Waco/Bellmead purse snatcher

[K.Mooneyham]

Leaving the scene...... Hmmmmm.

You are not to leave the scene of a traffic incident you are involved in, where there is injury or damage, but is there any similar requirement for non traffic events? Nobody was hurt.

I don't know of any legal requirement for someone to remain or give statements, say, after a bank robbery you witness but did not participate in.

Discharging a firearm in city limits, maybe? No requirement to remain.

I agree, I think on the off chance she is found, she will be fined for discharge of a firearm in city limits.

[treadlightly]

Deadly force can be used to prevent the fleeing after the robbery.

And you could always try the stretch part. It might also be justified as preventing an escape after a lawful arrest. The purse snatching was a felony and all citizens have the legal authority to make an arrest in that case. The men trying to hold him down show that force was necessary. When he breaks free from them, it is technically an escape from a lawful arrest and the fact that the suspect did break free from multiple people holding him could lend credence to a claim that less than deadly force was not working so deadly force was needed.

I don't think you can prevent someone from fleeing, or can use deadly force to keep someone from escaping. In fact, I think deadly force is probably never justified by someone fleeing.

As to whether you would get prosecuted for potting a fleeing suspect, it probably depends on whether his name is Osama Bin Laden or not.

Approaching to render aid, that was OK. Drawing a gun, possibly lawful but I would argue it was a poor idea. Firing a shot, incredibly bad idea.

[CHLLady]

Looks like she is pointing her gun and/or sweeping everyone. I wouldnt have taken the shot.

Exactly what I thought when I watched it. And how she thinks she can shoot and walk away, wow.

[Shadow41]

This is my opinion, so please correct me if I'm wrong on this from a legal standpoint.

She would have been ok if she had walked up to observe, but her weapon should have remained concealed at that point. Prepared, yes, but still concealed. She should only have drawn when the perp had gotten away from the men that were holding him. The only way she could have justified the shot, warning or otherwise, would be if the perp had turned and presented a threat of deadly force. Since the perp was attempting to flee and did not have possession of the stolen property, she should not have engaged him by firing a shot. At that point she should have been a good witness. The fact that she left the scene after discharging her weapon was just sheer stupidity.

I live in the Waco area, and I'm at that particular store fairly regularly where this took place. The building in the background of the video is American National Bank. At that time of day, there's no telling how many people were either in the bank or in the teller lanes that were directly in front of her when she fired the shot. Also, she fired towards a Velero station across from the bank, as well as an extremely busy intersection at the IH35 overpass, not to mention IH35 itself. I seem to remember something called "know your background"! Whether she's thought to be ok for her involvement or not, she was an absolute idiot for firing a shot in the air like that. At best, it was reckless endangerment of who knows how many people.

Again, just my opinion.

[JALLEN]

Leaving the scene...... Hmmmmm.

You are not to leave the scene of a traffic incident you are involved in, where there is injury or damage, but is there any similar requirement for non traffic events? Nobody was hurt.

I don't know of any legal requirement for someone to remain or give statements, say, after a bank robbery you witness but did not participate in.

Yes, but she WAS an active participant and became so the moment she decided to grab her gun, get out of her vehicle and point that gun at someone.

If the responding officers had noticed her holding the gun when they arrived, I'm pretty sure SHE would have been the focus of their attention.
They just didn't see her.

Had they seen her holding the gun, of course that would have drawn immediate attention and action. Open carry, and that wasn't even "open carry" in a holster, isn't lawful yet. Discharging a firearm in the city is likely no more than a misdemeanor, and wasn't committed in the presence of the officers.

She was neither the robber nor the victim of the robbery which the police were called.

I'm not sure what capacity she was required to remain.

[Larz_1]

Had they seen her holding the gun, of course that would have drawn immediate attention and action. Open carry, and that wasn't even "open carry" in a holster, isn't lawful yet. Discharging a firearm in the city is likely no more than a misdemeanor, and wasn't committed in the presence of the officers.

She was neither the robber nor the victim of the robbery which the police were called.

I'm not sure what capacity she was required to remain.

I'm not sure of the requirement for her to remain on the scene either ....
Just seems like a bad idea for her to walk away after discharging her weapon.
Who knows ... might have been the best thing for her legally, she may have been in more trouble by staying.

Again, I am not sure of the legal requirement for her to stay vs. leaving, but I am curious to know.

[WTR]

Bad decision to draw or shoot.

[Rmartinez37]

It looked like she was waiting to shoot instead of helping detain the guy. Imho, Bad choice to shoot...

[ldj1002]

She is getting more negative comments than the purse snatcher. By law, right, wrong, or indifferent I wish there was more like her and less like him. If I could identify her, NO WAY would I snitch on her.

[JALLEN]

Another unknown here is what was said between the various actors. There must have been some talk, between who and about what there is no way to know.

Maybe somebody told her "it's ok, we've got this handled" or similar. She walked away fairly nonchalantly, as the police were arriving. Not exactly flight to avoid them, by appearances.

[rvsullivan]

She has since turned herself in the local law enforcement, no charges filed yet.
Wouldn't this cover the situation though:
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

[surferdaddy]

Well, at least this settles the caliber debate. No doubt she was tootin a 45...even the warning shot had knock down power!

But seriously, warning shot is a big no no...warning shot in a busy city environment is a really big no no. However, robbery is the biggest no no here.

This will make a great training video of what not to do.

Surfer

[surferdaddy]

She has since turned herself in the local law enforcement, no charges filed yet.
Wouldn't this cover the situation though:
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

I've though of that provision for justified use of deadly force. The question for me is if the purse snatcher was committing robbery or theft. If the latter, it wasn't at nighttime.

I have no formal legal training, but as I understand it, theft is taking someone else's property while robbery is taking property FROM someone.

Surfer

[c.edgington]

I just watched the video.
My observations:

1> I would not have jumped out of my vehicle with a firearm and inserted myself into the situation in the first place.
Observe and report unless he was a direct threat to me or was armed himself.

2> She didn't shoot him.
She raises her gun and fires a warning shot into the air - the perp happens to trip at the same time, making it look like he was shot.
-Dumb- I wonder where that bullet landed.
I'm familiar with that area and I-35, several businesses and residential areas are in the direction that she just sent an uncontrolled round.

3> I don't know what happened prior to the start of the video but, I don't think deadly force would have been justified based on what I saw.
I would not have taken the shot unless he tried to run at me. Then I would have stopped the threat.

4> She left the scene. Probably not a smart decision. I'd be willing to bet that if they find her, she will be facing some sort of charges - Negligent discharge, leaving the scene ..... something.

JMHO

+1... People need to watch the vid again because unless the sound in the video is off, which I don't believe it is, she fires into the air and then comes back on target. A warning shot is FOR SURE a bad shot in Texas, but am curious where imminence comes into play in this scenario. He had clearly attempted to commit a robbery, we don't know if he was armed or not, so doesn't it stand to reason that deadly force can be taken under the imminent commission of a felony/crime?... Someone who knows more will have to help, I just seem to remember MY instructor saying that action can be taken under that theory, although that might hinge on whether the criminal was armed or not.