robber got more than he bargained for...

[clhaberle]

From: www.kyw1060.com

"And in Bristol Township on Wednesday night, a would-be robber got more than he bargained for.

Police say the bandit walked into the Windsor Pharmacy, on Haines Road in Levittown, pulled a knife, and announced a robbery.

One of the two employees behind the counter pulled out a gun and shot the suspect.

The suspect was admitted to the St. Mary Medical Center in critical condition. His identity was not immediately released.

No charges have been filed against the drug store employee who fired the shot."

[wa3ra]

He shoots...he SCORES!

Let's hope dirtbag doesn't file a civil suit. We REALLY need the castle doctrine codified in this state.

[40 cal]

Yeah, I bet the robber didnt see that coming. I dont see why he would file a civil suit. Concidering he wasnt even being civil while trying to rob a pharmacy with a knife. Anyone would do the same thing as the employee, even the robber if they were in each others shoes.

[Mtbkski]

I don't see why he would file a civil suit. Considering he wasn't even being civil while trying to rob a pharmacy with a knife. Anyone would do the same thing as the employee, even the robber if they were in each others shoes.

Because once he is in good enough shape to go to jail. A "jail-house lawyer" will explain to him that he is allowed to sue civilly. And of course he will. Why wouldn't he. It is a guarantee win for him. The Jail-house lawyer will take a cut for doing the work for him.

We need the castle doctrine really bad in this state.

[40 cal]

I just dont understand how he is gonna arm rob place/someone. An then sue the person protecting him/her self from a armed man, robbing them. Just bullshit if you ask me lol

But, we deff. do need a castle doctrine here. Why havent they passed one by now? kinda dumb also for us having more gun rights then most states. You would think they would have passed one.

[CrazyFeet]

Because once he is in good enough shape to go to jail. A "jail-house lawyer" will explain to him that he is allowed to sue civilly. And of course he will. Why wouldn't he. It is a guarantee win for him. The Jail-house lawyer will take a cut for doing the work for him.

We need the castle doctrine really bad in this state.

why would you say its a guarantee win for him? any proof or previous civil cases where someone was not charged and then sued in civil court and lost? just curious.. definitely not a lawyer...

[38SnubFan]

Not a guaranteed win, but a possibility exists.

IANAL either, but IIRC, there's a fair amount of case law on it.

-38SnubFan

[40 cal]

Its like saying " You were robbing me with a knife threating to kill me. I shot you go to hospital/jail. Then you sue me like I was the one commiting the crime?

lol that is messed up. Need some kind of justifiable backup here, because that is wrong...

[Mtbkski]

Not a lawyer either. But from how I understand it.

The civil case has nothing to do with the criminal case.

Lets assume he will be sueing for pain and suffering..... Did the shooter cause him Pain? Yep! Did he cause him suffering? Yep! And that is what the Civil Case will be all about. Why or what was going on doesn't matter. This is why the Castle Doctrine is such an important bill.

It is like the OJ case. Found totally innocent. Yet found guilty in a civil trail.

[ggig]

This Guy needed more time at the range..Nobody shoots to wound.