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

OK "he-shoulda-driven-awayers' -

1. You weren't there and are looking at this like there were NFL-like pauses in between steps in the action. In reality, this was most likely bang-bang-bang (to follow with an NFL idiom). When you are getting beaten, your instincts simply motivate you to defend yourself.

2. How was this dude supposed to know the guy with the the gun would not instantly change his mind to shoot him and THEN go get the wallet? The guy with the gun already demonstrated a 100% willingness to use force. I am pretty sure the guy new the dude with the gun could have used it at any minute. Abundantly clear.

3. How did the guy driving truck know with 100% certainty he would kill the assailant, not just disable him?

4. No matter how you spin it, you are nurturing cultural insanity by claiming the guy defending himself is now the criminal. And yes, if you say he is guilty of excessive force or what-not, you are making him a criminal. Do you honestly feel, in your heart, society's laws will protect you? Heal you? Vindicate you? To such a degree we can individually stop defending ourselves? The guy was getting his head beaten in to the concrete and you are screaming to remind him there is a piece of paper somewhere which will make it all better? If so, you are nuttier than a squirrel turd.

5. From your unassailable moral high ground, what is commensurate force? The thief is not going to allow commensurate force. If he sees his victim can fight back equally, he will one up it. Ergo, greatly increase the odds he will be successful.

6. For the anti-gunners out there, you are demonstrating a vehicle is more deadly than a gun. Welcome to what folks have been pointing out for decades but you simply danced around.

Drive away and call the cops!?!?! When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

Common Good
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

really?
Did you really just type that ?
hahahaha.
Ignorance runs rampant on this site.


You guys would take the chance of getting killed while "Running away"..
Me- Id make sure that no good bastard was dead.

Corrections officers may like to run away from trouble- but Marines never run away.

So- lets stop this Dk measuring contest- and take this for what it is.
Some ahole tried to rob a working man- and he got killed in the process.
He got what he deserved.

To the Tow Truck Driver(If you are out there)- Glad you are safe- and Im glad your family gets to see you again.

This is a simple case of not knowing what you are talking about.
Its not about running or fighting - its about understanding the situation and having the ability to analyse it. The two are completely different things.
Being able to understand an issue requires knowledge of the said issue. I don't know about the role of Corrections Officer's in the US, but in the UK, a similar role requires a study of the issue. So what I tell you is not guesswork, nor is it opinion. Its based upon empirical evidence that is applied in prison and probation settings.

If you wish to disagree, you may. Just base it upon knowledge not gut feelings. As I said, being a marine provides no skill set related to understanding criminal behaviour.

reply to post by 12m8keall2c


My appologies.

reply to post by spacedog1973


I already presented my assesment of the situation earlier in the thread.
So go back and read it if you want.

I didnt bring out the whole "Marine" bit until capt corrections over there made big assumptions that they know more about this type of stuff more than damn near anyone else.

=)

Common Good
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

really?
Did you really just type that ?
hahahaha.
Ignorance runs rampant on this site.

OK, I'll retract my horns. This guy has a valid point. Motivation. He had a gun...right. He was robbing and beating the guy....right. What did the assailant do when the wallet was thrown? Went after it. THAT was his motivation. He wanted the money. IMO probably for drugs. That's MY opinion. My experience has led me to this conclusion.

You guys would take the chance of getting killed while "Running away"..
Me- Id make sure that no good bastard was dead.

Corrections officers may like to run away from trouble- but Marines never run away.

I seriously recommend that you reevaluate that as you WILL end up incarcerated if you go down that road. There is a criminal justice system in place for a reason. WE(as people) are not above the law.

swimmer15
reply to post by intrepid

 

Im not sure how dealing with "these types of people" by trained individuals in a controlled environment correlates with average citizen dealing with "these types of people" in a tow yard setting after having their head bashed in. Could you clear that up because I'm not clear what makes you a subject matter expert?

edit on 4-1-2014 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)

The place where the incident occurred has little relevance as to whether the knowledge is still applicable.

spacedog1973
Only certain criminals 'Get Off' on hurting people. They are a very small minority. Anyone who works with criminals will know that their motivations are like anyone else. A robbery has a purpose; to obtain goods to sell = money. Any violence committed is usually to forward that purpose. Once the objective has been achieved, there is no need for further violence.

There are people in this thread that understand this and others that use judgements that are best left for action movies. Being a Marine is completely unconnected and introduces no skills that are relevant in any way to this issue.

So all the gang thugs in prison who get "jumped in" (i.e. kill someone to prove they are "teh coolness") to join the gangs and use guns and knives like they are a toy to purposely hurt or kill others, don't "get off" on it? OK I'll even give you that. How about this "HAVE MADE A CAREER" of all of the above and more and if they threaten my life I have every right to and WILL use any means I can to survive if an opportunity arises before they kill me or anyone nearby.

Don't break the law and you have nothing to worry about. This guy may have gone from victim to criminal by his actions. Yes, that can easily happen. That's up to the courts to decide. I'm just putting out there a knowledge of criminal behavior. And addressing the attitude of those that have NO idea what they are talking about.

I have never (to my knowledge, who knows in today's world) broken the law, not even a ticket. That's my whole point. *sigh* Nevermind this is pointless.

Fine you guys who think a career criminals life is worth more than your own go right on doing that. I'll just have to agree to disagree and protect me and mine the best I can until I die, or am killed by said "career criminalistas", they certainly outnumber us law abiding citizens anymore.


Lil

intrepid
reply to post by IceHappy

 

There's plenty of keyboard warriors say that they would "do this, do that" and GH's points are valid(She lives it). She knows more about these types of people more than damn near anyone here. She should be listened to.

Second time I wrote this... I was in an armed robbery in San Francisco and almost died......

A pretty competitor (Manuf Rep) was blown away some 2 months later in same territory!

Unless you been in this situation I would suggest you could be what you are suggesting a "keyboard warriors" points of view. Being a "Keyboard Warrior" (experience of this situation) and being alone except for a store owner from a 3rd world, unarmed trapped in store with gunman between me and the door is 2 different things... or in Mr. Stoddards case enclosed fenced in area and its unclear where the exit was in relationship of the gunman. Another thing unclear, blood in eyes creates a situation of blindness.... Mr. Stoddard was hit in the back of the head a few times with a weapon. If the blood was not flowing into his eyes it would have been a "normal" reaction to feel the wound and perhaps rub the eyes.... I am suggesting at this point Mr. Stoddard was no longer normal, no longer capable of normal or rational thoughts, wounded, panic and in fear of his life and maybe those who live at the addresses that could be found in his wallet! Until someone here can say they have been in this situation then they must be as you intrepid call a "keyboard warriors"! I know I turned my rings around so only gold bands were showing as I put my hands behind my head POW style.... I was concerned for my wallet.... Not for the company cash but for my id that was in my wallet as my wife as home in a family way!

"GH's points are valid". Has GH been in an Arm Robbery or is this again what you call.... a "keyboard warriors" valid points? Book knowledge and on the job experience is not the same as what Mr. Stoddard lived through with none of your training after an attempt of murder on his life, wounded and alone....

For all those who claim Mr. Stoddard had choices I just wonder at your logic as Mr. Stoddard was beaten repeatedly to the back of the head with a gun.... GH valid points must be valid as GH must have been alone and gone through the same experience as Mr. Stoddard ergo this is knowledge and not a a "keyboard warriors" points of view, YES????

For the record I can send you SF DA record or a letter dismissing my need to appear in court to testify and that at last min the SF DA plea bargained with my gunman.... the gunman got 8 years and his lookout got 5. I still have their letter to me somewhere in my filing cabinet. If you doubt my words and make that suggestion a "keyboard warriors", I will have to send you a photo of that paperwork.... Please U2U if you require that proof... until then I am rather upset with you that you used that phrase with me!

Fellow members unless you have been a victim of a gun innocent and a beating then how the heck do you know what you are talking about?

swimmer15
reply to post by intrepid

 

Im not sure how dealing with "these types of people" by trained individuals in a controlled environment correlates with average citizen dealing with "these types of people" in a tow yard setting after having their head bashed in. Could you clear that up because I'm not clear what makes you a subject matter expert?

edit on 4-1-2014 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)

Never claimed to be a "subject matter expert" but working in that environment "may" make me one. "Controlled environment"? When a shank can be made out of a chicken bone? A toothbrush? Yeah that actually has happened in my place of work.

Lilroanie

spacedog1973
Only certain criminals 'Get Off' on hurting people. They are a very small minority. Anyone who works with criminals will know that their motivations are like anyone else. A robbery has a purpose; to obtain goods to sell = money. Any violence committed is usually to forward that purpose. Once the objective has been achieved, there is no need for further violence.

There are people in this thread that understand this and others that use judgements that are best left for action movies. Being a Marine is completely unconnected and introduces no skills that are relevant in any way to this issue.

So all the gang thugs in prison who get "jumped in" (i.e. kill someone to prove they are "teh coolness") to join the gangs and use guns and knives like they are a toy to purposely hurt or kill others, don't "get off" on it? OK I'll even give you that. How about this "HAVE MADE A CAREER" of all of the above and more and if they threaten my life I have every right to and WILL use any means I can to survive if an opportunity arises before they kill me or anyone nearby.

You are confusing two different things. The case we are discussing is a robbery. The motivation is money. This is obvious.
Your example is gang related. Not robbery. The motivation has changed. To confuse both to make your point undermines it.

reply to post by intrepid


What part are you not reading?

I HAVE been in these situations before- Albiet I am a trained person who taught close combat instruction
and am an expert rifleman. I handled it differently-because I was trained to handle it that way.

The experience I was talking about earlier- with the guy who was trying to kill me with a butcher knife- I ended up putting him on the ground and releasing his knife away from him..Only reason being was that I knew what I was doing and I knew how to control my emotions in the heat of becomming a slab of meat. I could have taken the knife away from him and stabbed him with it- But I didnt. I took the knife away from him(ending threat of life)- and commenced on giving him an old fashioned ass whooping. Cops showed up- saw how I handled it- and gave me props for not ending the dudes life. Point is- I was trained- most people arent. Most people are clueless in those situations of what to do because they have never been prepared for it. So to expect anything other than someone doing what they have to do to ensure their own safety, is being wholly unrealistic.

If had guns in my face- Ive been shot at- Ive been attacked. I know what its like, its scary sh!t.
I dont blame this driver one freaking bit for doing what he did.

HE is the victim- dont get it twisted.

spacedog1973

swimmer15
reply to post by intrepid

 

Im not sure how dealing with "these types of people" by trained individuals in a controlled environment correlates with average citizen dealing with "these types of people" in a tow yard setting after having their head bashed in. Could you clear that up because I'm not clear what makes you a subject matter expert?

edit on 4-1-2014 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)

The place where the incident occurred has little relevance as to whether the knowledge is still applicable.

The place maybe but the setting, most definitely not. This is a setting of pure adrenaline and fear created by the attacker. Theres a big difference in how you would expect anyone to handle prisoners and combatants and trained vs untrained. When you make a man fear for his life it triggers instincts and reaction/reaction... Highly trained people learn to trust there judgment and training and control instinct... But even some of the best fail... Because it is what it is...average person cannot be expected to react a certain way.

Common Good
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

I already presented my assesment of the situation earlier in the thread.
So go back and read it if you want.

I didnt bring out the whole "Marine" bit until capt corrections over there made big assumptions that they know more about this type of stuff more than damn near anyone else.

=)

If he works with criminals day in day out, its not rocket science to appreciate that he will have more knowledge about the types of people that commit crimes. Sometimes people know more than others in certain areas. Its nothing to be ashamed of or to get stupid over.

Common Good
HE is the victim- dont get it twisted.

OK, when does he stop being a victim?

swimmer15

spacedog1973

swimmer15
reply to post by intrepid

 

Im not sure how dealing with "these types of people" by trained individuals in a controlled environment correlates with average citizen dealing with "these types of people" in a tow yard setting after having their head bashed in. Could you clear that up because I'm not clear what makes you a subject matter expert?

edit on 4-1-2014 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)

The place where the incident occurred has little relevance as to whether the knowledge is still applicable.

The place maybe but the setting, most definitely not. This is a setting of pure adrenaline and fear created by the attacker. Theres a big difference in how you would expect anyone to handle prisoners and combatants and trained vs untrained. When you make a man fear for his life it triggers instincts and reaction/reaction... Highly trained people learn to trust there judgment and training and control instinct... But even some of the best fail... Because it is what it is...average person cannot be expected to react a certain way.

I agree with that. But thats on how the victim may act. His defense may be that he was in fear, felt cornered and was acting on adrenaline. Thats fair enough, may even be true. But thats giving him the benefit of the doubt. In most normal situations where someone is threatened and in fear, the first natural thing they want to do is escape the situation at the earliest opportunity. The question of why he didn't flee is most likely the basis of why he was arrested and charged as the police on the spot did not agree that he had limited options to flee.

intrepid

swimmer15
reply to post by intrepid

 

Im not sure how dealing with "these types of people" by trained individuals in a controlled environment correlates with average citizen dealing with "these types of people" in a tow yard setting after having their head bashed in. Could you clear that up because I'm not clear what makes you a subject matter expert?

edit on 4-1-2014 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)

Never claimed to be a "subject matter expert" but working in that environment "may" make me one. "Controlled environment"? When a shank can be made out of a chicken bone? A toothbrush? Yeah that actually has happened in my place of work.

Im not trying to discredit you, you guys have my respect..may have come off wrong just wanted make you think a bit. But it is controlled,hours upon hours of training protocols and safeguards are in place and you know people die when not followed.you will and are to be expected to react different in situations like this than average citizen, just as i am when swimming in 15 foot swells in shark infested ice water.

Asktheanimals
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

I am guessing the case rests on whether or not he could have driven away without getting shot. Tow lots usually only have one way in and if his assailant was between him and freedom then perhaps he had no choice. 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.

I'm not wasting tears over someone who has already assaulted people with a gun and after being released does the same damn thing again. Many people might say Stoddard did society a favor.

He may have been very disoriented after getting hit in the head. I hope he uses that as a defense. For once the victim can claim "I couldn't control myself, I didn't know what I was doing".

We don't need to ruin 2 lives over this.
Don't go assaulting people with a gun and they won't kill you in self defense.
The kid brought this on himself.

Well said! It's unbelievable that people in this country think you're supposed to sit their, get your head knocked in, robbed and still remain threatened with a gun by a low life criminal who already car jacked in the past, and then run away instead of fight! I get in that tow truck all I'm thinking about is how this piece of dirt still has a gun...it's kill or be killed! The anger alone after being jacked in the skull with a gun would be enough defense for this guy to say he acted out in temporary rage. I mean, come on, 2nd degree murder? This low life got what he deserved and the tow truck driver deserves a medal! America would be a lot safer if more people would quit being such sissy's sticking up for this garbage. Unbelievable. Sorry...rant over!

reply to post by intrepid


IMO- he will always be the victim of this crime.

He did what he had to do to ensure his own survival- and if I were on the jury- and evidence was presented to me the way it was in this article(with no details left out)- I would give him the innocent(Not guilty) verdict.

spacedog1973
...The place where the incident occurred has little relevance as to whether the knowledge is still applicable.

To be more accurate at this stage of the game, one might want to replace "has little relevance" to "may have had little relevance".
Being a "subject-matter-expert", I have already briefly addressed the probable constraints presented by wrecker/impound lots. I could go into much greater detail regarding other probabilities, but they would still only be probabilities and not facts.
For expansion on the "subject-matter-expert" tagline, my experience was in three metropolitan areas - and, across the board - highly constricted, limited mobility, sharp angles, and locked/obstructed gates.
So - I disagree with your assessment that "the place where the incident occurred has little relevance...".

spacedog1973
You are confusing two different things. The case we are discussing is a robbery. The motivation is money. This is obvious.
Your example is gang related. Not robbery. The motivation has changed. To confuse both to make your point undermines it.

I SAID

"Then you two of ALL of us should KNOW most of these creeps GET OFF on hurting others or ending their lives or being in prison.

MOST not all. And you know for sure he wasn't a gang member or wanna be gang member maybe getting "jumped in" how?

There are not enough facts available yet to determine that. Even if he wasn't a gang member or wanna be one, he BEAT the guy in the head repeatedly! That alone could/would have impaired the INNOCENT CIVILIANS judgement enough that he should NOT be facing charges in my opinion!

I think I finally get it though. Law abiding=bad, criminal=good. I seriously fear for my daughters life, I'm almost glad I'm getting older and won't be here much longer, because the inhumanity I see now adays just makes me cry. When the "Justice" system can in all seriousness charge a man defending his life with murder then in my opinion all is lost for humanity.


Lil