Armed robbery scenario

[Paladin]

...maybe you would be able to distract the robber by throwing or dropping your wallet (or phone or watch or whatever) and then drawing and firing when he looks down and bends over to pick it up. My wallet, for example, is a loose, simple bifold design, so cards and money fall out of it easily. I could toss it so its contents would scatter on the ground somewhat, which could increase the opportunities to bring the firearm into action.

Worth repeating.

This strategy is tried and true.

[philip964]

I apologize if I have mentioned these two Houston cases I remember from the ‘70’s ( a long time ago in how society has changed )

A Clerk in a convenience store back shot and killed a 9 year old boy who stole a pack of gum at night and was outside the store running away when he was shot. Clerk was not arrested.

Apartment resident had hooked up a silent alarm to his car after a break in. He was woken by the alarm at night and from his 2 nd floor open window, killed the man breaking into his car with a deer rifle with scope. He was not arrested.

[Mike S]

That would then fall under PC Chapter 9, Subchapter C, "Protection of Persons." But "Protection of Property" in Subchapter D is a different animal.

For the scenario, to me, PC §9.42 is fairly clear the requirement is that one reasonably believes the use of deadly force is immediately necessary "to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property, and [the actor] reasonably believes that the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means."

Sir,
I agree with your analysis that during the actual robbery that either TPC 9.32 (Deadly Force in Self Defense) or TOC 9.42 (Deadly Force to Protect Property) have clearly stated 'presumptions' that deadly force would be reasonable.

I also agree that once the "immediacy" requirement is no longer present (ie, robbery is over & the criminal is leaving), that TPC 9.32 may no longer be available.

However, what RoyGBiv posted above is the correct interpretation of TPC 9.42's clause on justification for using deadly force to prevent the criminal from fleeing with your property.

Focusing only on the part of 9.42 dealing with using deadly force to recover the property just taken from you in a robbery, in layman's terms it says:

To use deadly force to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property;

YOU MUST already be justified in using force under TPC 9.41, AND reasonably believe that EITHER:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means,

OR

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

The placement of the "or" between subsections (a) & (b) means only one of those elements must be satisfied.

[srothstein]

There may be extenuating circumstances (e.g., the code to unlock the deadly virus research repository at UTMB Galveston is in your wallet) and/or you might get a lenient grand jury. But...if the bad guy has already turned around and is running away and is no longer threatening you with his gun, I think it would be an uphill battle to persuade a jury that a reasonable person would have believed the contents of the wallet could not be protected by any other means. For most of us, we have a couple of state licenses (replaceable), insurance cards (replaceable), a few credit or debit cards (replaceable and usually cancellable with just a phone call), and maybe some cash.

Just a point to consider, but I think you forgot one thing that is very valuable and irreplaceable and present in most wallets. I have to admit that I did not have this when I was young but I do now as an old man. Am I the only one who has pictures of their wife from our wedding, or their kids when they were young, in their wallet? I was married almost 47 years ago. How do I replace that picture? My oldest daughter is now 36. How do I replace the snapshot of her leaning against the tree in front of our house when she was 6, looking exactly like her mother?

I might not shoot to recover my wallet, credit cards, or cash. I would definitely shoot to recover those photos and the memories and feelings they give me.


On another point, several people have mentioned the jury and how weird their rulings might be. I think we are seeing a a return to much more traditional Texas values recently. Even (especially?) in the big cities with liberal judges and district attorneys who will prosecute you, people are getting fed up with crime. I might be more willing than most to put my faith in a Texas jury.

[Ruark]

On another point, several people have mentioned the jury and how weird their rulings might be. I think we are seeing a a return to much more traditional Texas values recently. Even (especially?) in the big cities with liberal judges and district attorneys who will prosecute you, people are getting fed up with crime. I might be more willing than most to put my faith in a Texas jury.

Unfortunately, this is another factor to consider during that split-second when you're deciding whether or not to shoot. In some liberal, gun-hating cities, e.g. Austin, you might very well be indicted for a serious crime even in a clear self defense case. I can see a pink-haired tattooed liberal Austin jury deciding that you murdered that poor thief because he was running away with your wallet. Or at least, a DA taking it to a grand jury and making your life miserable for awhile.

In contrast, in other communities (e.g. I used to live down the road from Gatesville), especially some smaller rural towns, the local sheriff would slap you on the back and say "hey, good shot, buddy."

[Rafe]

On another point, several people have mentioned the jury and how weird their rulings might be. I think we are seeing a a return to much more traditional Texas values recently. Even (especially?) in the big cities with liberal judges and district attorneys who will prosecute you, people are getting fed up with crime. I might be more willing than most to put my faith in a Texas jury.

Unfortunately, this is another factor to consider during that split-second when you're deciding whether or not to shoot. In some liberal, gun-hating cities, e.g. Austin, you might very well be indicted for a serious crime even in a clear self defense case. I can see a pink-haired tattooed liberal Austin jury deciding that you murdered that poor thief because he was running away with your wallet. Or at least, a DA taking it to a grand jury and making your life miserable for awhile.

In contrast, in other communities (e.g. I used to live down the road from Gatesville), especially some smaller rural towns, the local sheriff would slap you on the back and say "hey, good shot, buddy."

Considering that two-thirds (well, technically 65.8%) of the entire population of Texas live in just four metropolitan areas (DFW, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin), that is a consideration for most people.

To one of Steve's points, when I mentioned the contents of a wallet I didn't bother to include photos as something worth sending a bullet over. Possibly a few decades ago, but it never dawned on me that anyone would keep original photographs in a wallet where they'll get damaged and abused from just day-to-day carry. It costs very little to have original photos scanned (and even retouched) and have copies made if you want a physical copy in your wallet (mine are digitized and on my phone; I can also carry a lot more of them that way, and they're backed up to the cloud automatically). If a shoot ever got to a jury trial and protection of original photos was a rationale for the defense, it isn't difficult for me to imagine a prosecutor asking why, if the value of the photos was equivalent to a human life, that you didn't spend $5 and have FedEx Office make a copy for you.

I'm honestly not trying to take a devil's advocate position here. But in the described scenario, with no other elaboration or clarification (for example, the scenario says nothing about whether other family members are with me; whether I'm male or female, or 75 years old or 35; where the robbery takes place, e.g., crowds or no crowds, quick access to cover or not, day or night, surveillance cameras or not; item stolen was just a wallet, so I can go by only what I carry; no demands for your car keys, your cell phone, or anything else; as presented, the bad guy already has the wallet and is fleeing; as presented, there is no mention of the bad guy being a continued threat, e.g., he hasn't turned back around to look at you or raised his gun back in your direction) then, no, I don't believe this would end up being a justifiable shoot.

In the real world, I think the point would likely be moot, anyway, because the robbery was, statistically, probably in a parking lot or parking garage (and probably in one of those four metropolitan areas) and, by the time you make a decision (remember, you're under stress and have evidently taken no action to prevent or interrupt the robbery), by the time you access your firearm and get a good sight picture which will allow you be certain of a hit and no stray rounds (adrenaline will have your front sight hopping around), the guy has probably already turned behind a line of cars or made some other move that prevents him from being in your stable line of sight. Even if he's stupid enough to run in a straight line, remember the Tueller Drill? The guy would be around 21 feet from you in 1.5 seconds, 14 or 15 yards in less than 3 seconds. If you're Dave Sevigny waiting for the buzzer to start a course of fire at the USPSA Nationals, you're good to go. If you're the Average Joe "Responsible Person" who's just been traumatized by an armed robbery and experiencing an adrenaline dump and sensory compression, you may already be out of your league. If you can draw, aim, fire, and successfully hit a running suspect in less than 3 seconds under stress, I'd also expect the prosecutor to question intent: whether you had already made up your mind you would shoot before the bad guy ever turned around (and remember that where 66% of the Texas population lives, there are cameras all over the place).

No, as described, I think there's enough in the penal code to make something like this at least a "gray area" shoot. The stipulations in the penal code may prove to be a defense to prosecution, but with no additional scenario information to go on, I still think you take the ride and that (for at least two-thirds of us) the DA sends it to a grand jury. Just my non-professional opinion only. I think it's a different story if you shoot while attempting to prevent the robbery or during its commission.

It would be interesting to turn this around and ask our certified LTC instructors how they would respond to this question while teaching a class. "If someone robs me at gunpoint, takes only my wallet, and then turns around and runs away, is it okay for me to shoot him in the back?"

[Paladin]

One thing to consider regarding a wallet is that it is standard procedure for violent criminals to threaten you with follow on violence. Since they have your ID with your home address on it, they have both the means and motive to further victimize you and your family at home.

One way to deal with that is to keep your cash in a money clip and hand over the cash clip instead of your wallet with ID.

Certainly situational awareness and avoidance are primary tools. If you find yourself in this unfortunate position my advice is to fully cooperate right up until the time you don't. The OODA loop tells us being able to see, understand, make good decisions and act with both speed and surprise are the keys to victory. Solid training and things like proper force-on-force training are really helpful to find your strengths and weaknesses and know what will work for you and what adds risk.

[Mel]

One thing to consider regarding a wallet is that it is standard procedure for violent criminals to threaten you with follow on violence. Since they have your ID with your home address on it, they have both the means and motive to further victimize you and your family at home.
One way to deal with that is to keep your cash in a money clip and hand over the cash clip instead of your wallet with ID.
Certainly situational awareness and avoidance are primary tools. If you find yourself in this unfortunate position my advice is to fully cooperate right up until the time you don't. The OODA loop tells us being able to see, understand, make good decisions and act with both speed and surprise are the keys to victory. Solid training and things like proper force-on-force training are really helpful to find your strengths and weaknesses and know what will work for you and what adds risk.

Not sure this is going to work. The BG is probably going to demand the wallet, thinking that you probably have more cash and credit cards in it.

An alternative might be to keep all your ID and CCs in a separate pocket, and only money in the wallet.