Shoplifter Sues Springs Liquor Store Owner Who Shot Him

[Teh One Who Knocks]

CBS 4 Denver


COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) – A shoplifter who was shot in the face after stealing a bottle of vodka from a Colorado Springs liquor store is suing the shop owner.

The Gazette reports that the shoplifter is seeking at least $100,000 for pain and suffering. Bryson Adrian Dewberry was shot in the jaw two years ago by Chang Ho Yi, the owner of Austin Bluffs Plaza Liquor.

According to a lawsuit filed in early October, Yi witnessed the 2010 theft and pursued Dewberry out of his store with a loaded .357 revolver, which fired as Dewberry was in the backseat of a getaway car.

Dewberry’s lawsuit alleges that Yi behaved “negligently and recklessly.” Yi was initially arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, but a grand jury declined to charge him.

[redred]

[Loser]

Yea, Yi deserved jail time.

[Acid Trip]

Dewberry’s lawsuit alleges that Yi behaved “negligently and recklessly.” Yi was initially arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, but a grand jury declined to charge him.

Says the lawyer of a person who was negligent and reckless by robbing the liquor store in the first place.

[RBP]

Oh geesh.

[Loser]

Here's the difference between this and the security guard thread.

Here, no one was in danger. Period. The thief was already fleeing.

Guard thread, the brawd tried to run the guard over.


It comes down to this. If you believe your life is being threatened, you have the option to protect it by using force, if and only if, you cannot or don't have the option to flea. <----This is the majority of states.

You have idiot states like florida and texas with stand your ground laws that are asinine in my opinion, but we won't get into that argument.

[FBD]

So at what point within the law is it ok for a business owner to protect his business?

[Loser]

When his, or his customers life is in danger.

Outside of that, he can't, and to be perfectly honest, shouldn't.


Everything, other then cash, is insured, or can be a tax write off. So his loss is nil.

Now if he refuses to give up the cash, and is threatened by the robber, then by all means, plug the idiot, but for a 20$ bottle of vodka that is a tax write off? Ya, he deserved to go to jail in my opinion.

[Acid Trip]

When his, or his customers life is in danger.

Outside of that, he can't, and to be perfectly honest, shouldn't.


Everything, other then cash, is insured, or can be a tax write off. So his loss is nil.

Now if he refuses to give up the cash, and is threatened by the robber, then by all means, plug the idiot, but for a 20$ bottle of vodka that is a tax write off? Ya, he deserved to go to jail in my opinion.

I disagree completely because what you said is politically correct nonsense.

Since it was a $20 vodka (which was probably insured) you say the store owner should have just accepted that fact he was ROBBED by CRIMINALS. Never mind the fact the CRIMINALS started the incident by BREAKING THE LAW right?

Fuck that. Shoot a CRIMINAL who ROBBED you and it sends a nice message other potential CRIMINALS. Let them get away with it and they'll be back later.

[KevinD]

I agree with AT on this one. Don't do the crime if you can't pay the fine....lol

[Loser]

I disagree completely because what you said is politically correct nonsense.

Since it was a $20 vodka (which was probably insured) you say the store owner should have just accepted that fact he was ROBBED by CRIMINALS. Never mind the fact the CRIMINALS started the incident by BREAKING THE LAW right?

Fuck that. Shoot a CRIMINAL who ROBBED you and it sends a nice message other potential CRIMINALS. Let them get away with it and they'll be back later.

And if you did this, you would end up in prison.

So if your scenario ever plays out, and you are in some super max getting fucked in the ass, remember...I told you so

Remember the home owner that chased the burglar that left his property and shot him? How'd that play out for the home owner?

[Loser]

http://www.news10.net/news/local/sto...storyid=129431
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/nh-h...ring-burglary/
http://heraldnet.com/article/20091119/NEWS01/911199996

yea...

The law always works for ya

[Acid Trip]

http://www.news10.net/news/local/sto...storyid=129431
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/nh-h...ring-burglary/
http://heraldnet.com/article/20091119/NEWS01/911199996

yea...

The law always works for ya

#1 link an old story, it's not a homeowner, he used an Ax not a gun. It's not even an accurate story/link to be honest. Here is the real story:

http://blogs.sacbee.com/crime/archiv...and-trial.html

#2 link is New Hampshire and they are backwards anyways. He never went to jail btw.

#3 link is way more complex then you are making it out to be.

[Hal-9000]

first off, I believe that store owners and home owners have the right to shoot intruders/thieves.....believe it or not


These pursuing guys however seem to be on the slippery slope. If we allow people to take any sort of shot they want, then we're leaving the law in their hands to interpret...and I don't agree with that at all.


so as much as it pains me, I agree with Loser on this one

[Loser]

The fact is, in "most" states, pursuing criminals AFTER they have left and are no longer a threat, and then shooting them, is illegal.

Read a few castle docterines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine

Good page to read.