Aggressive robbery in Golden Gate Park on Thursday

Grim Reefer -

Do you think the situation described here can be considered a robbery?
And if so, California law defines robbery as a felony.
Not a misdemeanor.

Furthermore, according to California law
“The use of deadly force in protecting property is authorized in the following circumstances:
In defense of habitation or property against one who intends, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony; or...”

So, if I’m being robbed, can’t I use deadly force against the attacker? And especially if the attacker turns from the victim to me, wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume they are coming to hurt me or my property and I can use deadly force against them?

I know that if this were to happen, everything would be questioned in court, so I’m not asking about that. I’m asking if the above understanding is correct.

I might be wrong, but I think in California, even if you're being robbed, your life would have be in some serious serious danger before you can respond with deadly force.  Seems crooks have more protection from the law than we do...lol. 

Grim Reefer -

Do you think the situation described here can be considered a robbery?
And if so, California law defines robbery as a felony.
Not a misdemeanor.

Furthermore, according to California law
“The use of deadly force in protecting property is authorized in the following circumstances:
In defense of habitation or property against one who intends, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony; or...”

So, if I’m being robbed, can’t I use deadly force against the attacker? And especially if the attacker turns from the victim to me, wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume they are coming to hurt me or my property and I can use deadly force against them?

I know that if this were to happen, everything would be questioned in court, so I’m not asking about that. I’m asking if the above understanding is correct.

I might be wrong, but I think in California, even if you're being robbed, your life would have be in some serious serious danger before you can respond with deadly force.  Seems crooks have more protection from the law than we do...lol. 

I agree with Smoke.  per Grim, the crime is a non-violent felony.  (Breaking a window and grabbing valuables).  Grim states that you have to be directly threatened or assaulted for you to use deadly force.  and even then you will have to be able to prove it.

Sad that our officers are put in the situations they are, and sad that law abiding citizens are left to be victims due to the actions of our elected State officials.  I pray the pendulum will swing back to a more reasonable and centered approach when it comes to dealing with felony crime.  Unfortunately, it is my opinion that things will have to get worse before a change occurs.

Ok, as a 25 year LEO, I gotta chime in here. There are a lot of issues to address so this may take a bit. Believe me when I say, your frustration is a fraction of what is felt by most of us in law enforcement. Especially those of us that have been around a minute.  As far as the crime you witnessed, yes, it is a property crime (vehicle burglary) which your STATE LEADERSHIP AND VOTERS have all but decriminalized.  It is still a felony but yes it is considered non-violent. For it to be Robbery (a violent crime) there has to be a theft by use of force (against a person) or fear. In this case you could make the case that the person would have been in fear but it is more meant to be used in the context of ‘give me the money or I will shoot you’. Even if you don’t see a gun a reasonable person would be scared. Again it is important to remember that this is not the officers doing, it is your state leadership and the laws they wrote.   These things are occurring more often because the punishment is a joke.  Again, not law enforcement’s fault (none of us in LE voted in support of these law changes.   Your state leadership came up with prop 47-decriminalizing many crimes, prop 57-early release for violent and non-violent criminals,  Pc 36- decriminalization of drug offenses, zero bail, you name it.  Your state leadership is making it all but impossible for LE to do their job. Add to that, state leaders are actively going after the law enforcement profession and you get a lot of cops that are scared to do anything. As far as the ‘evening they saw it occur, they wouldn’t chase them’ part, that is strictly a financial decision that many agencies are adopting (and this one I support completely).  If we chase someone and they crash into an innocent person, guess who they will come after? Is someone else’s family member worth recovering your camera?  The answer is no.  Regarding you shooting the person of you were armed, completely depends on how you articulate yourself.  If you see someone break into your car with a hammer and you shoot them, yeah it ain’t going to work out well for you. If the crook turns towards you with the hammer fire away. If you are inside the car they are attacking, you would probably be ok too.  Let’s see what else, as far as the cop leaving you there, yep, totally agree, that was chicken shit and unprofessional.  I tell my guys every day, 10 percent of people hate us and will hate us no matter what.  90 percent support us but treating them poorly can chip away at that number.  Anyway, just my 2 cents. I am going to end my rant here.   I have a lot more to say but I’m doing this on my phone and I have dumb thumbs which makes it hard.  Sorry this happened to you. Glad you made it through it.

Thank you for your insider perspective.  I will be sure to remember this on how I vote next time.

Grim Reefer -

Do you think the situation described here can be considered a robbery?
And if so, California law defines robbery as a felony.
Not a misdemeanor.

Furthermore, according to California law
“The use of deadly force in protecting property is authorized in the following circumstances:
In defense of habitation or property against one who intends, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony; or...”

So, if I’m being robbed, can’t I use deadly force against the attacker? And especially if the attacker turns from the victim to me, wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume they are coming to hurt me or my property and I can use deadly force against them?

I know that if this were to happen, everything would be questioned in court, so I’m not asking about that. I’m asking if the above understanding is correct.

Regarding your first question...do I think this is a robbery... my answer is a very noncommittal maybe, maybe not.  I don’t know exactly what the victim told the investigating officer.  If the suspect simply broke the window and took items then it is a simple burglary.  If the suspect told the victim not to move or he would beat his ass...then it is a robbery.  So too many details are missing to give a solid answer. 

Regarding your second question if you are being robbed can you use force... first we have to make the distinction between robbery and burglary.  Robbery is theft by force or fear.   Burglary is entering a structure (in this case a vehicle)with the intent to commit theft or any felony.  If you wake up to someone in your house and shoot them you SHOULD be fine as long as you can articulate a threat.  If they are in your house and run out when they see you and your shoot them as they are running down the street... you will probably not be good because they are no longer a threat.  In this incident as described, the suspect broke out a window to grab stuff.  If I am sitting in my car and someone comes and starts breaking windows with a bat I can reasonably believe I am in danger.  If they break the window grab the stuff and i shoot them as they are driving away, I am no longer good.   But as we are seeing more and more , it is getting difficult to have a clear definition. And as someone stated, yeah, the suspect have a lot of protection nowadays.  But to be clear, you can never use deadly force simply to protect property.

[/quote]
Thank you for your insider perspective.  I will be sure to remember this on how I vote next time.
[/quote]

I try not to mix politics and fishing, but that is the only way things will change.

In an age when spitting or coughing at someone is deemed assault, I think the law should be rewritten such that smashing into a car while someone is in it - and sending shards of glass flying - should be considered a violent crime. Personally I think when a thief enters someone's car or house - particular when someone is in it/home - then that thief has forfeited all expectations of safety and privacy, regardless of whether they're after property or trying to harm you. Apparently the law doesn't agree, though.

If what happened here isn't considered "theft by force or fear" then the law is fucked and needs to be changed. They did not use verbal threats, but their actions alone induced fear.

The officer did tell me that it would be in accordance with the law to use pepper spray since that wouldn't permanently injure the thief. It's like we're in an unevenly matched soccer game. The cops are the refs, we're getting our asses kicked, and the other team knows exactly how to play dirty without breaking any rules.

In an age when spitting or coughing at someone is deemed assault, I think the law should be rewritten such that smashing into a car while someone is in it - and sending shards of glass flying - should be considered a violent crime. Personally I think when a thief enters someone's car or house - particular when someone is in it/home - then that thief has forfeited all expectations of safety and privacy, regardless of whether they're after property or trying to harm you. Apparently the law doesn't agree, though.

If what happened here isn't considered "theft by force or fear" then the law is fucked and needs to be changed. They did not use verbal threats, but their actions alone induced fear.

The officer did tell me that it would be in accordance with the law to use pepper spray since that wouldn't permanently injure the thief. It's like we're in an unevenly matched soccer game. The cops are the refs, we're getting our asses kicked, and the other team knows exactly how to play dirty without breaking any rules.

I agree with you mostly.  But the courts and lawmakers are the ones that are tilting the odds in favor of the criminals. The cops are just the easy target to point fingers at because they are on the front line.   We operate under the rules they give us. And those rules are constantly changing as more liberal courts continually interpret law differently. And trust me, the changes never benefit law enforcement.   I can’t tell you how frustrated LE is with the current climate.  My officers have literally arrested people for serious crimes only to see them back out on the street committing more crimes DURING THE SAME SHIFT! One was booked for driving a stolen vehicle, released 2 hours later, only to be re-arrested in a car that he stole to get back across town. And that is a minor example. I can think of cases where the courts released people from custody and they returned and MURDERED their victims from the prior case. One of our officers was shot and almost killed by a suspect that had been released from jail on some pretty serious charges. The system is broken for sure but unfortunately, it comes from above our pay grade.   

Again, in this case, I don’t know exactly what questions the officer asked and exactly how those questions were answered.  I can see where a case could be made for robbery IF they right questions were asked and IF the right answers were given.     But like I said before. The force and fear have to be directed towards the person. 

Very interesting thread. I'm happy no one was injured in the incident. You couldn't pay me enough to be Law Enforcement officer in this climate.

I have a can of "wasp spray" in my nightstand along side the bed ... to be used as a first line of defense. I would consider keeping one in the door pocket of my vehicle but I might be too tempted to use it on aggressive drivers.