This incident occurred last Friday, and the surveillance footage has been making its rounds on the internet. Today I want to discuss whether or not the stabbing was justified. I am not a lawyer, so these are just my opinions.
View this post on Instagram
First, I’ll start with the details of the incident. Just before 3:30 PM last Friday, two masked men walked into a Las Vegas smoke shop. The store owner walks to the counter to help them and realizes they have masks on. He asked them why they had masks on, and after getting no response, he asked them to leave. At this point, the two suspects are trespassing. At this point, the store owner armed himself with a knife next to the register.
According to Las Vegas Defense Group, in Nevada, if the trespasser is posing an immediate threat of injury, then the property owner or tenant can act in self-defense with reasonable and proportional force.
So at this point, it would seem that he could use “reasonable and proportional force” to remove them from the store but did it warrant deadly force at this point? At this point, I don’t believe so. He also has the right to protect his property from being stolen, but I don’t think the use of deadly force is justified.
Then one of the suspects grabs a cup with some bills and chance and starts to walk out of the store. The store owner then asks him to leave the change and take the bills. That suspect then comes back to the counter to steal more. As he steals something else, the other suspect jumps the counter.
That’s when the store owner stabbed the suspect, who jumped over the counter seven times, hitting him in the neck, leg, and back. The wounded suspect called his mother and told her he was going to die. The store owner then called the police.
As of this writing, the two suspects have been arrested. The wounded suspect survived the stabbing. And the store owner has not been charged.
So do I think the store owner was justified in using deadly force? Again, I am not a lawyer, but I’d have to say no. The Nevada state stature of justified homicide is defined as:
Killing in self-defense. If a person kills another in self-defense, it must appear that:
1. The danger was so urgent and pressing that, in order to save the person’s own life, or to prevent the person from receiving great bodily harm, the killing of the other was absolutely necessary; and
2. The person killed was the assailant, or that the slayer had really, and in good faith, endeavored to decline any further struggle before the mortal blow was given.
By looking at the video, the suspect that jumped the counter directed his attention to stealing something from behind the counter. He didn’t seem to make any threats toward the store owner himself. The other suspect was already on his way out of the store at this point as well. There also were no weapons displayed by the suspects. They didn’t say they had a weapon or make any threats.
The store owner was quoted as saying, “I assumed they had a firearm” and that he never saw a visible firearm but felt “I couldn’t take it anymore.” Assuming someone has a weapon is insufficient to justify using deadly force. Nevada Revised Status 200.130 states:
Bare fear insufficient to justify killing; reasonable fear required; rebuttable presumption under certain circumstances.
1. A bare fear of any of the offenses mentioned in NRS 200.120, to prevent which the homicide is alleged to have been committed, is not sufficient to justify the killing. It must appear that the circumstances were sufficient to excite the fears of a reasonable person and that the person killing really acted under the influence of those fears and not in a spirit of revenge.
I posted this video on my YouTube channel and Instagram. Many of the comments are mixed with people agreeing with my analysis that he wasn’t justified in the use of deadly force. And then there’s the other side of people saying the suspect got what he deserved or the usual, “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”
I can understand being fed up with people robbing your store. I read somewhere that he may have been robbed recently before this occurred. I also understand people watching the video and being fed up with criminals getting away with crimes like this. But you have to know the laws if you are going to use deadly force. I think the use of pepper spray would have been a better choice.
I also think it was a bad idea for the store owner to post an “Ask Me Anything” thread on Reddit, which has since been deleted. But you can still see many of the posts here. He said his lawyer said it was okay for him to post it. I’d have to disagree.
In one post, he stated that he bought a Glock 19 to defend himself if anyone comes back to retaliate. I’d highly recommend he get training on both how to use the gun and the self-defense laws in the state of Nevada.
“in the heat of the moment i had no idea what was going on, clearly you can see in the video what he was grabbing for but keep in mind I had a lot of adrenaline and it was a fight or flight response.”
I think stating that he didn’t know what was going on and that you can clearly see the suspect was grabbing merchandise (and not moving toward the store owner or threatening him) was a bad idea.
I will keep an eye on this one to see what happens with the store owner. I bet he’s at home hoping he doesn’t get charged with assault with a deadly weapon which is a class B felony in Nevada and is punishable by a sentence of 1 to 6 years in state prison and a fine of up to $50,00.00. If he is, I think his lawyer will have a hard time proving this stabbing was justified.
If you take anything from this story, it should be that you MUST know your state’s laws on self-defense.
I’d like to hear your opinions on this as well. Let me know what you think in the comments below.
I think its dicey to say the least. Me personally I would be scared out of my mind if two masked men walked into my store. So I can say for sure I can identify with him being scared. Whether he actually was or not we will likely never know, but its more than plausible. As for him attacking first…well again if you are scared to death your point of view changes. What looks so readily apparent to us after the fact (a kid trying to steal some crap from behind the counter) could have easily looked very different to the guy standing behind the counter in real time facing off with two masked robbers. I would assumed one or both was armed as well. So why wait until they kill you? He didn’t go to their house and murder them. He was where he was supposed to be, doing what he was supposed to be doing, when two masked men entered his store in a menacing manner. Under NRS 207.190, the Nevada crime of coercion is defined as intentionally using intimidation, deprivation, or violence to compel another person to do something that he or she is not legally obligated to do. Prosecutors may file this charge as a misdemeanor or a felony. I would say its reasonable that he felt the need to defend himself is within the realm of being plausible.
This VIOLENT INCIDENT. has just been eating at me for days. Unless your a Extremist Left Wing, this should bother you too. Yes the boys were in the wrong, but jumping over the counter for merchandise is so petty it is not worth taking a life for. This is unacceptable attack. The store owner was not attack, it was he who started stabbing for a kid reaching for items on shelf. Clerk stabbed first the kid defended himself from the weapon attack. As the victim was fleeing for his life, Clerk stabs him in the back a couple more times. Are you kidding me!
I feel for the kid stealing items. It breaks my heart when the went limp from his injuries as clerk stabs him a couple more time. Kid crying out “I am dead”
“I am dead” and dragged to the front of store and dropped. Speaking to the Clerk “ Sir don’t let me die”.
I been robbed before and I saw no threat of the clerk life. If that kid was a tall 10 year old or mentally issues , and or on drugs.
I would not have a heart to play it off like the Clerk is a victim.
Wow you better be careful in a grocery store and are starving for food the Clerks may stab you. Good thing did not have a gun he would have shot him 6 times.
I saw not threat. I would step back and let the thief take what he wanted.
The Clerk is in the wrong business if you think that a thief can be Butchered by you. There is some many levels of wrong here even list.
I would not be your customer, you may assume I have a weapon and attack me.
Not we’re a life.
Watch the video step by, step you see how bad and wrong it.
If that was a family member. ?
You don’t know the reason for the petty theft.
One of the back stabbings look like it puncture his Spine if he is not died he maybe paralyzed, looked as he collapsed on his knees because he could not walk anymore and was still being stabbed and dragged.
The Clerk should be charged with a Felony and thief a misdemeanor.
Oh and by the way if you pick up a weapon and use it your planning on hurting them till they stop or are killed.
So far and I have not heard
about the boy condition.
Is he dead or paralyzed.
think when the tried to get
of stabbings he went limp to
his knee and thought he
was dying and was scared.
As you can see the
Stabbing Clerk dragged his
body to the front of the
store.
I have seen a lot of death
and crimes first hand, but
that video made have
flashbacks of my kids,
grand babies, family and
friends could have been
that boy. We make
mistakes, but his was
wrong, but unarmed petty
theft does not warrant a
stabbing.
I been praying he is ok.
These are unbearable
times. Some people are
criminals and some just
need money etc. The point
is I don’t what the reason is
or his 1st time or, his 50th
time.
He did not deserve a 7 time
stabbing The kid had run
and was stopped and
stabbed in the back trying
to flee a deadly attack.
This kid did not attack the
Clerk he was reaching on
the shelf and had defend
his self from a stabbing
attack.
Sorry it just get my
blood boiling.
The Clerk said I feared for
his life BS. He enjoyed the
stabbing. He and others
think he is a hero, how?
Petty theft.
Boy I hope I don’t forget to
scan and pay for my case of
water under the basket,
What $10.00 at Walmart
they may butcher me. The
Smoke shop Clerk.
The said I am get a
gun now.
No life is worth taking no
even in a Bank Heist.
Sorry, but the moment the perp jumped the counter the store owner was more than justified in defending himself. Waiting at that point to see if the thief is going to get violent puts the store owner at very high risk. The store owner should get a medal and left alone. Yes it is heart breaking to hear the kid realizing he just made a huge mistake, but he chose to put his life at risk.
This pity for criminals is why there is so much damn crime.
Everything I have read has been presumed as not guilty as he should be. The store owner didn’t know if he had a knife, gun, or other weapon and he feared for his life and his store. Which gives him the right to self-defense. Now I have seen people get up after being shot 5+ times and still try to fight so I see no reason to condemn the 7 stabs, if you watch the video he stops once the suspect stops fighting back and the suspect lived.
I also want to add Vegas does have a Castle Doctrine under (NRS 200.120). This gives people the right to use deadly force if they are assaulted by a third party in their home or car and presumably even at their place of work.
My Personal Take
Personally, this article sounds more targeted at the store owner and you wanting to protect “Criminal rights”. Which is kind of odd as this is a website for the 2nd Amendment and concealed carry for Self-Defense. This store owner did EVERYTHING RIGHT in protecting himself and his store and seems the law agrees.
Never once did I state anything about protecting “criminal rights.” It is just my opinion that deadly force wasn’t justified in this situation. Presuming someone has a weapon does not give you the right to use deadly force.
When the prep jumped the counter, he lost that innocence.
Legally in the state of Nevada the store clerk is not guilty due to the uncertainty of what the robber had in their bag, according to this attorney; “any reasonable person would fear for their life” after the robber decided to close the distance and jumó over the counter leaving the store clerk in a fight or flight situation, which makes the store clerks actions justifiable. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRymcbTy/
People keep justifying the incident with “he jumped over the counter”. In the eyes of the law, jumping a counter might not be a sufficient excuse to attack someone. Also, he was by no means defending himself, he was defending his store. You could maybe argue that he felt trapped because the exit was on the other side of the guy who jumped the corner. But the fact that he closed the gap on that guy from the other side of the counter and stabbed him for taking something on the shelf is a legal wildfire. Because the criminal didn’t start punching him and fighting back until he was stabbed. It also doesn’t help that he stabbed him in the back while his hands was on the counter. This will also not be seen well in the eyes of the law.
He is also in hot water for doing a Reddit AMA and he even stated on the news that at the time of engagement he didn’t see a gun on them. He should remain silent until this is resolved. You could also clearly see in the video that both of them were avoiding the store owner which could also be seen as a non-threat. You could also argue too that the criminals didn’t technically steal anything yet because they didn’t leave the area with something they didn’t pay for and then the second guy could easily say that he only left the premise after seeing the guy have a knife and want to attack. There are a lot of legal problems with this whole situation.
As a previous law enforcement officer, I would disagree with the author on this one for one reason. Once the suspect jumped the counter and closed distance to the store owner, the protective barrier was removed. At this point the person could have pulled out a gun or a knife. It is reasonable to assume that a criminal can become violent in the commission of a crime, statistics support this assumption.
Furthermore, the likelihood of the escalation of violence is also assumed when the store owner confronts the suspects as they are taking merchandise. Again statistics also support this assumption.
Finally, it is reasonable to fear death when someone is that close and in the commission of a crime, especially to a lay person. I have seen law enforcement officers use deadly force in the very same circumstance.
I would agree with you if the suspects had stayed on the other side of the counter, but when he jumped the counter, he took away the store owners ability to flee and cause a reasonable person to fear for their life or great bodily harm because the suspect was in the commission of a crime.
Well, he was exposed and I’d sure hate to be dead just because I assumed he wouldn’t hurt me with an unseen weapon or something he may grab & use as a weopon. I do believe adrenaline was going, hence the 7 blows & yet he survived. Someone more seasoned & with training would have made more precise & deadlier strikes. Knives r gr8 weapons if u know how to use them & if u have element of surprise-u must be fast & highly aggressive. Semper Fidelis…I don’t have any sympathy for the criminals, regardless who they were–but I’m a grungy USMC door kicker that believes in FAFO (look it up) & I live in the gr8 state of Texas.
Regardless of feelings, what the law states is what must be upheld. Self-defense states: First a life must be threatened, Second self-defense actions stop at disabling. In the case of this vape shop, neither happened. There was no presented or presumed threat, regardless of the threat the actions taken should have stopped with the individual no longer presenting a threat which is when they stopped hitting back, and at this point the attack was not stopped but continued until the individual went fully limp and presumed dead by view of the video. Going by evidence of the video, this is assault by the shop clerk with possible manslaughter, officers seeing this video and not upholding the law can themselves be held negligent of duty.
I think you totally missed the part in criminal defense law class where Nevada is a stand-your-ground state and self-defense is allowed when the aggressor poses an immediate threat of harm. Hence, the moment the kid hopped the counter, the clerk was legally allowed to defend himself.
For the author of this article to offer an opinion without having a full understanding of law is frightening. It means they don’t know what to do in this situation and can end up dead bcuz of what they presume is appropriate self-defense. And to read comments from readers who also feel that the store owner went too far is even more alarming. I pray that none of you are ever the victim of a robbery bcuz your inability to understand when and how you’re allowed to protect your persons and property can result in your family reading a very different headline.