple holes in the door and crack a windshield.

Now if it was something like a Desert Eagle and I was Stoddard, yes I'd be a bit concerned, but if it was small rounds, the guy could duck or just deal with a bullet hole or 2 on the outside.

That said, Stoddard should have left the assailant alone and filed a police report and let the police handle him.

Sometimes I don't think any of you who praise Stoddard's actions know how a gun works.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


He was right to throw his wallet away, but he should have driven off. As soon as he became the aggressor after his attacker was fleeing, he became the bad guy.

I know it doesn't sound logical, but in a court of law you will lose every time with actions like this.

In Atlanta I was held up at gunpoint for my wallet and my car.
I gave the guy my wallet and my keys. Fortunately for me, he didn't know how to drive manual and threw the keys down on the ground.

Judging by a lot of posters logic here, I should have got back into my car, and ran the guy down.
Because maybe as I turned around he would have shot me.
Or maybe he would have taken my wallet and gone to my house and killed me later.
Or maybe he was actually an alien and needed something of mine to replicate my DNA and create an army of clones!
I mean, the maybes are endless right?

Good thing for me that I didn't rely on maybes and just called the police because the court doesn't care about maybes. They care about absolutes.

So, was the driver in absolute danger when he decided to run over the man who chased his wallet?
That's up to a jury to decide.

TheToastmanCometh
reply to post by Common Good

 

Come on...obviously in the story it would have said what type of gun it was. If it was just a standard .35mm it probably would put a couple holes in the door and crack a windshield.

Now if it was something like a Desert Eagle and I was Stoddard, yes I'd be a bit concerned, but if it was small rounds, the guy could duck or just deal with a bullet hole or 2 on the outside.

That said, Stoddard should have left the assailant alone and filed a police report and let the police handle him.

Sometimes I don't think any of you who praise Stoddard's actions know how a gun works.

Right. So make sure to note what make and caliber weapon the attacker used to bash your face. It should be stamped somewhere on the frame. Or just ask him nicely?

Maybe he'll show you a bullet, proving that it's a real gun!

I'm up for some entertainment. I'd like to know, from you, how a gun works. Why? Because I'm in support of Stoddard's actions?

Not necessarily...

It's because I wonder how it is possible that the way a gun works, changes, all based on one's opinion of the event differing from your's?

# 107

It was wrong for the vic/perp to run over the original perp as he was no longer a threat..however i have 0% sympathy for the loser who got run over..play stupid games win stupid prizes.

I would have ran over the attacker too.


I cant help but think about how i would feel if i let this guy get away with my personal details after almost killing me.
Personal details that include where my family live.......
What if he came back a few days later to finish the job only this time terrorizing or killing your whole family?

Would you be able to sleep knowing this scumbag now knows where you live?
Especially after you put up a fight he might come back to get revenge on you and your family.

Screw it i would have run him over and ended the threat.

reply to post by TheWhiteKnight


To me it sounds like you actually want me to explain how a gun works (how it fires and what not), so allow me to clarify what I meant.

Did it say in the news report what type of gun the robber had on him? Obviously it would be something of note to put down because the difference between handguns vary in threat level.

Say he had your typical 9mm automatic: Easy to use, you can do some damage with it via shooting or pistol whipping. So the driver throws his wallet, perp goes after it, driver gets into the truck and starts to drive away. Perp notices and decides to fire. Now we don't know if perp had good aim, but lets say he did...truck is going x miles per hour, probably fast because he wants to get out of there. Perp fires, at least he could take out a window or put a couple dings in the door, seeing as we are talking about an all metal tow truck and not a plastic body Prius here. That's all the damage. Maybe the guy gets some broken glass, not mortally serious.

On the other hand, if this perp was compentent enough to get a good weapon, say an Uzi or a fairly large handgun (Desert Eagle, Dirty Harry .45) I can understand where the driver would be concerned for his life. I know for a fact that a Colt .45 can put a hole through a metal truck door, and again, assuming that the perp had good aim, can lay a nice big slug in the back of the guy's head or at least graze him/put out a tire.

Crouch answered with an expletive, the police report said, and pulled out a dark-colored gun and pointed it at Stoddard. “Give the [expletive] up,” Crouch said, according to the police report.

washington post article on incident

By dark colored gun, I am assuming 9mm automatic pistol handgun, so means Stoddard was in danger because of the gun, but could have just simply left in his truck and had minimal damage.

There also would have to be some challenge to the perp if the windows were tinted, as some heavy trucks like the tow truck in the story are wont to have.

One last thing- In the WaPo article, it states that the customer with Stoddard called the police, so regardless of a shooting, they'd come in for damage control.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


I see very good reason to kill him, if he thinks he can get away with it he might do it again, and next time the victim may not be as lucky as this guy,

Good job.. that scum deserved it!

reply to post by ototheb85


I would run over the guy also. You can never predict what someone with a gun and ill-intent will do next...

The tow-truck driver is a hero in my book for pulling a neat stunt like that and sending a strong message to other criminals. We law-abiding citizens have teeth too!

You lawmakers are in cahoots with criminals, and persecute heroes, shame on you!

vonclod
It was wrong for the vic/perp to run over the original perp as he was no longer a threat..however i have 0% sympathy for the loser who got run over..play stupid games win stupid prizes.

How do you know it was wrong? The criminal scumbag could have starting shooting. He could have been standing in the way. The only person in the wrong is the violent, armed mugger. If you attack someone like that you get what you get. A person has every right to do what they need to do to escape from someone attacking them with a deadly weapon.

The only way the driver would be in the wrong is if he lied about the events, and that his life had not been in a threat.

I don't know why people think that jumping in a truck makes would make a person immune to bullets.

This whole story plays out like a scene from any Hollywood action film in which everyone would unanimously be cheering on the hero who escaped the deranged violent criminal filth who was assaulting him with a deadly weapon.

Yet when it happens in real life it's nothing but violins and flowers for the poor armed mugger. Everyone could have chosen better and done the perfect, somehow escaping danger completely from an armed madman with your entire personal information in his hand. Just drive away calmly ignoring the hail of gunfire, ignoring the bleating pain of your own bashed in head, then spend a few hours down at the police station filling out paperwork while the madman is busy at your house raping and murdering your wife and kids.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Should be interesting because the District of Columbia is directly under the provincial rule of Congress as prescribed in the Constitution. This case will depend upon what exactly went down during this tragic encounter.

I would be on the side of the guy in the truck, he could easily have been shot while attempting to drive away. While the scumbag lives a life of crime and playing the system, the other guy makes a panicked decision probably under the most pressure he's ever been under and gets a lengthy jail term, it stinks. I'd have popped his head like a watermelon.

I would be on the side of the guy in the truck, he could easily have been shot while attempting to drive away. While the scumbag lives a life of crime and playing the system, the other guy makes a panicked decision probably under the most pressure he's ever been under and gets a lengthy jail term, it stinks. I'd have popped his head like a watermelon.

He deserved a truck over him,a real shame the other guy gets jail tho. self defence for me every time.