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.

 

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

page: 3
37
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
I hate strawmen, but...After a rapist gets what he wants and orgasms, is it safe to assume the threat is over?




posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by 12m8keall2c
 


Yea- but the guy wasnt free from danger.
Thats my point.
Bullets travel faster then tow trucks.

Fight or flight = Depends on what you are capable of doing at the time.

We dont know the whole story- but from the sounds of it- I dont know if I would have done it any differently.

The guy who assaulted the truck driver was not a victim, he was the aggressor. The driver was just too fond of his own life to take that chance, and I dont blame him one bit.

The guy is not sitting in jail right now...thats a good thing. Hopefully he gets a fair trial.

If Im wrong later when the details come out- I will be the first to say I was wrong. As it stands now though- I think the man had every right to defend his own life.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Wrabbit2000

When he got into a vehicle...and a tow truck of all things for mental image of comparisons...he dramatically changed the balance of the situation in his own favor. I think that's where he could be said to have disengaged while the robber was off chasing what he came there for anyway. re-engaging is a fundamental no no.


So lay down on the ground, grab you wallet and throw it as far as you can. Than time yourself to see how long it takes to recover the wallet. I am sure we are talking about seconds not minutes.

I would think in that short amount of time you could either:

1.) try to pounce on the attacker when his back is turned and try to wrestle the gun away. (Really, really stupid idea)

2.) flee on foot as fast as you can and pray to god he doesn't shoot you in the back. (With luck attacker doesn't want to kill you but would you want to put you life in the hands of a man who just pistol whipped you?)

3.) find the closest thing to even the odds. In this case a big f'n tow truck.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   

12m8keall2c



Stoddard attempted to run away but tripped and fell. Crouch repeatedly struck him in the head with the gun according to the Washington Post. Finally, Stoddard flung his wallet towards a fence and Crouch ran after it. While Crouch was distracted, Stoddard climbed in to a tow truck and ran over his assailant. Crouch died from his injuries a few hours later.


dailycaller.com...

Once he went from being the victim to being the aggressor, he just lost any/all protections that the law may have otherwise afforded him/ his situation.

for those claiming they would have run him over again, or took the gun and shot him, you'd likely be facing Murder in the First Degree.

good luck with that 'defense'


so the victim was suppose to make that call?...he didn't have the luxury of taking a few minutes to ponder what might happen next, and he didn't know what the attacker's mind set was, he had seconds to end the threat from an armed man......gees...I'm left of center, but if that guy went to trial, and I was on the jury?....he would walk, and it wouldn't take along time to decide that...if you have a deadly weapon and you attack me, I will do everything I can to kill you...at that point there is no debate, no weighing each side, no hesitation on what I MUST DO....it's to survive



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:36 AM
link   
To those of you who say I would do this or that; I'm not buying it. You don't know what you will do in any given situation until you are faced with it.

Once the Stoddard was in his truck he was no longer in immediate danger; which is generally the standard used and therefore when he attacked with a tow truck he became the aggressor and is now rightly being charged. The standard used is what would a Reasonable person do. It is not generally held that a reasonable person would run somebody over with a tow truck.

Further to those who say he was doing society a favor by killing I would say you're awfully quick to judge somebody you do not know as being worthless and beyond redemption; careful it might be you one day.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by gallopinghordes
 


You- "Once the Stoddard was in his truck he was no longer in immediate danger"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I didnt know Tow trucks were bullet proof.

You assume too much when the details arent out yet.

A reasonable person will do what it takes to protect their own lives.
Especially after being brutally attacked.


edit on 4-1-2014 by Common Good because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 


Well, I wouldn't think I'd BE thinking that much or that carefully, to be honest. It would be happening far too quickly.

So, I really simplify this to where it came down to one decision at one point which determined how everything else went.

When he found himself in the tow truck, it actually started and he realized he had the full ability to drive it into or away from the other guy, which did he choose to do? Attack into the possible threat from a position of vastly superior power at that point (murder) or did he choose to drive away from the threat he'd successfully drawn off himself to get to the tow truck in the first place? He had a pretty good plan going there for spur of the moment thinking. Right up to where he chose to kill ...and a choice it was, which is what matters, IMO.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Common Good
 


I'm thinking you are assuming facts that either do not exist or have not yet surfaced. Do you know beyond any doubt that the original assailant would have turned and shot at Stoddard? Until that happened he was in no immediate danger.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


The man was in a tow truck. His life was no longer in imminent danger. He then decided to run the attacker over. That is not self defence. In my eyes that is murder...



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by gallopinghordes
 


He had the audacity to rob him at gun point and pistol whip him- so yes- Yes I do.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:00 AM
link   
I dont think this is black or white.


But I think the guy should have driven away.


There could have been other factors involved here.

It not something I would judge unless I heard all the evidence for and against.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 



Then again after someone has hit you in the head multiple times I would assume they were trying to kill me, in which case I would do what I could to kill them instead.


Then the murder charge is legitimate, because you CHOSE to pursue the altercation and CHOSE to end the person's life.

That's the definition of premeditated.


Don't go assaulting people with a gun and they won't kill you in self defense.


Sure, that's true enough.


The kid brought this on himself.


So did this guy.

edit on 1/4/2014 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I suspect the guy was charged because he talked to the cops. Had he said nothing and gotten an attorney, there would be no charges, because the only witness is himself.

"...and then, I ran him over..." M'kay thanks, that will be 2nd degree.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:06 AM
link   
Look, you can cry murder until the cows come home. This a$$hole made the decision to commit a crime with a lethal weapon. If he would have murdered his victim, where would have been the justice for the victim or his family? Sure, he would have been sent to jail for life, but he would have still had his life and his family.

The problem with criminals, is they know if they get caught committing a crime without firing a shot, they will
get probably 5 years. But when they're life is in danger or when they want a sick thrill, they will not hesitate to kill you. They have absolutely no rights when they have made the decision to break a law and commit a crime with a deadly weapon, period.

Cry me crocodile tears. Criminals beware.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by gallopinghordes
 





To those of you who say I would do this or that; I'm not buying it. You don't know what you will do in any given situation until you are faced with it.


As a general rule I agree with you here 100%. But there are people like myself who do actually know, without a second guess as to what I would do given the opportunity in a situation where my life has been threatened. If I could turn the tables, in this situation get into my truck and take your life, that's what I would do. I realize completely that this seems unreasonable to many. I also realize many will look at that and think poorly of me because I know I am capable of such a thing. But, anyone threatening my life or the life of my family should expect no less from me. There are acceptable lines of behavior in my mind, and once those lines are crossed a person should expect me to step across them as well in my response.

I was brought up to never pull a firearm unless your prepared to kill what your pointing at. When you do that you should be prepared to die as well. I see no middle ground.

That being said I am simply basing how I feel and my opinion if I were in a situation such as in the op. Whether or not there are circumstances not known at this time my stance may change. At face value though it is without question my response.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


There's a reason its called the Criminal Just-Us System. Those that make the laws and enforce the laws are exempt from the laws 93% of the time. (just a fact)

As far as correctional facilities go...they are private corporations and like any hotel they make money on a 100% occupancy rate. They are not in the business of rehabilitating or correcting even though they have programs to give it the illusion they are rehabilitating...
They are designed to intimidate the public and make gobs of money. Period.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:33 AM
link   

intrepid

MadHatter364
I can understand he was probably scared and MAYBE took it a little too far, but what was the alternative, let the criminal go?


So the citizenry are now to act as the police? What's next? Blowing a neighbor away if they are doing drugs? "Hell, cops never see it, can't let them get away with that."

Man, the court of public opinion is out of control.


Well not if they do drugs since they're only harming themselves.

However, let's say you are sure your neighbour abuses his children and yet the police can't do anything ATM because of poor/non existing evidence...well in that case I say PROTECT THE COMMUNITY!
i.e. blow his head off before he can do more harm.

The only difference between you doing it with a gun vs. a judge doing it by lethal injection is money saved and time not wasted.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:34 AM
link   

tothetenthpower
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 



Then again after someone has hit you in the head multiple times I would assume they were trying to kill me, in which case I would do what I could to kill them instead.


Then the murder charge is legitimate, because you CHOSE to pursue the altercation and CHOSE to end the person's life.

That's the definition of premeditated.



No, the definition of premeditated is that he planned out the alleged crime before the events occurred. That's why they are charging him with 2nd degree and not 1st degree murder. Please look up the definition of a word before you get on a forum and spout off about it.



The kid brought this on himself.



So did this guy.


Um no, he was minding his business, doing his job. He didn't ask to be thrust into the situation. You're pretty quick to stand in judgement against a regular guy put into an impossible situation.
edit on 4-1-2014 by SonsOfTheMeek because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 



Because he was assaulted, he had the right to take that man's life? With a ton or more of metal behind him?


Yes. Yes he did.



posted on Jan, 4 2014 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by SonsOfTheMeek
 


Oh arguing semantics are we? I was just making the point that if he CHOSE to get into his car and run him down, when he had the chance to just leave, then he deserves the murder charge as he is a murdered.

That's not self defense. Self defense is when you have NO OTHER CHOICE.

A jury of his peers will decide if he did or not.

~Tenth




top topics



 
37
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join