Florida Shooters Network

https://treasurecoast-fl.newsmemory.com ... ubscriber&

Teen shot in jewelry store heist dies
Store owner fired shot; 16-year-old accomplice to be charged as adult
Sara Marino
Treasure Coast Newspapers USA TODAY NETWORK - FLORIDA
MARTIN COUNTY - The teen accused of robbing a Jensen Beach jewelry store who was shot by the jeweler as the getaway car exited the parking lot has died, and a 16-year-old accused accomplice now faces adult felony charges in the incident.
Jakeem McMillian, 17, of Pompano Beach, was accused Dec. 13 of stealing jewelry from Treasure Coast Liquidators, 2319 N.W. Federal Highway in the Granada Plaza.
John Sidney Clark IV, of Lauderhill, was waiting for Jakeem in a stolen Jeep in the parking lot, Sheriff William Snyder has said. The Jeep was stolen earlier in December out of Broward County.
While the pair exited the parking lot onto Federal Highway, the store’s owner, Michael Dacey, a New York Police Department detective
who retired in 2003, shot through the back window of the car and hit J akeem in the head, deputies said. The car crashed shortly afterward.
Jakeem, who was critically injured and on life support, died Dec. 19, according to a social media post by Shiner Law Group, which is representing his family. Attorney David Shiner could not be reached for comment.
Snyder said on the day the robbery happened that if Jakeem died, John
could be charged with murder because, while the duo was in the commission of a crime, one of them was critically hurt. As of Thursday afternoon, additional charges had not been added.
Assistant State Attorney David Lustgarten, who is assigned to the case, said it’s unlikely John will face a murder charge.
However, he will be tried as an adult, despite being 16, because of the nature of the crime, according to officials with the Martin County Clerk of Courts.
John was arrested Dec. 28 on three felony charges: third-degree grand theft, grand theft of a motor vehicle and leaving the scene of an accident involving personal injury. He also faces two misdemeanor charges of leaving the scene of an accident causing property damage and driving without a valid driver’s license.
Before arriving in Jensen Beach that day, the teens are accused of attempting to steal items from a jewelry store in St. Lucie County. That incident occurred at Cash America Pawn in the 8400 block of South U.S. 1 in Port St. Lucie less than 45 minutes before the the Martin County incident.
Dacey, who shot Jakeem, likely will not face charges, Snyder said last month. He could not be reached Thursday.
“We walked away believing that the shooting was justified, well within the scope of using justifiable force during the commission of a forcible felony,” Snyder said after the Jensen Beach jewelry heist. “Unless something really dramatic changes, I do not anticipate any arrest coming out of this.”
TCPalm, which customarily does not name juveniles accused of crimes, does
name some juveniles depending on the seriousness of the crimes, their ages, aggravating circumstances and other factors.
“We walked away believing that the shooting was justified, well within the scope of using justifiable force during the commission of a forcible felony.”
William Snyder
Martin County Sheriff

Probably a bad shoot, but I still like the result.

Play stupid games.....

Good. one less scumbag on the street.

GunsandHoses wrote: ↑Fri Jan 04, 2019 6:18 pm Play stupid games.....

Thissssss 100x over. You play Russian roulette long enough eventually your going to lose.

> Jakeem, who was critically injured and on life support, died Dec. 19,
> according to a social media post by Shiner Law Group, which is
> representing his family.

I like the implication that the minor's parents will be charged for his crime. They raised him to be a thief, so they should be prepared to go to jail when he steals as a minor.

Iosef wrote: ↑Fri Jan 04, 2019 7:29 pm > Jakeem, who was critically injured and on life support, died Dec. 19,
> according to a social media post by Shiner Law Group, which is
> representing his family.

I like the implication that the minor's parents will be charged for his crime. They raised him to be a thief, so they should be prepared to go to jail when he steals as a minor.

Mmmm, I don't think so. My bet is on a wrongful death lawsuit against the store owner.

Jakeem, who was critically injured and on life support, died Dec. 19, according to a social media post by Shiner Law Group, which is representing his family. Attorney David Shiner could not be reached for comment.

So much for civil immunity in a "good" SYG shooting...


'Stand Your Ground' Immunity Won't Block Civil Suit, Florida Supreme Court Says:

In a legal dispute stemming from a Tampa bar fight, the Florida Supreme Court on Thursday drew a line in the use of the state's “stand your ground” self-defense law in criminal and civil cases.

The issue facing justices involved criminal charges and a civil lawsuit filed against Nirav Patel after he struck Ketan Kumar with a cocktail glass in 2008 at a nightclub, permanently damaging Kumar's eye.

Using the “stand your ground” law, Patel successfully argued in circuit court that he should be shielded from criminal prosecution because he struck Kumar in self-defense. He also contended that the finding of self-defense in the criminal case should prevent the civil lawsuit filed by Kumar from moving forward.

The 2nd District Court of Appeal agreed with Patel. But in a unanimous opinion Thursday, the Supreme Court overturned the appeals-court ruling and said a finding of “stand your ground” immunity in a criminal case could not be used to block a civil lawsuit.

Florida law allows “stand your ground” immunity in criminal and civil cases. But the Supreme Court opinion effectively said a determination of immunity in a criminal case does not carry over to a civil case.

The opinion, written by Justice Alan Lawson, pointed in part to a section of the “stand your ground” law dealing with attorney fees, saying that it “implies recognition by the Legislature that civil immunity will be determined separately in a civil proceeding.”

Lawson also cited a change approved this year by lawmakers that dealt with the burden of proof in “stand your ground” criminal cases. That change placed a burden on prosecutors to prove by “clear and convincing evidence” that defendants are not entitled to immunity. Lawmakers took up the issue because of a 2015 Supreme Court decision that had placed a burden of proof on defendants.

In Thursday's opinion, Lawson wrote that the change led to different burdens of proof in criminal and civil “stand your ground” cases.

“[The] 2017 amendment to the Stand Your Ground law creating different burdens of proof for criminal and civil immunity not only implies an understanding that separate immunity determinations will be made but also forecloses any argument, going forward, that the criminal `determination' could ever be binding in the civil proceeding,” the opinion said. “Even in a case where the state could not prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant was not entitled to immunity, the criminal defendant may not be able to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he is entitled to immunity in the civil case.”

The long-controversial “stand your ground law” says people can use deadly force and do not have a duty to retreat if they think it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. In the Tampa case, Patel contended that he struck Kumar in self-defense after being attacked in the bar.

Iosef wrote: ↑Fri Jan 04, 2019 7:29 pm > Jakeem, who was critically injured and on life support, died Dec. 19,
> according to a social media post by Shiner Law Group, which is
> representing his family.

I like the implication that the minor's parents will be charged for his crime. They raised him to be a thief, so they should be prepared to go to jail when he steals as a minor.

The Shiner Law Group is a personal injury firm, not criminal defense.

Good riddance but.... If I am reading this correctly, the storekeeper shot at a fleeing perp, outside the shop. How else could he have shot through the Jeep window. Seems like a different treatment of some similar cases.

That a civil case can be pursued, even if there is a clear lack of criminality (just talking theoretically, not related to the above case), would tend to drive one's decisions in such a circumstance.