Store owner shoots robber..

[jsmithxd]

This was in the Reading Eagle today. I will try to find the original story from when it occured. Not ruled justifiable but no charges filed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No charges in store robber's killing
District Attorney Mark C. Baldwin cites conflicting witness accounts and police inability to prove who fired the fatal shot. He says the slaying was not justifiable.

By Steven Henshaw
Reading Eagle

There is insufficient evidence to file charges in the slaying of a man shot in the back after robbing a grocery store at 12th and Green streets, according to Berks County District Attorney Mark C. Baldwin.
Baldwin, citing conflicting witness accounts, said investigators have been unable to determine who fired the shot that killed Jason T. Mallow, 27, on March 3 and if Mallow was shot while he was inside or outside the store.

Mallow of 527 N. 10th St. died of the gunshot wound about 30 feet from the front door of Gregory's Market shortly after he robbed the store, officials said.

Mallow had threatened owner Gregorio Zarzuela, 58, at knifepoint inside. Zarzuela's son, Hector, age unavailable, also was in the store at the time.

Coroner Dennis J. Hess ruled the death a homicide.

City police said they turned over their investigative report to Baldwin about a month ago for him to decide if charges should be filed.

Baldwin informed criminal investigators of his conclusion in a letter Monday.

“After careful consideration and a thorough review of the facts as well as the conflicting eyewitness accounts, I have concluded that there is insufficient evidence to support the filing of criminal homicide charges against any one individual at this point in time,” Baldwin wrote.

However, he said, there is no statute of limitations for homicide charges and he would be willing to meet with investigators if new evidence or additional witnesses are found.

The killing has not been ruled a justifiable homicide, Baldwin wrote.

Investigators said Gregorio Zarzuela told them he shot Mallow, but they have not ruled out that his son fired the shot.

Gregorio Zarzuela initially told investigators that he shot Mallow after Mallow left the store, but later said he shot Mallow inside the store.

Police said they found a bullet that went through Mallow about 20 feet outside the front door of the store.

They also said they found a fired 9 mm bullet on a mat just inside the front door of the store.

An autopsy showed the bullet entered the right side of Mallow's back below the shoulder blade and came out the left side of his chest.

Reading attorney Paul S. Missan, who represented the Zarzuelas, said he had not been informed of the decision when he was contacted.

“I am gratified that after a thorough investigation, the district attorney's office has decided against filing charges in a tragic shooting in which my client's place of employment was the victim of a violent robbery,” he said after being told of Baldwin's decision.

Capt. Francis F. Drexler, a supervisor in the criminal investigations division, said he concurred with Baldwin's decision.

But Drexler said the investigation would remain open.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[JustinM]

The robber got what he deserved. Although I wouldn't of waited to shoot him while he was leaving.

[ChamberedRound]

Originally Posted by jmateer

The robber got what he deserved. Although I wouldn't of waited to shoot him while he was leaving.

I agree, and that is likely the reason why the shooting is not being considered justifiable.

[Cole]

Legally I concur that shooting the guy in the back is indefensible, but I will lose no sleep over this guy's death or the shop owner getting a free pass.

[dmg1969]

Hmmm...I would think the fact that the robber was shot in the back would have been problematic for the store owner. We all know the golden rule...if the attacker flees and you pursue, you become the aggressor. Also, the inconsistant story about where he was shot (outside or inside). If he was shot inside, the case could be made that he was shot during a struggle. If he was shot outside...see the golden rule. Tough call.

Dave G.

[ChamberedRound]

Originally Posted by Cole

Legally I concur that shooting the guy in the back is indefensible, but I will lose no sleep over this guy's death or the shop owner getting a free pass.

Neither will I.

Originally Posted by dmg1969

Hmmm...I would think the fact that the robber was shot in the back would have been problematic for the store owner. We all know the golden rule...if the attacker flees and you pursue, you become the aggressor. Also, the inconsistant story about where he was shot (outside or inside). If he was shot inside, the case could be made that he was shot during a struggle. If he was shot outside...see the golden rule. Tough call.

Although one would think that a shooting in the back would cause problems for the shooter, I think it's the overall inconsistency in the stories/accounts that IS the reason no charges are being pressed at the moment.

However, the police did say they do not believe the shooting to be justifiable, so they can go after this guy whenever they want to if new information comes up.

[KeithPA]

An autopsy showed the bullet entered the right side of Mallow's back below the shoulder blade and came out the left side of his chest.

Sounds like he was shot while turning. Depending on where the store counter/shooter was he could have either been running away, or turning when the shot was fired. If the counter/shooter was parallel to the victim then more like he was shot from an angle. But if the counter/shooter was perpendicular then he would have been shot while turning. My guestimation

[exceltoexcel]

sure it is not legal sure a jury wouldn't convict you either!

[Farbmeister]

Always yell 'HEY YOU" and hope he turns.. then its two to the chest and one to the head.

Doesn't the self defense law say that you have to fear for your life? Wouldn't the presence of an armed and violent man (he already showed you the knife) put you in fear of your life? How far away does a bad guy have to be before its NOT an immediate danger? 10 ft? 10ft 1 inch?

Most people could turn an bum rush you in seconds...

I bet the DA is just fuming that he could not prosecute anyone and bolster his conviction rate. Its ALL ABOUT THE NUMBERS.

[wewo]

Store clerk: I dint shoot him!
Store clerk's son: I dint shoot him!
Smoking gun: I dint shoot him and I dint see who pulled my trigger!

Lol, how hard you think they grilled these guys? Bet not as tough as if it was an innocent victim on the floor No CSI work? fingerprints, powder residue, etc? who owns the gun? hmmmm.