Skip to comments.Police: Arizona Walmart shooting was self-defense
Posted on 02/18/2014 4:43:41 AM PST by Uncle ChipEdited on 02/18/2014 5:44:49 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
A man who shot and killed another man inside a suburban Phoenix Walmart opened fire in self-defense, Chandler police said Monday.
According to Chandler police, Kyle Wayne Quadlin, 25, shot Kriston Charles Belinte Chee, 36, following a fight at a service counter Sunday afternoon.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I checked the demographics last night on Wikipedia for Chandler when I saw this story on Drudge and was surprised to learn it wasn’t in an “urban” setting.
Good thing neither individual was black.
Good thing neither individual was black.
I still haven’t seen a statement of who STARTED the fight.
If the shooter started the fight, then ‘feared for his life’ because he bit off more than he could chew, that is NOT self-defense.
As usual we aren’t getting the entire story.
Question is did the police get the whole story,
did they get an accurate story.
Apparently there was video. The fact that they
did not arrest but instead submitted to the DA
would indicate that there was a disparity of some
kind in force....probably size. Wonder if there
was an employee or two who witnessed the event
and heard any threats etc. that may have talked
to the investigators.
Be interesting to see how the DA views this.
Of course it’s not Pinal county where it’s legal
to shoot an unarmed man in the back while he has
his hands in the air and you are one of a dozen or
so armed people.
That seems a strange construction, wouldn’t it be that having remained in the story he then “left”; fleeing implies, you know, flight, as in swift, sudden, etc.
I can only wonder why someone didn’t break up this fight before it got to this point.
Chee = Navajo = racial
Don't they have security guards at Walmart or are they just potted plants???
How is it possible to fear for your life in a public place -- a service desk at a Walmart -- surrounded by dozens of people and employees -- any of whom can intervene at a moment's notice.
Good luck getting anyone to intervene. There are few men of character roaming the land anymore.
Not sure about the law, but if AZ law supports picking a fight then escalating when you start losing, it would be a stupid law, IMO. Throw a punch, take two punches, then shoot.
“A.R.S. 13-405 speaks towards the justification of using deadly force against another person. Deadly physical force is justified if it is used as defined in A.R.S. 13-404, or when a reasonable person would believe deadly physical force is necessary to protect themself against the other persons unlawful deadly physical force.”
If you started the fight, and the person you hit is defending themselves which is lawful under the law, how can you claim to be defending against “unlawful deadly physical force”?
I’m no lawyer, but the initiator of a fight should not be allowed to escalate the fight because he is losing it.
Exactly - the racial dynamics in AZ are very different from most people’s understanding in a black/white construct. It’s also complicated by lingering bad feelings between and among the various tribes. Another interesting dynamic between US immigrant groups would be the one between the Vietnamese and the Chinese. Saw that one played out in the workplace back in the 80s.
Its a felony. Unless the dead guy had a lethal weapon on him.
Friend of mine cuffed a little punk a year or so and never even had his pistol on him..it was in his truck. The punk told police he had a firearm on him when he slapped him. Friend went to jail and got off, but not before he had to prove he did NOT have that pistol on him. You can not get into a fight with a firearm on you in AZ. If you do, it is a felony. You can use your firearm ONLY in cases of a crime being committed. Such as B&E, robbery, or if someone is pointing a firearm at you, things like that.
Fleeing also tells me the police took a while to respond. Assuming he was actually in fear for his life its a good thing he didnt have to wait for the police to protect him.
Short AP articles must be excerpted at all times. Please make a note of it.
An armed society is a polite society.
This was simply and politely edging society towards the polite column.
can only wonder why someone didnt break up this fight before it got to this point.
Don’t they have security guards at Walmart or are they just potted plants???
The answer is NO. They have plain clothes security agents to prevent shoplifting. They are unarmed.
Axe mr. chee.
Mark Twain might have something to say.
A few files down the street from my hallway. Middle class part of town, although there is a gang presence in neighboring apartments. This was the first Walmart around here. (20+ years ago). They redid it a few years ago. Nice inside.
Just short AP articles or all AP articles???
Delivering newspapers. I've done that.
So if you are a 90-pound woman who is armed and a 6 foot 8, 300 pound man threatens to beat you to death and comes at you, you cannot shoot him?
Walmart is the worst possible place to commit a criminal act, because every square inch is monitored by surveillance cameras, which Walmart has to do because of continuous efforts by scoundrels to fake “slip and fall” accidents, then sue.
And Walmart is more than happy to share those video recordings with the police, which is likely why no charges have been filed at the shooter. A video and a few witnesses just sealed that door shut.
Threats to do bodily harm or death is a crime. He can make a threat, but if he comes at you, then it is assault. That is a crime. You can respond by lethal force.
You simply CAN NOT get into a bar room brawl after an arguement and pull a gun. You are equally responsible for the fight.
Those threats have to be immediate, and not in the future.
Here is the related article link on freerepublic:
Maybe it’s my point of view and personal experience; but, anything in the Valley of the Sun is urban to me. That includes Phoenix, Mesa, Tempe, Chandler, Gilbert, Glendale, Avondale, Peoria, Litchfield Park, Sun City, Apache Junction, San Tan Valley, and Ahwatukee.
Jeff, am I too rural down here?
LOL, if you think Chandler is an urban area, then yes.
There are older areas but Chandler will never be urban.
Have to admit Jeff is right about one thing - living in Sierra Vista does give me a rural outlook.
I used to live at 39th Ave and Dunlap, graduated from Cortez HS in ‘72. I considered that urban.
At the time, we did our target shooting north of North Mountain Park. I think there’s a golf course there, now.
Correct. I mean, WTH? They want to make this state into a free for all? Pull a gun on someone in this state and you better have a very very good reason for it.
I have been told, by a state troop, that if you shoot someone running away from you after he has busted into your house, you can be charged. Never shoot anyone in the back..that was his advice.
All AP articles and everything on the list at the link below.
Short articles excerpt by at at least 1/2 of the number of words.
Longer articles no more than 300 words.
Why take the chance of one or the other party shooting you?
I'm beginning to think that if the 6 foor 8, 300 pound man shot the woman and claimed he feared for his life then there aren't a whole lot of places where he'd be convicted.
As with most one-sentence descriptions of laws, this one is wrong. If one *starts* the fight, self-defense is certainly more difficult to prove, but not impossible. One can start a fight, and if one tries to back it down while the other persists, then the homicide would be "justified."
Throwing the first punch does not invalidate the "self-defense" defense. It certainly does make it more difficult to prove, but it's not as cut and dried as you suggest.
That is a valid improvement to my description. But the questions remain - did the shooter start the fight, and was he trying to disengage when the shooting occurred? If the shooter started the fight, and the person he attacked the fight escalates to include deadly force, I think the shooter should still have to prove they were trying to disengage.
Bottom line - a weapon carrier needs to stay out of fights whenever possible. The weapon is not a reason to be braver than normal - it is assurance that one can protect oneself better.
I agree with you 100%. I carry, and staying away from people fighting is numero uno on my situational awareness list. I’m now waiting to see the video from the store’s security cams.
This is my neighborhood, I live within walking distance of this WM (have for about 20 years), and go there from time to time. Usually on Sunday afternoons around 4PM, so if this had been a time I went there, I would have been in the store when this happened.
I will be watching this story carefully.
Loved it when our subdivision was the last outpost. Balloons flying over the house every weekend. Those were the days.
The school of Vincent Furnier!
In '76, we moved from suburban Houston to Tempe near Rural&Southern. My mom still lives in the same house there. It sure felt like we moved to the city, what with ASU and the freeways nearby, a swimming pool in every back yard. But just a few miles south was endless farmland and even an "Open Range" sign. I don't believe Ray road was paved in '76. Now there is freeway to the south of it! Chandler Mall even! Semiconductor plants and big box stores galore.
Yes ma’am! He graduated with my sis-in-law in, I think, ‘68 or ‘69.
You know his dad was a minister, yes?
I know, right? The only thing keeping the area from growing south and east are the reservations. And the mountains to the north are doing little to stop growth.
Bell Rd. used to be horse properties; now you have homes almost all the way out to Anthem, past the Ben Avery range and Lake Pleasant.
Jeff! A descendant of the city’s founder?
ahh, thank you. I wondered about that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.