Burglar Beaten With His Own Bat. Victim Charged

[Kirkhill]

Robber entered store. Demanded money. Struck clerk. Was disarmed. Fled and was beaten while fleeing. Hospitalized. Clerk charged with assault.

Peterborough store clerk charged with assault after allegedly beating would-be robber with the latter's own baseball bat

Police say he allegedly stole a baseball from a would-be robber and hit the suspect several times with the bat.

www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com

BAT FLIP: Peterborough store clerk charged after robber hit with own weapon

A young convenience store clerk has been charged after he allegedly struck a would-be robber with the latter's baseball bat.

torontosun.com

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/peterborough-robbery-aggravated-assault-1.7079418

 

[Fishbone Jones]

We'll have to start issuing a 10 page UN ROE, Bosnia style pamphlet to all retail workers now.

 

[OldSolduer]

We'll have to start issuing a 10 page UN ROE, Bosnia style pamphlet to all retail workers now.

The advice given us to give the robber what he wants.
.

 

[KevinB]

Times when I am glad I no longer live in Canada...

 

[Halifax Tar]

What a messed up system we have.

 

[Gunnar]

Jury nullification is a thing...

 

[Haggis]

The clerk was assaulted. The clerk disarmed the robber, ending the assault on himself and the robbery as well. Robber fled. The clerk, no longer under threat has no reason to defend himself as the attack has ended and the attacker has fled. The clerk the pursues robber and, without further apparent provocation, assaults him with his own bat causing head injuries which required hospitalization. That's not self-defence. That's revenge.

There may be more to this that could come out later (i.e. did the robber turn to fight while on the street? Was there a second weapon in play?) For now, I'm siding with the cops charging him on this one. It sucks, yeah, but we may not have the whole picture yet.

 

[KevinB]

The clerk was assaulted. The clerk disarmed the robber, ending the assault on himself and the robbery as well. Robber fled. The clerk, no longer under threat has no reason to defend himself as the attack has ended and the attacker has fled. The clerk the follows robber and, without provocation, assaults him with his own bat causing head injuries which required hospitalization. That's not self-defence. That's revenge.

I'm siding with the cops charging him on this one.

Well if he hadn't traumatized the clerk, the clerk wouldn't have felt that he had to attack to defend himself...

 

[Furniture]

Well if he hadn't traumatized the clerk, the clerk wouldn't have felt that he had to attack to defend himself...

The beating is also the only real consequence the attempted burglar will receive. The system will do nothing, then wonder why people feel emboldened enough to commit crimes like that in the first place.

 

[KJK]

The clerk was assaulted. The clerk disarmed the robber, ending the assault on himself and the robbery as well. Robber fled. The clerk, no longer under threat has no reason to defend himself as the attack has ended and the attacker has fled. The clerk the pursues robber and, without further apparent provocation, assaults him with his own bat causing head injuries which required hospitalization. That's not self-defence. That's revenge.

There may be more to this that could come out later (i.e. did the robber turn to fight while on the street? Was there a second weapon in play?) For now, I'm siding with the cops charging him on this one. It sucks, yeah, but we may not have the whole picture yet.

I don't see how you can say "without provocation". The guy threatened the clerk with bodily harm. That seems like provocation to me and like Furniture said that will be the only consequences for the dirtbag since the 'justice system' in this country won't do anything.

 

[Haggis]

Well if he hadn't traumatized the clerk, the clerk wouldn't have felt that he had to attack to defend himself...

Based on the media reports, he wasn't defending himself. He pursued and attacked a person. Canada does not have any "stand your ground" laws and even if we did, the clerk was no longer "on his ground". He was on a public street in pursuit, wherein he initiated a second assault. Had he, at least, articulated a citizen's arrest his only issue would be to ensure the force used was reasonable.

 

[DBNSG]

The clerk was assaulted. The clerk disarmed the robber, ending the assault on himself and the robbery as well. Robber fled. The clerk, no longer under threat has no reason to defend himself as the attack has ended and the attacker has fled. The clerk the pursues robber and, without further apparent provocation, assaults him with his own bat causing head injuries which required hospitalization. That's not self-defence. That's revenge.

There may be more to this that could come out later (i.e. did the robber turn to fight while on the street? Was there a second weapon in play?) For now, I'm siding with the cops charging him on this one. It sucks, yeah, but we may not have the whole picture yet.

What ever happened to Fuck around , find out?

 

[KevinB]

Based on the media reports, he wasn't defending himself. He pursued and attacked a person. Canada does not have any "stand your ground" laws and even if we did, the clerk was no longer "on his ground". He was on a public street in pursuit, wherein he initiated a second assault. Had he, at least, articulated a citizen's arrest his only issue would be to ensure the force used was reasonable.

But he had just been brutally traumatized and was not capable of rationale thought
I mean if I was his lawyer, I'd be hyping he was the original victim.

 

[Haggis]

What ever happened to Fuck around , find out?

Like everything else in society, FAFO has limits.

 

[KevinB]

Like everything else in society, FAFO has limits.

Shoot, Shovel, ShutUp...

 

[Kirkhill]

Haggis, you know as well as anybody that you don't turn emotions on and off like a tap.

 

[markppcli]

Haggis, you know as well as anybody that you don't turn emotions on and off like a tap.

True, but there’s a reasonable limit to self defence. Had the clerk disarmed, and struck the thief immediately as part of that altercation I assume no issue. Making the conscious choice to pursue some one after arming yourself and your no longer protecting yourself or your property.

 

[Haggis]

Haggis, you know as well as anybody that you don't turn emotions on and off like a tap.

I do. I also know how the courts look at cases like this. What's unclear from the articles is the timelines. Was there time for the clerk to consider his actions or did he just charge after the robber? How far was the pursuit. Did the robber stop to fight or did he surrender before the assault? These situational factors could play in his defence along with Kevin's observations of trauma reaction, I'm sure.

This will be interesting if it makes it to court.

 

[Kirkhill]

I agree that the issue is the timeline.

If the initial strike by the robber, blocking, disarming, fleeing, chasing and pummeling happened in a second and a half that is quite a different thing than if the clerk decided five minutes after the robber fled to go hunt him down and lay a beating on him.

 

[KevinB]

I agree that the issue is the timeline.

If the initial strike by the robber, blocking, disarming, fleeing, chasing and pummeling happened in a second and a half that is quite a different thing than if the clerk decided five minutes after the robber fled to go hunt him down and lay a beating on him.

I mean if I had to chase someone for 5 min, he’s definitely getting a beating then…