Good Samaritan Killed Trying to Thwart Robbery

November 1, 2011 -

TV Station KTLA reports on a tragedy that resulted from one man trying to stop a theft. Los Angeles County Sheriff's deputies have arrested four teenagers as a result. The boys were arrested after a fight over a DS ended in a shooting that wounded one teen and killed an unnamed 29-year-old male. The shooting occurred just after 3:00 p.m. Monday at a shopping center where a teen met with four other teen boys to sell a Nintendo DS game system.

According to police, the boys had no intention of buying anything - they planned to rob him. When they tried, a fight broke out and one of the four robbers pulled out a gun. An unidentified man, who police are calling a Good Samaritan, tried to break up the fight armed with a baseball bat. The boy with the gun shot him in the torso and the owner of the DS in the thigh as he tried to flee.

The four suspects - males between the ages of 13 and 16 - have been arrested and are facing charges of robbery and murder.

Police said the man who tried to thwart the robbery was a 29-year-old Hispanic male, but did not divulge his identity. The DS seller was treated for non-threatening injuries at a nearby hospital. Detectives are asking anyone with information to call the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff's Station at 661-255-1121.

Thanks to Andrew Eisen for the tip.

Source: KTLA by way of Kotaku. Image via KTLA.


Comments

Re: Good Samaritan Killed Trying to Thwart Robbery

Would you trade one DS for one count of attempted murder and one count of felony murder? Is a DS really worth that much? Morons.

Re: Good Samaritan Killed Trying to Thwart Robbery

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenAnd how was Gamasutra not accountable for the opinion piece it published and refused to pull or edit even after advertising had been pulled?07/28/2015 - 8:08pm
Andrew EisenThere are tons of options when it comes to an opinion piece you don't agree with. Stating otherwise is dishonest or shows an extraordinary lack of imagination.07/28/2015 - 8:07pm
Mattsworknamethem acounatble. We just didn't have many opttions at the time07/28/2015 - 8:05pm
MattsworknameEZK:I never said it was justified, I just said that some people felt they didn't have any other means to hold them accountable. Weather it's justifited or not is somethign to debate, but I was never a big fan of it cause I wanted some other way to hold07/28/2015 - 8:04pm
Mattsworknameprice07/28/2015 - 8:03pm
MattsworknameAndrew: Your not wrong andrew, but gamasutra , and others like it , were called to task by the audiance that felt they had turned there backs on them. True or not, in media, you have to know how to reach an audiance, and chosing not to, well, you pay a07/28/2015 - 8:03pm
Andrew EisenAt the end of the day, even when Intel pulled its advertising (albeit, temporarily), Gamasutra showed its journalistic integrity by not removing or editing the opinion piece.07/28/2015 - 8:00pm
Andrew EisenNot liking Gamasutra is fine. The audience is primarily industry folk and it's not a game-focused site so it's probably not targeting you anyway.07/28/2015 - 7:57pm
E. Zachary KnightMAtt, So, an online petition asking Target to stop selling GTAV is "bullying and threatening" but a petition and boycott of Intel to force them to stop advertising on Gamasutra is justified?07/28/2015 - 7:56pm
Andrew EisenTrue or not, what it came across as a bunch of people lashing out at a publication over an opinion piece.07/28/2015 - 7:56pm
MattsworknameTo be honest, I've never liked them, but mostly cause rather then being a game focused site, they felt to political for my taste07/28/2015 - 7:56pm
Andrew EisenAnd in the case of Gamasutra?07/28/2015 - 7:54pm
Mattsworknameour concerns about them were well founded.07/28/2015 - 7:50pm
MattsworknameDepends on who you ask, accountable fto it's audiance, accountablie for lies and half truths, accountible for disengenous statements, everyone had there own reasons for going after them. Although in the case of gawker, recent events seem to indicate that07/28/2015 - 7:50pm
Andrew EisenAccountable for... what, exactly?07/28/2015 - 7:48pm
MattsworknameI think the intent was to force some kind of accountabilty on them. Granted As I said ,i wasn't exactly big on the ideas of attacking advertisers but it's a common and well used tactic. Sadly, theres not many other ways of holding media sites acountable07/28/2015 - 7:47pm
MechaTama31With the goal of...? Getting those media outlets to fire or silence the "scum"? That's shitty.07/28/2015 - 7:44pm
Mattsworknamewarned about the scum there assoicating with. Looking at you GAWKER media07/28/2015 - 7:37pm
MattsworknameI think the only reason it was the first action was alot of people felt it was the only option that might have an actual impact. and to be honest, i don't see how they were exactly wrong. Plus, as recent events showed, soem times adverisers need to be07/28/2015 - 7:37pm
MattsworknameTo be honest, I was always kinda on edge about that, while I did not like that those news outlets had acted in the way theey did, i didn't like that we thought boycotting and advertiser attacks were the only recourse07/28/2015 - 7:36pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician