Armed robber sues victim.
06-18-06, 11:06 PM
#1
Political Exile
Thread Starter
Armed robber sues victim.
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.ph...2-090711-6961r
Robber sues victims over beating
ROCHESTER, N.Y., June 12 (UPI) -- A convicted robber in New York is suing over the reported beating he received from the two AutoZone employees he robbed.
Moments after Dana Buckman brandished a 9mm semiautomatic pistol to steal cash from an AutoZone store in Rochester, N.Y., employees Eli Crespo and Jerry Vega beat him with a metal pipe and held him at bay with his own gun, the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle reported.
Buckman escaped when Crespo and Vega recovered the money and went to call 911. He was arrested a week later, pleaded guilty to first-degree robbery and was sentenced to 18 years in prison as a repeat violent felon.
Buckman is suing AutoZone and the two employees, claiming they committed assault and battery and intentionally inflicted emotional distress, the newspaper said.
Robber sues victims over beating
ROCHESTER, N.Y., June 12 (UPI) -- A convicted robber in New York is suing over the reported beating he received from the two AutoZone employees he robbed.
Moments after Dana Buckman brandished a 9mm semiautomatic pistol to steal cash from an AutoZone store in Rochester, N.Y., employees Eli Crespo and Jerry Vega beat him with a metal pipe and held him at bay with his own gun, the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle reported.
Buckman escaped when Crespo and Vega recovered the money and went to call 911. He was arrested a week later, pleaded guilty to first-degree robbery and was sentenced to 18 years in prison as a repeat violent felon.
Buckman is suing AutoZone and the two employees, claiming they committed assault and battery and intentionally inflicted emotional distress, the newspaper said.
06-19-06, 06:26 AM
#8
DVD Talk Legend
Hopefully, the judge will find for Autozone, et al., and what little money Mr. Buckman can scrape together for toothpaste and cigs at the prison commisary will go to them instead to cover legal costs.
06-19-06, 07:14 AM
#9
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: La Crosse, WI
Posts: 15,556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't there a precedent for this in favor of the "victim". I seem to recall a story a few years ago where a guy broke into someone's house, got shot, and then sued the homeowner and won.
06-19-06, 07:37 AM
#10
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know what the law is in NY, but the right to use force against someone who attempts to rob you is not unlimited. Generally, one can use unlimited non-lethal force when he is in reasonable apprehension of force being used against him. In other words, they can beat up on this guy while he is brandishing a gun. But, when they take his gun and he is lying on the floor, any subsequent wailing may be considered an assault.
06-19-06, 07:51 AM
#12
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by BobDole42
I don't know what the law is in NY, but the right to use force against someone who attempts to rob you is not unlimited. Generally, one can use unlimited non-lethal force when he is in reasonable apprehension of force being used against him. In other words, they can beat up on this guy while he is brandishing a gun. But, when they take his gun and he is lying on the floor, any subsequent wailing may be considered an assault.
06-19-06, 08:20 AM
#15
DVD Talk Hero
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Words
Posts: 28,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Numanoid
Yes, and that's exactly the way it should be. Just because somebody tried to rob you doesn't give you the right to throw him in your fruit cellar, chain him up and torture him for weeks.
-p
06-19-06, 10:37 AM
#19
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Malvern, PA
Posts: 5,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Numanoid
Yes, and that's exactly the way it should be. Just because somebody tried to rob you doesn't give you the right to throw him in your fruit cellar, chain him up and torture him for weeks. There are points where one crime ceases and another begins. Unless you're George Bush, revenge is not a valid legal defense.
06-19-06, 10:51 AM
#21
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While it seems a little extreme to have an armed robber suing someone, I cannot in principle disagree with his rights to do that. In any civilised society there has to be some sort of definition of acceptable response to provocation. Once we define acceptable response, then responses outside that area become unacceptable.
Ok, but consider this, my family’s starving and I’m broke, I go to the local store and I steal a loaf of bread that I need to feed my family. The shopkeeper catches me doing it and takes me hostage torturing me for months, before eventually killing me.
Under the above suggestion there would be no problem with the shopkeeper’s actions. I was clearly breaking the law in stealing the bread.
We need to agree what is and is not a proportionate response. I don’t believe that in the scenario above the shopkeeper’s response would have been proportionate. Therefore I feel that he should be arrested.
Regarding the case that initiated this thread their response seems far more proportionate, they were afraid of the robber with the gun and acted accordingly. It should be IMHO for a jury with full possession of the facts to actually determine whether their response was in deed proportionate or whether they just took the opportunity to enact their own violence in return.
In the latter case then I would find against them and want to see them pay for their actions.
Originally Posted by mikehunt
there needs to be a law that if you're committing a crime you can't sue
Under the above suggestion there would be no problem with the shopkeeper’s actions. I was clearly breaking the law in stealing the bread.
We need to agree what is and is not a proportionate response. I don’t believe that in the scenario above the shopkeeper’s response would have been proportionate. Therefore I feel that he should be arrested.
Regarding the case that initiated this thread their response seems far more proportionate, they were afraid of the robber with the gun and acted accordingly. It should be IMHO for a jury with full possession of the facts to actually determine whether their response was in deed proportionate or whether they just took the opportunity to enact their own violence in return.
In the latter case then I would find against them and want to see them pay for their actions.
06-19-06, 11:08 AM
#22
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Rampaging across DVDTalk.
Posts: 4,046
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by Numanoid
Yes, and that's exactly the way it should be. Just because somebody tried to rob you doesn't give you the right to throw him in your fruit cellar, chain him up and torture him for weeks.
06-19-06, 11:45 AM
#23
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Summerfest
Posts: 1,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't believe that a lawyer would even take on this case. I hope it's dismissed. There's a difference between shooting a guy and preventing yourself from dying from a guy who has a gun.
06-19-06, 12:13 PM
#24
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Green Smurf
I can't believe that a lawyer would even take on this case.
