Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would-Be Robber Sues 2 Who Foiled Plan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Would-Be Robber Sues 2 Who Foiled Plan

    Would-Be Robber Sues 2 Who Foiled Plan

    ROCHESTER, N.Y., June 10, 2006
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (CBS/AP) A man who was beaten by employees of an auto parts store he was trying to rob is now suing the store and those employees.

    Police say Dana Buckman entered the AutoZone in Rochester, New York, last July, brandished a semi-automatic pistol and demanded cash.

    Eli Crespo and Jerry Vega – who were working that day – didn't cooperate. The pair beat the would-be robber with a pipe and held him at bay with his own gun.

    Buckman escaped when the employees retreated into the store to call 911, but he was arrested a week later. Buckman pleaded guilty to first-degree robbery and was sentenced to 18 years in prison as a repeat violent felon.

    But now, Buckman is suing the auto parts store and the two men who beat him, claiming they committed assault and battery and intentionally inflicted emotional distress.

    "It seems to me a bit audacious," Patrick Naylon, the attorney for AutoZone, Crespo and Vega told CBSNews.com's Lloyd de Vries. "The plaintiff first tried to rob AutoZone with a gun, and now he's trying to rob it with a civil lawsuit."

    But lawyer Phillip R. Hurwitz, who represented Buckman in the criminal case and also filed the civil suit in April in state Supreme Court, told the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle that Crespo and Vega crossed the line by pursuing Buckman and attacking him.

    "The danger was past," Hurwitz told the paper. "These two employees took it upon themselves to go after Mr. Buckman after he left the store."

    The lawyer for Crespo and Vega – who no longer work for AutoZone – told CBSNews.com his clients shouldn't be too worried about the outcome. "If they were brave enough to handle an armed robbery, a civil lawsuit certainly shouldn't scare them, especially one like this."

    Monroe County District Attorney Michael C. Green would not comment on the suit's chances in court, but he told the Democrat & Chronicle, "There doesn't seem to be any question that they were justified."

  • #2
    But lawyer Phillip R. Hurwitz, who represented Buckman in the criminal case and also filed the civil suit in April in state Supreme Court, told the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle that Crespo and Vega crossed the line by pursuing Buckman and attacking him.

    "The danger was past," Hurwitz told the paper. "These two employees took it upon themselves to go after Mr. Buckman after he left the store."
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Well, Mr. Hurwitz, it is sometimes difficult to live by the letter of the law. Now, isn't it? Especially when under duress and extreme stress created by a semi-automatic pistol stuck in your face by an individual intent on forcefully taking something not his. It is appearent he was willing to take a life for unlawfull gain. How un-thoughtful of these fellas to defend and retaliate.

    Comment


    • #3
      Shoulda shot him.
      "Alright guys listen up, ya'll have probably heard this before, Jackson vs. Securiplex corporation; I am a private security officer, I have no State or governmental authority. I stand as an ordinary citizen. I have no right to; detain, interrogate or otherwise interfere with your personal property-... basically all that means is I'm a cop."-Officer Ernie
      "The Curve" 1998

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Wackenhut Lawson
        Shoulda shot him.
        Yup!
        Save time, money, and the bull!

        Comment


        • #5
          The danger did not pass. Those men were in pursuit of a fleeing felon. Robbery and attempted robbery, the last time I checked were felonies. Those men were doing the correct thing.
          Enjoy the day,
          Bill

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Bill Warnock
            The danger did not pass. Those men were in pursuit of a fleeing felon. Robbery and attempted robbery, the last time I checked were felonies. Those men were doing the correct thing.
            Enjoy the day,
            Bill
            Bill, you have to (And I know you do) understand the thinking of modern society now days.

            Remember (collective) back in the olden times when men were subjects of the Crown, and the Crown placed a duty on all subjects to quell disturbances and affrays of the peace, then remand those who cause such disturbances to the Crown for punishment?

            This duty was brought over, as well. It is a basis of common law, we now call "Citizen's Arrest," in which a person fufills their duty to the Crown/Government by arresting said breachers of the peace or felons and remanding them to the Crown/Magistrate.

            Over the years, this has been publicially intrepreted from "shall arrest" to "shall summon," to finally, "Call 911." The "Failure to Report a Crime" statutes in many states reflect to hundreds years old tradition of the citizenry stopping breaches of the peace.

            I've spoken to many sworn governmental law enforcement officers. Unless their state has codified arrest statutes, they are blithely unaware and will try to argue that no citizen has the right or duty to arrest a felon or breacher of the peace. That is a right bestowed only upon sworn law enforcement officers.

            This is what they are taught in the academies, and in criminal justice curricliums. Police arrest, citizens interfere.
            Some Kind of Commando Leader

            "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
              I've spoken to many sworn governmental law enforcement officers. Unless their state has codified arrest statutes, they are blithely unaware and will try to argue that no citizen has the right or duty to arrest a felon or breacher of the peace. That is a right bestowed only upon sworn law enforcement officers.

              This is what they are taught in the academies, and in criminal justice curricliums. Police arrest, citizens interfere.
              I have also dealt with the sad scene many times where the state does have codified arrest laws, but the department you called out refuses to recognize them when you have somebody restrained. Worst case scenario was when they let somebody go who severely beat a woman and then put the handcuffs on the security, took him to jail, and tried unsuccessfully to charge him with impersonating a police officer.
              "We appreciate all the hard work you've done, the dedicated hours you have worked, and the lives you have saved. However, since this is your third time being late to work, we are terminating your employment here."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 1stWatch
                I have also dealt with the sad scene many times where the state does have codified arrest laws, but the department you called out refuses to recognize them when you have somebody restrained. Worst case scenario was when they let somebody go who severely beat a woman and then put the handcuffs on the security, took him to jail, and tried unsuccessfully to charge him with impersonating a police officer.
                Where's the Ghost of Johnny Cochrane then? I think I would have a Section 1984 lawsuit started against those police officers for violating my security officer's civil rights. And encourage the woman to file one as well, since they violated her civil rights as well.
                Some Kind of Commando Leader

                "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                Comment


                • #9
                  I don't know what the punk is whining about. Here in Colorado he committed the crime in their presence and the two employees had every right to arrest him and use reasonable for in that arrest.

                  Now considering they already KNEW he was armed - well the argument could easily be made that they could use deadly force in return since they could reasonable be in fear of serious bodily injury or death. *sigh* He's still breathing, I say he oughtto be counting himself lucky.
                  "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by aka Bull
                    I don't know what the punk is whining about. Here in Colorado he committed the crime in their presence and the two employees had every right to arrest him and use reasonable for in that arrest.

                    Now considering they already KNEW he was armed - well the argument could easily be made that they could use deadly force in return since they could reasonable be in fear of serious bodily injury or death. *sigh* He's still breathing, I say he oughtto be counting himself lucky.
                    The average kid still beleives that only a police officer may arrest. Security Guards cannot touch you.
                    Some Kind of Commando Leader

                    "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
                      Where's the Ghost of Johnny Cochrane then? I think I would have a Section 1984 lawsuit started against those police officers for violating my security officer's civil rights. And encourage the woman to file one as well, since they violated her civil rights as well.
                      This is just the kind of thing our new police chief is working on cleaning up. According to him, however, between battling with individuals on the department force and with the city council it will take around six years for things to start to work the way they're supposed to. He fired nine officers for disciplinary issues over the past two weeks.
                      "We appreciate all the hard work you've done, the dedicated hours you have worked, and the lives you have saved. However, since this is your third time being late to work, we are terminating your employment here."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I handcuffed and held an individual for local police who had committed domestic assault, and it cost me my position in law enforcement.

                        I had to go thru Internal Affairs, who cleared me. Was asked multiple times by supervisors and fellow officers if I was going to be arrested for it, and finally got fired because I had told the truth (how was I supposed to know I should lie to my supervisors) for using my issued equipment while not on duty.

                        This was a violation of proceedure, not law, but was enough to get me fired while on probation because my supervisor did not like me. Did I violate a law?
                        Only the courts would be able to decide, I guess.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by kingsman
                          I handcuffed and held an individual for local police who had committed domestic assault, and it cost me my position in law enforcement.

                          I had to go thru Internal Affairs, who cleared me. Was asked multiple times by supervisors and fellow officers if I was going to be arrested for it, and finally got fired because I had told the truth (how was I supposed to know I should lie to my supervisors) for using my issued equipment while not on duty.

                          This was a violation of proceedure, not law, but was enough to get me fired while on probation because my supervisor did not like me. Did I violate a law?
                          Only the courts would be able to decide, I guess.
                          That's really messed up. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as a law enforcement officer weren't you required to intervene in a family violence assault even if you were off duty? In that case the department policy set you up to fail. If you did nothing you would have faced prosecution and/or firing. Since you did something though, you got fired just because the restraints were city equipment. Really lame.
                          "We appreciate all the hard work you've done, the dedicated hours you have worked, and the lives you have saved. However, since this is your third time being late to work, we are terminating your employment here."

                          Comment

                          Leaderboard

                          Collapse
                          Working...
                          X