A new update says the citizen who shot him is not even born until December of next year.
Charge = Agg assault
Charge = Agg assault
Covington: Armed citizen shoots suspect fleeing from police; gets arrested
CPD confirms shot fired in morning incident
There's not enough information to know whether the shooting was justified, but if it was even debatably so, it sets a very bad precedent to punish a private citizen who's attempting to help the police.
Summary: Police try to pull over a speeding driver. Driver runs. He wrecks and flees on foot. An armed citizen sees the suspect and tries to catch him. The citizen ends up shooting and injuring the suspect. Police arrest both the suspect and the armed citizen.UPDATE, 8:40 a.m. - Covington Police Department (CPD) is actively working a shooting incident in the Bank of North Georgia parking lot at the intersection of Highway 278 and Pace Street near Kroger this morning .
...
There's not enough information to know whether the shooting was justified, but if it was even debatably so, it sets a very bad precedent to punish a private citizen who's attempting to help the police.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
I am not a cop. I will assist if asked otherwise I'll stay out of their way and let them do their job. The only time one should consider shooting is a mater of saving a life. If they are running away they are not my problem.
WSB Radio is reporting the shooter has been arrested.
http://www.wsbradio.com/news/local/...r-running-from-police/ZvKpf9Cscq4xAVwVTcNhcL/
http://www.wsbradio.com/news/local/...r-running-from-police/ZvKpf9Cscq4xAVwVTcNhcL/
From the information available at this time, I would say bad shoot.
I fail to understand how that statement is even relevant to this discussion.I am not a cop.
bad shoot by armed citizen
Covington, GA.
A "good guy" uses his gun to shoot and wound a thug on the run from cops.
Now he's in trouble. The thug wasn't armed and dangerous, other than being "dangerous" through reckless driving, and even then, he'd already crashed his car and bailed out and was fleeing on foot when the Good Samaritan fired, taking him down.
Now the good Samaritan is under arrest.
Marcus Pitts, age 47, is the armed citizen who got involved and fired without legal justification.
33-year-old Terrence Lee Lennox is the reckless driver who led police on a high speed chase and then a foot chase.
http://www.11alive.com/news/crime/man-allgedly-shot-by-motorist-while-fleeing-police/451810303
Covington, GA.
A "good guy" uses his gun to shoot and wound a thug on the run from cops.
Now he's in trouble. The thug wasn't armed and dangerous, other than being "dangerous" through reckless driving, and even then, he'd already crashed his car and bailed out and was fleeing on foot when the Good Samaritan fired, taking him down.
Now the good Samaritan is under arrest.
Marcus Pitts, age 47, is the armed citizen who got involved and fired without legal justification.
33-year-old Terrence Lee Lennox is the reckless driver who led police on a high speed chase and then a foot chase.
http://www.11alive.com/news/crime/man-allgedly-shot-by-motorist-while-fleeing-police/451810303
Already discussed:
http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/showthread.php?t=272912
http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/showthread.php?t=272912
Exactly cops can't do that either. We're all bound to the same conditions.I fail to understand how that statement is even relevant to this discussion.
That may be what the law says, but I don't think either of you really believes that a police officer who shoots a fleeing suspect while trying to detain him would find himself in jail facing a 20 year felony charge the same day.Exactly cops can't do that either. We're all bound to the same conditions.Malum Prohibitum said:I fail to understand how that statement is even relevant to this discussion.
Originally Posted by WegaheI am not a cop.
In context Wegahe's comment is totally relevant.I fail to understand how that statement is even relevant to this discussion.
And in proper context I fail to understand how
Nemo
He is implying (or maybe I should say I infer) that not being a cop isn't an excuse to walk away and let the cops handle it. Someone who needs help needs help, whether you or he is a cop or not.In context Wegahe's comment is totally relevant.
And in proper context I fail to understand howthatyour statement is even relevant to this discussion.
Nemo
Didn't know this happened there until right now. Heard about it though.
Sounds like a bad shoot.
Sounds like a bad shoot.
Cops have IMMUNITY in the lawful course of their duties, especially when on duty.
You do not.
They also get a bunch of other perks that are given to them just on account of this idea that so many Americans have drilled into their head known as authority.
That is also another added perk that helps cops out when they make grave or large mistakes in the course of their duty.
I've heard of situations where it made huge difference as far as courts, the government, and all types of things end up.
It matters and makes a huge difference.
It shouldn't, but it does. That's our fault mostly. All of us.
You do not.
They also get a bunch of other perks that are given to them just on account of this idea that so many Americans have drilled into their head known as authority.
That is also another added perk that helps cops out when they make grave or large mistakes in the course of their duty.
I've heard of situations where it made huge difference as far as courts, the government, and all types of things end up.
It matters and makes a huge difference.
It shouldn't, but it does. That's our fault mostly. All of us.
Immunity would not have made a bit of difference in this situation had an officer done the same thing. This is a red herring.Cops have IMMUNITY in the lawful course of their duties, especially when on duty.
You do not.
They also get a bunch of other perks that are given to them just on account of this idea that so many Americans have drilled into their head known as authority.
That is also another added perk that helps cops out when they make grave or large mistakes in the course of their duty.
I've heard of situations where it made huge difference as far as courts, the government, and all types of things end up.
It matters and makes a huge difference.
It shouldn't, but it does. That's our fault mostly. All of us.
Unless another officer did the same thing and it could be construed as reasonable. And the term reasonable sure as hell isn't well defined these days when it comes to cops killing people.Immunity would not have made a bit of difference in this situation had an officer done the same thing. This is a red herring.
Bad guy shooting at you or cops? Shoot him. Bad guy running from cops? Point the cops in the right direction and keep out of it.
Or take him down and hold him for the cops. No legal problems there.Bad guy shooting at you or cops? Shoot him. Bad guy running from cops? Point the cops in the right direction and keep out of it.
So when you tackle him and accidentally fracture his skull on a rock in the process, causing death, you'd be fine? What if you just broke his leg, or dislocated his knee in the process?Or take him down and hold him for the cops. No legal problems there.
What about non-lethal force? get within 15 feet and tase him if your able?
Would a bola be acceptable? or perhaps a rubber shotgun slug or bean bag round?
The shooter is being charged with aggravated assault. Is the gun-shot wound really the hard and fast line in the sand between assisting an officer and a jail sentence?
Sigh.The shooter is being charged with aggravated assault. Is the gun-shot wound really the hard and fast line in the sand between assisting an officer and a jail sentence?
http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-16/chapter-5/article-2/16-5-21
(a) A person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he or she assaults:
(1) With intent to murder, to rape, or to rob;
(2) With a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; or
(3) A person or persons without legal justification by discharging a firearm from within a motor vehicle toward a person or persons.
(2) With a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; or
(3) A person or persons without legal justification by discharging a firearm from within a motor vehicle toward a person or persons.
Ok, so (1) does not apply. (2) and (3) do.
Pretty simple.
If somebody is threatening you with a firearm, and you shoot him, you must admit that you committed aggravated assault and claim "justification," in this case "self defense."
The man in the story has no justification to claim.
If I tackle him, and he fractures his skull on the pavement, tell me which of the three things above I have violated. (1) does not apply. (2) does not apply. (3) does not apply.
Same if I broke his leg or dislocated his knee as I tackled him for the police.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing
A forum community dedicated to Georgia firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Malum Prohibitum
409 Replies
Nemo
355 Replies
seajay
113 Replies
Recommended Communities
