Wal-Mart Pepper Sprayer May Not Be Charged

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Wal-Mart Pepper Sprayer May Not Be Charged

image

The woman who pepper-sprayed 20 people at a Los Angeles Wal-Mart may not face criminal charges because the police say she might have fired in self defense.

There are few things that leave my faith in humanity ruptured and bleeding on the floor as immediately and effectively as Black Friday. I didn't hear any reports of anyone being killed in this year's quest for an extra ten percent off the already low, low price on cheaply-made consumer goods that nobody really needs anyway, but that doesn't mean that there wasn't plenty of appallingly bad behavior on display.

The 2011 poster child for "What is Wrong With You People?" has to be the woman who fired pepper spray in a crowded Wal-Mart in Los Angeles. An estimated 20 people were affected by the attack, although fortunately nobody was seriously injured; she fired the pepper spray multiple times "to gain preferred access to a variety of locations in the store," according to Los Angeles Fire Department Captain James Carson, who added, "She was competitive shopping."

But now the police say that initial reports of the woman using the weapon to punch holes through the crowd in order to get the best deals may have been incorrect, and that she may not be charged with any criminal offenses because it's possible that used the spray in order to avoid being killed.

"What am I going to charge her with?" said LAPD Detective Michael Fesperman. "There was a stampede at Wal-Mart from people getting Xbox games for half off. There was no control. People were getting stampeded and trampled. There were people screaming, yelling that they were being trampled or crushed. This woman may have fired her pepper spray in self-defense."

It's still appalling, in other words, but possibly for different reasons than were first thought. Police spent the weekend reviewing YouTube videos and security footage taken from the store and are in the process of conducting interviews with witnesses and victims; a formal decision about whether or not charges will be filed is expected by Wednesday.

Source: MercuryNews.com

Permalink

No wonder corporations feel that they're above everyone. Must be one hell of a power trip to turn everyone into complete maniacs by reducing prices on crap for a day.

OLD man. obviously not trying to shop lift. gonna be charged with it. YOUNG woman who may have been out to intentionally harm people selfishly. not gonna be charged. makes perfect sense to me.

Anthony Wells:
OLD man. obviously not trying to shop lift. gonna be charged with it. YOUNG woman who may have been out to intentionally harm people selfishly. not gonna be charged. makes perfect sense to me.

1. The old man did shoplift, by the letter of the law. Regardless of intent what he did is considered shoplifting by Arizona state law. No, you don't have to leave the store for it to be shoplifting. Actually, if a shoplifter leaves the store premises with the stolen merch, then they can't legally be stopped. Also, no criminal charges have been brought against him yet since the incident is still under investigation. (That last sentence is REALLY important)

2. The key phrase there is 'may have been'. While 20 'hits' is a bit excessive, I could believe that she did it in self defense. Black Friday is the day when everyone goes absolutely batshit.

If it was in self-defense, then she should definitely not be charged. Interesting how if one aspect of a story is revealed, your judgement changes.

Phhh, if that was in Britain then there would of been a complete storm around this story....and law suit courts.....and possible racial motivation investigations......and LIIIEEEES!

It isn't what it looks like. They had mescaline in their Balls!

Andy Chalk:
"What am I going to charge her with?" said LAPD Detective Michael Fesperman. "There was a stampede at Wal-Mart from people getting Xbox games for half off. There was no control. People were getting stampeded and trampled. There were people screaming, yelling that they were being trampled or crushed. This woman may have fired her pepper spray in self-defense."

You'd think someone who worked with the LAPD would be well acquainted with phrases like "excessive force" and "criminal assault"

henritje:
she could have NOT gone to some shitty deal and avoid getting trampled.
that would have avoided allot of painful eyes!

BUT XBOX! <=(

Of course SHE won't be charged. It's no secret that the justice system is gender biased.

she could have NOT gone to some shitty deal and avoid getting trampled.
that would have avoided allot of painful eyes!

Why should he be charged?! it seems that pepper spraying people in America is a national sport.

Kopikatsu:

Anthony Wells:
OLD man. obviously not trying to shop lift. gonna be charged with it. YOUNG woman who may have been out to intentionally harm people selfishly. not gonna be charged. makes perfect sense to me.

1. The old man did shoplift, by the letter of the law. Regardless of intent what he did is considered shoplifting by Arizona state law. No, you don't have to leave the store for it to be shoplifting. Actually, if a shoplifter leaves the store premises with the stolen merch, then they can't legally be stopped. Also, no criminal charges have been brought against him yet since the incident is still under investigation. (That last sentence is REALLY important)

2. The key phrase there is 'may have been'. While 20 'hits' is a bit excessive, I could believe that she did it in self defense. Black Friday is the day when everyone goes absolutely batshit.

1. point taken. stupid as hell laws but point taken.
2. again point taken. but i doubt 20 people needed to be sprayed.
Conclusion: Arizona needs better shoplifting laws and this woman probably went a bit overboard but might be innocent.

I'm not fooled. This can not have been self-defense.

So wait this lady was probably self defense but that old man was definately stealing video games?

Anthony Wells:

Kopikatsu:

Anthony Wells:
OLD man. obviously not trying to shop lift. gonna be charged with it. YOUNG woman who may have been out to intentionally harm people selfishly. not gonna be charged. makes perfect sense to me.

1. The old man did shoplift, by the letter of the law. Regardless of intent what he did is considered shoplifting by Arizona state law. No, you don't have to leave the store for it to be shoplifting. Actually, if a shoplifter leaves the store premises with the stolen merch, then they can't legally be stopped. Also, no criminal charges have been brought against him yet since the incident is still under investigation. (That last sentence is REALLY important)

2. The key phrase there is 'may have been'. While 20 'hits' is a bit excessive, I could believe that she did it in self defense. Black Friday is the day when everyone goes absolutely batshit.

1. point taken. stupid as hell laws but point taken.
2. again point taken. but i doubt 20 people needed to be sprayed.
Conclusion: Arizona needs better shoplifting laws and this woman probably went a bit overboard but might be innocent.

If she went overboard, she isn't innocent.

Sweet.. so next year we can bring a tazers and state it was in self defense..

I waz gun'git stampeeded! i feered fer mah laife!

wooty:
Phhh, if that was in Britain then there would of been a complete storm around this story....and law suit courts.....and possible racial motivation investigations......and LIIIEEEES!

Where in Britain have you been?

If that happened in this town people would be complaining there was no iron bar used and no one ended up in intensive care.

In other words, it's not news worthy in a northern town unless it involves extreme violence and/or a hit and run involving an old lady on a motorised wheelchair "running over" a drunk bloke .... which was one of the most hilarious stories i've read in the Burnley Express.

Crono1973:

Anthony Wells:

Kopikatsu:

1. The old man did shoplift, by the letter of the law. Regardless of intent what he did is considered shoplifting by Arizona state law. No, you don't have to leave the store for it to be shoplifting. Actually, if a shoplifter leaves the store premises with the stolen merch, then they can't legally be stopped. Also, no criminal charges have been brought against him yet since the incident is still under investigation. (That last sentence is REALLY important)

2. The key phrase there is 'may have been'. While 20 'hits' is a bit excessive, I could believe that she did it in self defense. Black Friday is the day when everyone goes absolutely batshit.

1. point taken. stupid as hell laws but point taken.
2. again point taken. but i doubt 20 people needed to be sprayed.
Conclusion: Arizona needs better shoplifting laws and this woman probably went a bit overboard but might be innocent.

If she went overboard, she isn't innocent.

not the point i was trying to make. i know she isnt if she did. thats why i put probably went overboard but MAYBE she's innocent. maybe she didnt go overboard. if she did they better charge her..

You couldn't pay me enough to go shopping on Black Friday, let alone at a Wal-mart. In the words of Tommy Lee Jones (paraphrased) from Men in Black:

"A person is smart. People are stupid, dangerous, panicky animals, and you know it".

Rawne1980:

wooty:
Phhh, if that was in Britain then there would of been a complete storm around this story....and law suit courts.....and possible racial motivation investigations......and LIIIEEEES!

Where in Britain have you been?

Bit of lingering rage from earlier there, but I'm in Southport where there was some ruckus on saturday night, some guy who happened to be Latvian, got beat up outside a nightclub and claimed it was racially motivated....

All well and good except the guy who hit him was much too pissed to even realize he was human. So naturally he's suing

Nouw:
If it was in self-defense, then she should definitely not be charged. Interesting how if one aspect of a story is revealed, your judgement changes.

She may not be charged by the law but she's still going to be sued by everyone she sprayed.
I don't care how much money she saved. It's not going to make up for how much she'll lose...just in legal fees...for one afternoon.

Simple:

If she was competitive shopping, she needs to be charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon.
If she was defending herself, she needs to be charged with Breach of the Peace.

Walmart need to be charged with numerous Health/Safety offences though, because I doubt there's been an H&S Audit on the probability of Potential Assault within a Riot situation though.

Yeah, Laws can work both ways.

The_root_of_all_evil:
Simple:

If she was competitive shopping, she needs to be charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon.
If she was defending herself, she needs to be charged with Breach of the Peace.

Walmart need to be charged with numerous Health/Safety offences though, because I doubt there's been an H&S Audit on the probability of Potential Assault within a Riot situation though.

Yeah, Laws can work both ways.

I don't know...depends on the situation.

I mean, people do literally get trampled to death and stabbed over the Black Friday sales. Which is ridiculous and honestly, I have no idea why it happens. Still, it does happen.

Also, the English 'breach of the peace' and the America' breach of the peace' are different. In England, it refers to riotous behaviors while in America it's just retardation. (Being drunk in public falls under breach of the peace, for instance).

'Course, you could be right and pepper spraying crowds might fall under the American version. I don't know.

Edit: I don't think pepper spray is a 'deadly weapon', though.

Crono1973:
If she went overboard, she isn't innocent.

Depends on what you mean by "innocent." If she went overboard defending herself, she is innocent of "spraying people to get to the XBox deal." She may not be innocent in the sense of "having done nothing wrong," but there's a big difference between accidental excess and malicious assault.

In the end, it's not about whether or not she did or didn't. It's about whether or not it can be proven that she did. And the cops are saying, "In the end, we probably can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. It's not worth the money and paperwork to make this a criminal case."

Now, a civil case? That's another matter entirely. And separate from the cops...

Andy Chalk:
snip

What I like about stories like this are how people are either going, "Stupid police acting without thinking, typical psycho assholes," or when something like this comes to light it's, "Stupid police thinking about it too much, they should just arrest her, she obviously did it."

Kopikatsu:

I mean, people do literally get trampled to death and stabbed over the Black Friday sales. Which is ridiculous and honestly, I have no idea why it happens. Still, it does happen.

*KLAXON*

One person died from being trampled, one person died of a heart condition. All the rest are deaths that happened to be near Black Friday.(And that's in the entire catalogue of Black Friday's)

Edit: I don't think pepper spray is a 'deadly weapon', though.

'tis if you have asthma or are...in the middle of a crowd fighting for air.

Without any witnesses there's no way to tell if she's innocent or guilty. Maybe charges should be levied against Wal Mart for not handling these Black Friday sales properly. I for one think they should, inhuman bastards.

The_root_of_all_evil:
Simple:

If she was competitive shopping, she needs to be charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon.
If she was defending herself, she needs to be charged with Breach of the Peace.

Walmart need to be charged with numerous Health/Safety offences though, because I doubt there's been an H&S Audit on the probability of Potential Assault within a Riot situation though.

Yeah, Laws can work both ways.

Uhm... Is pepper spray considered a deadly weapon in your country (not mocking you, just asking)?

The_root_of_all_evil:

Kopikatsu:

I mean, people do literally get trampled to death and stabbed over the Black Friday sales. Which is ridiculous and honestly, I have no idea why it happens. Still, it does happen.

*KLAXON*

One person died from being trampled, one person died of a heart condition. All the rest are deaths that happened to be near Black Friday.(And that's in the entire catalogue of Black Friday's)

http://www.uncoveror.com/blackfriday.htm
http://www.ranker.com/list/13-most-brutal-black-friday-injuries-and-deaths/john-barryman

Not exactly.

BrionJames:
Without any witnesses there's no way to tell if she's innocent or guilty. Maybe charges should be levied against Wal Mart for not handling these Black Friday sales properly. I for one think they should, inhuman bastards.

If by 'not handling Black Friday sales properly' you mean that they don't have full scale riot squads armed with shotguns, tasers, and teargas, then no, I suppose they didn't handle the sales properly.

A few years back, people actually broke the doors to a Wal-Mart down in order to get inside. (And trampled one of the employees to death, then complained when told that they had to leave because they murdered someone).

The only solution is to just not have Black Friday at all. Cancel the goddamn holiday. It's obvious that people can't handle it.

Kopikatsu:

Anthony Wells:
OLD man. obviously not trying to shop lift. gonna be charged with it. YOUNG woman who may have been out to intentionally harm people selfishly. not gonna be charged. makes perfect sense to me.

1. The old man did shoplift, by the letter of the law. Regardless of intent what he did is considered shoplifting by Arizona state law. No, you don't have to leave the store for it to be shoplifting. Actually, if a shoplifter leaves the store premises with the stolen merch, then they can't legally be stopped. Also, no criminal charges have been brought against him yet since the incident is still under investigation. (That last sentence is REALLY important)

2. The key phrase there is 'may have been'. While 20 'hits' is a bit excessive, I could believe that she did it in self defense. Black Friday is the day when everyone goes absolutely batshit.

arizona's state laws need changing, that's just plain backwards.

winter2:
Sweet.. so next year we can bring a tazers and state it was in self defense..

I waz gun'git stampeeded! i feered fer mah laife!

Ahahahaha! Dude, you made my day!

Z

I don't even have to read much before it makes me sick of how certain places in our society find this acceptable... People that go this nuts need to be put down. I know I sound extreme saying that and I admit I do not truly mean it, but it does make me think it may not be such a bad idea...

Kopikatsu:

BrionJames:
Without any witnesses there's no way to tell if she's innocent or guilty. Maybe charges should be levied against Wal Mart for not handling these Black Friday sales properly. I for one think they should, inhuman bastards.

If by 'not handling Black Friday sales properly' you mean that they don't have full scale riot squads armed with shotguns, tasers, and teargas, then no, I suppose they didn't handle the sales properly.

A few years back, people actually broke the doors to a Wal-Mart down in order to get inside. (And trampled one of the employees to death, then complained when told that they had to leave because they murdered someone).

The only solution is to just not have Black Friday at all. Cancel the goddamn holiday. It's obvious that people can't handle it.

what the hell
that actually happened.
Who can't wait for opening. What the hell is wrong with people.
Im sad now.

kayisking:
Uhm... Is pepper spray considered a deadly weapon in your country (not mocking you, just asking)?

At the moment, peanuts are considered a deadly weapon here. ;)

Given the confines of where it was used, I think "potentially fatal" would fit.

Kopikatsu:

http://www.ranker.com/list/13-most-brutal-black-friday-injuries-and-deaths/john-barryman
Not exactly.

1/ Mentioned 2/Not appropriate 3/ Unrelated 4/ Not appropriate 5/Paralysed 6-13/ Not appropriate (usual frenzy)

Uncoverer has no sources at all and is probably a FUD site.

So, 2 deaths, 2 tramples and 1 paralysis in 36 years.

wooty:

Rawne1980:

wooty:
Phhh, if that was in Britain then there would of been a complete storm around this story....and law suit courts.....and possible racial motivation investigations......and LIIIEEEES!

Where in Britain have you been?

Bit of lingering rage from earlier there, but I'm in Southport where there was some ruckus on saturday night, some guy who happened to be Latvian, got beat up outside a nightclub and claimed it was racially motivated....

All well and good except the guy who hit him was much too pissed to even realize he was human. So naturally he's suing

Well of corse people are going to use the race card if they can... This brings up another problem that goes a bit off-topic... Frivolous lawsuits that waste peoples time, tax money, and in some cases ruin a victim of some suits lives...

Dear Humanity:
For fuck's sake, stop making me lose my faith in you every 7 minutes. Seriously it's not good for my already dwindling sanity stop it.
Lots of love vicious hatred,
Mrmac

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here