• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Enraged store owner flips out on skateboarder, and calls police

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Apart from the screaming and touching the thug, he's absolutely 100% right. Unfortunately, his having touched the sleaze might make things work out badly from him.

If the dirtbag had been trying to evade a citizen's arrest, depending on the jurisdiction, the citizen could've lawfully restrained him, but the video does not show that there was an evasion or that the touching was restraint.

I hope the skateboarder is convicted of malicious mischief (to which he stupidly admits, on the video, having repeatedly committed).
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Who took the video? Seems to me that the guy verbally and physically assaulted the skateboarder and illegally detained him.

Based on the last few minutes, I'd say it was a friend of the thug who took the video.

I don't know the local laws, but the store owner was almost surely allowed to detain the criminal. He witnessed the commission of a crime: malicious mischief.
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
Based on the last few minutes, I'd say it was a friend of the thug who took the video.

I don't know the local laws, but the store owner was almost surely allowed to detain the criminal. He witnessed the commission of a crime: malicious mischief.

I would hope that you would agree with me that the actions of the store owner were "over the top" and that he acted foolishly. I suspect that we haven't heard the last of this issue ... If I were the kid, I'd file charges.

Bottom line, it looks like this was a setup to get the store owner to do exactly what he did.
 

aadvark

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,597
Location
, ,
Given the others Person age, just as much could have been Accomplished less the Yelling.
 
Last edited:

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
Given the others Person age, just as much could have been Accomplished less the Yelling.

The store owner probably felt that if he didn't come across so aggressive, that the skater would have just walked away before the police arrived. Not saying that he didn't go over the top here, but that was probably why he acted the way he did.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
The store owner probably felt that if he didn't come across so aggressive, that the skater would have just walked away before the police arrived. Not saying that he didn't go over the top here, but that was probably why he acted the way he did.

I agree with that assessment completely. The yelling was not unlawful. The touching might be. However, I see two things helping the store owner out in court. One, he could make the claim (possibly successfully, possibly not) that the thug was starting to move away, and the touching was by way of restraint. Two, the camera seems to indicate touching, but the store owner could claim that he came close, out of frustration, to putting his hands on the thug, but restrained himself. This last claim is supported by the thug not saying anything along the lines of, "Don't touch me," or, "Stop hitting me."

The thug deserves a short time in jail, a fine, and a criminal record. The store owner deserves a brush with the criminal justice system, a close call with a conviction, and a stern warning from the judge that citizen's arrest is OK, but don't let it get that close to vigilantism again.
 

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
So sick of this punks damaging private business and the cops could care less in most cases(around here) and honestly if they are damaging your property you should be able to hold the little mattress stains still the cops come. These little turds deserve every hit they get from damaging peoples private property.
 
Last edited:

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
He had no business touching that kid. The kid would have been justified if he had fought back and decked him in the face, the kid was just standing there then the old guy goes all psycho and grabs him. Unnecessary force plain and simple. I woulda clocked em if I were the kid. Though, I don't go around vandalizing property, so I really wouldn't have to worry about it in the first place. lol
 

JollyLBK

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
16
Location
Tucson, AZ
Sorry but if I was that kid and that storekeeper was touching me and screaming in my face.. Mr. Skateboard would have gotten real close and personal with his noggin.
 

Kirbinator

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
903
Location
Middle of the map, Alabama
Were I the boarder, I would have gladly paid for the bush, taken the ride, wrap whatever... but the police would have found the shop owner on the ground restrained with me telling the cop: "This guy assaulted me, we have it on camera, but he wants to file a report about his plant."

I can empathize with both parties, but.. he shouldn't have been messing with the plant.

I do find it a bit odd the comment about the skate park.. around here, they are free and public... it's like being told to go to the gun range for OCing...
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
We should go to an appropriate place to use our firearms and not destroy private property to satisfy our need to use them.

On the touching: the video seems to indicate that the store owner may have put his hands on the thug, but does not clearly show such. The thug does not react as though he has been struck or grabbed in any way.

If I am the store owner, my defense to any such charge is that I believed the thug was trying to evade the citizen's arrest and move away. I got really close and strongly considered grabbing or hitting him. He seemed to resign himself to the arrest, so I thought better of it and did not touch him.

I don't think that it could be proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt that the store owner assaulted the thug.

One more thing: I don't know the law where this happened, but, in Alabama, appropriate force may be used to effect a citizen's arrest. (The flip-side is that there is no law against resisting citizen's arrest and appropriate force may be used to resist under the legal protection of self-defense.)

The store owner let his justifiable anger cause him to go a bit over-the-top, but I don't think he broke any laws. The thug, on the other hand, stupidly admits, on camera, to having broken the law several times.
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
Were I the boarder, I would have gladly paid for the bush, taken the ride, wrap whatever... but the police would have found the shop owner on the ground restrained with me telling the cop: "This guy assaulted me, we have it on camera, but he wants to file a report about his plant."

I can empathize with both parties, but.. he shouldn't have been messing with the plant.

I do find it a bit odd the comment about the skate park.. around here, they are free and public... it's like being told to go to the gun range for OCing...

IMO walking around with your skateboard outside of a skatepark= OCing

Riding your skateboard on private property = discharging
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
On the touching: the video seems to indicate that the store owner may have put his hands on the thug, but does not clearly show such. The thug does not react as though he has been struck or grabbed in any way.
It's quite obvious that the enraged lunatic grabbed the kid and shoved him. This is just a desperate attempt to defend the indefensible simply because you happen to agree that the kid should have been arrested. Despite the fact that the store owner's actions were unjustified.

If I am the store owner, my defense to any such charge is that I believed the thug was trying to evade the citizen's arrest and move away. I got really close and strongly considered grabbing or hitting him. He seemed to resign himself to the arrest, so I thought better of it and did not touch him.
A defense that would be easily destroyed as any reasonable person can plainly see that the kid did not move until after the store owner grabbed him, at which point the kid clearly struggles with the store owner.

I don't think that it could be proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt that the store owner assaulted the thug.
Well, good thing you're not a lawyer then, eh? :rolleyes: That was a clear case of assault, only those wearing blinders whom are predisposed to side with the store owner would say otherwise. A predisposition clearly evidenced by the fact you continue to call the kid a 'thug' despite the fact that he did not act violently.
 
Last edited:
Top