THREE SIDES OF A SHOOTING INCIDENT

A friend and graduate from Chicago passes along this story: http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/news/kadner/28958006-452/kadner-concealed-carry-shooting-incident-raises-questions.html#.U92YF_n6N7s .

An as yet unidentified law-abiding citizen in his fifties (erroneously said to be 86 in early reports) fires two warning shots at a fleeing armed robber.  A police officer chasing the same robber breaks off the pursuit and takes cover, thinking he’s the one coming under fire.  The suspect is captured anyway, and no one’s blood is shed.

In the story linked above, a retired detective calls the armed citizen an idiot for doing what he did, pointing out that among other things the officer could have shot him.  But the investigating officers, and their department, and the prosecutor’s office take the armed citizen’s side and determine no charges will be brought.

And now comes a third side of the story, that the citizen saw the robber run out of the store, saw the officer come around the other side of the building, and believed the robber was about to ambush and murder the cop.  The citizen is said to have fired to break the ambush and save the officer.

Moral of the story: wait for all sides’ viewpoints to come in before forming an opinion on what happened.  And there may be more information yet to come regarding this particular incident.

Discussion invited.

Share or Bookmark