Walmart security guard shoots 'shoplifting' mother dead in parking lot as she tries to escape with t

[decemberlove]

you couldnt have been more wrong...

i only share things that relate to certain situations that i've encountered, or that i could relate to.


so i have experiences with police you dont...

i dont have a criminal record either.

Again, how can you possibly know that I don't have any experience with the police?

 

[deleted]

are you like some sort of struggling rapper or something?? you seem really bitter..

You're lying again.

 

[mmg]

So she steals and tries to run over the cop.


She deserved it.

 

[00david00]

So with only the police officers side of the situation you guys ready to come to a conclusion?

You guys can call gatzby a "lil gangsta" or whatever but anyone that has had similar experiences can tell you why it's iffy.

 

[gatzbygordon]

im not defending criminal activity at all, especially putting kids in danger to steal some stupid stuff, but at the same time he could've just let them get away..its not that serious.

if you can apprehend the suspects without putting yourself and others in danger then ok, he should've had some backup too, thats my main issue with this situation..

 

[luong1209]

yall are ridiculous.

What was she trying to do? Flee.
Not hurt the cop, the cop put himself in danger and justified putting a bullet in her.

I wish someone would jump in front of your parents cars and tell them they're not moving and if they even try to maneuver around me put a bullet in them, then maybe you'd understand.

Yall are really valuing someones lives to a few dollars to a walmart store.... jesus ******g christ.

Yet she put her children in the vehicle she'd use as her get away car...

What would happen if it resulted in a high speed car chase? She deserved it.

 

[jones23me]

Some people take their job waay to serious... Its walmart.. I dont think she had a 75 inch flat screen or 2 or 3 baskets full of stuff, that was worth taking her life for.. The nerve of the law. But had they been white.... not even worth the thread derail....

 

[luong1209]

Some people take their job waay to serious... Its walmart.. I dont think she had a 75 inch flat screen or 2 or 3 baskets full of stuff, that was worth taking her life for.. The nerve of the law. But had they been white.... not even worth the thread derail....

+1 to the didn't read list.

 

[mmg]

Some people take their job waay to serious... Its walmart.. I dont think she had a 75 inch flat screen or 2 or 3 baskets full of stuff, that was worth taking her life for.. The nerve of the law. But had they been white.... not even worth the thread derail....

did you read the thread or going off pictures ?


she tried to flee and run over the cop.


she used her vehicle as a weapon, so the cop used deadly force....

 

[decemberlove]

So with only the police officers side of the situation you guys ready to come to a conclusion?
You guys can call gatzby a "lil gangsta" or whatever but anyone that has had similar experiences can tell you why it's iffy.

What could possibly be the story from the other side? We know she shoplifted and we also know that her and her accomplices swung at the cop. She also put 2 children in danger that weren't even her own. I have no respect for someone like that and conclude that she was in the wrong.

im not defending criminal activity at all, especially putting kids in danger to steal some stupid stuff, but at the same time he could've just let them get away..its not that serious.

if you can apprehend the suspects without putting yourself and others in danger then ok, he should've had some backup too, thats my main issue with this situation..

I doubt his intent was to shoot this woman. He was just doing his job which was stopping crime. If he let it go, hes not doing his job.

Cops are always putting their lives in danger apprehending suspects whether they know it or not which seems to be the case here. He probably thought he could handle the situation himself and the whole car thing was just immediate reaction.

 

[superantigen]

Let's review the sheriffs department story, shall we:

After chasing Frey and the other two women to their car, Campbell opened the door and commanded Frey to get out. But she refused, officials said

Andrews began to drive away while the deputy was standing between the open door and the driver's seat.
'She threw it in reverse and tried to run over the deputy,' said Harris County Sheriff's Office spokesperson Deputy Thomas Gilliland.

'He confronted the suspects at exit of the store before they left. One female wouldn't stop, struck the deputy with her purse, ran off.'

'I think it knocked him off balance and, in fear of his life and being ran over, he discharged his weapon at that point.'

What we know:


1. Shelly Frey was on the passenger side of the car.

2. Shelly Frey was the one who was shot--murdered.

3. The driver of the car was Tiasa Andrews.

4. Campbell, the cop, opened the PASSENGER side of the door and commanded Frey to get out (she refused).

5. "Andrews began to drive away while the deputy was standing between the open door and the driver's seat."

5.5--personally commentary-- So officer campbell FIRST went over to the passenger side of the car to get Fey out, when she refused, he then went over to the drivers side--where Andrews was-- and opened that door.

6. After reading more on the story, multiple news accounts suggests that Andrews revved the car FORWARD and took off. (Wonder why the Sheriff department is saying backwards--ohh yeah, that's right, because if they say backwards then it makes Campbell's story more plausible).

7. Officer Campbell was then knocked off-balance, likely because he was holding on to the car, and fearing for his life, he discharged his weapon.

Campbell confronted the women as they left the store and asked them to stop, but the women would not cooperate, Harris County deputies said. One woman allegedly struck the deputy with her purse and they all fled.
Campbell chased Frey around the parking lot. She got in a car with the other suspects and two children. Campbell opened the door and commanded them to stop, but the car was placed in drive and moved forward, investigators said.
“I think it knocked him off balance and, in fear of his life and being ran over, he discharged his weapon at that point,” said Thomas Gilliland, Harris County Sheriff’s Office.
Frey was struck in the neck.

http://www.khou.com/news/Deputy-involved-shooting-reported-at-North-Houston-Walmart-182480601.html

The deputy made his move, ordering the group to stop as they rushed through the exit and entered their getaway car in the parking lot.

According to KHOU Ch. 11, when Campbell opened the driver's door and ordered the suspects to stop, the vehicle revved forward, dragging the deputy along with it.

“I think it knocked him off balance," said Thomas Gilliland with the Harris County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO). "In fear of his life and being ran over, he discharged his weapon at that point.” The car fled the scene with one of the suspects suffering from a serious gunshot wound.

http://houston.culturemap.com/newsd...spect-part-of-group-of-alleged-women-thieves/

Campbell chased the women to the parking lot, where they tried driving off. At one point, he said he was between the car door and the driver’s seat and feared for his safety.
He fired, striking Frey in the neck. She died at an apartment complex in the 1300 block of Greens Parkway minutes afterward.

http://www.kens5.com/news/crime/182665501.html

First thing I ask, how does one fear for their life when a vehicle is moving forward and away from your current position? Fear of being ran over? How is that possible when the car was moving forward and away from him?

So he was knocked down, and he fired the weapon while being on the ground? Let's go deeper.

The person who was shot was the Shelly Frey, who was on the passenger side of the car. Campbell, the cop, was on the drivers side of the car. How the heck does one shoot someone on the passenger side of the car, while being on the ground next to the drivers side, in fear of their life, supposedly? That had to be one bad-*** magical bullet to able to hit a passenger in the passenger side of car while being shot from a gun being controlled by a fearful cop on the ground closest to the drivers side, dont'cha think?

Honestly, that seems way too farfetched so I offer a better scenario.

The better scenario, and the more plausible one, would be that Campbell shot at the car while being on his feet. If he is on his feet, then it doesn't matter where he is positioned, he has both the vision and stature to "neutralize" a potential threat in the car. If this is the case, which I believe it is, then we have a situation where Campbell had enough time to not only get up on his feet after being knocked down, but shoot at the car that was MOVING FORWARD and away from him. The next logical step in the matter is to ask, then, how exactly one feels "threatened" and or in danger when the threat is rapidly moving forward away from you? Mind you, after being knock down, you were able to get get up, draw your weapon, and fire--a series of events that takes some time?

Even with all that, the security officer SHOT the person in the PASSENGER SIDE of the car? I mean, how does this make sense.

He was in fear of his life, and he was on the drivers side of car; if he was fearful for his life, does it not make more sense to neutralize the driver? So how then do you shoot the passenger, mind you while on the ground, supposedly?

Anyone with the least bit of common sense can spot the inconsistencies in the Sherriff's office side of the story. And we all know law enforcement agencies often say whatever needs to be said to circumvent the burden of responsibility that comes with blame in situations like this.

Let it be restated, that I am not condoning theft. They should have been given a sentence that was equal to their grievances. They suspected them of shoplifting largely because they had video evidence of their crimes. So why not just contact the proper authorities--ON-DUTY Police officers--and have them handle it? In the end, that walmart security guard, an off-duty deputy, WAS IN THE WRONG, as far as his contractual obligations with Walmart go, and as far as using "excessive force" is concerned. He could have shot at the tires at the very least, but he wanted to be a hero. He got too trigger happy and killed someone for petty theft, and y'all are seriously lauding him? Pathetic...

How many opportunities did he have to de-escalate the situation? From chasing them out the store, from going to Frey's side of the car, holding on to the door on Andrews' side, from shooting at them. At least 4 separate instances where dude could have easily de-escalated the situation. You have them on camera; you know what they look like; you likely have their license plate number; what else do you need to make sure justice is eventually served? Bullets and lifeless body? A show of excessive authority? Right--they sure learned a lesson...





...

 

[huynher]

What could possibly be the story from the other side? We know she shoplifted and we also know that her and her accomplices swung at the cop. She also put 2 children in danger that weren't even her own. I have no respect for someone like that and conclude that she was in the wrong.
I doubt his intent was to shoot this woman. He was just doing his job which was stopping crime. If he let it go, hes not doing his job.
Cops are always putting their lives in danger apprehending suspects whether they know it or not which seems to be the case here. He probably thought he could handle the situation himself and the whole car thing was just immediate reaction.

I'm not siding with either one of you, and I appreciate the discussion that is going on. I think you guys have kind of hit the nail on the head with this issue. Bottom line is that there is a very fine line when it comes to justifiable murder. On the one hand, security cop has a very legitimate reason to feel that his life is threatened [especially in the heat of the moment]. On the other, you have a shoplifter who probably stole less than $200 worth of stuff. Either way, lives are ruined. Don't force yourselves into these type of situations people.

 

[SneakerProSr.]

I worked for a smaller retail store and the first thing the owner told me is if someone steals don't chase them out the store.

I need to see a video before I form a definite opinion because I don't believe this the way it was reported.

If it really happened the way Antigen broke it down that cop is going to jail.

 

[gatzbygordon]

they will say anything and everything to make their actions justified

i read this story alot to figure out where some of you were getting that the car was used as a weapon..

apparently you guys didnt read the story.

 

[nooera]

Texas sucks so bad

Bunch of idiots running around with guns eager to shoot anyone breaking any kind of petty law, because hey, its murica.

 

[Deleted member 43946]

Let's review the sheriffs department story, shall we:
What we know:
1. Shelly Frey was on the passenger side of the car.
2. Shelly Frey was the one who was shot--murdered.
3. The driver of the car was Tiasa Andrews.
4. Campbell, the cop, opened the PASSENGER side of the door and commanded Frey to get out (she refused).
5. "Andrews began to drive away while the deputy was standing between the open door and the driver's seat."
5.5--personally commentary-- So officer campbell FIRST went over to the passenger side of the car to get Fey out, when she refused, he then went over to the drivers side--where Andrews was-- and opened that door.
6. After reading more on the story, multiple news accounts suggests that Andrews revved the car FORWARD and took off. (Wonder why the Sheriff department is saying backwards--ohh yeah, that's right, because if they say backwards then it makes Campbell's story more plausible).
7. Officer Campbell was then knocked off-balance, likely because he was holding on to the car, and fearing for his life, he discharged his weapon.
First thing I ask, how does one fear for their life when a vehicle is moving forward and away from your current position? Fear of being ran over? How is that possible when the car was moving forward and away from him?
So he was knocked down, and he fired the weapon while being on the ground? Let's go deeper.
The person who was shot was the Shelly Frey, who was on the passenger side of the car. Campbell, the cop, was on the drivers side of the car. How the heck does one shoot someone on the passenger side of the car, while being on the ground next to the drivers side, in fear of their life, supposedly? That had to be one bad-*** magical bullet to able to hit a passenger in the passenger side of car while being shot from a gun being controlled by a fearful cop on the ground closest to the drivers side, dont'cha think?
Honestly, that seems way too farfetched so I offer a better scenario.
The better scenario, and the more plausible one, would be that Campbell shot at the car while being on his feet. If he is on his feet, then it doesn't matter where he is positioned, he has both the vision and stature to "neutralize" a potential threat in the car. If this is the case, which I believe it is, then we have a situation where Campbell had enough time to not only get up on his feet after being knocked down, but shoot at the car that was MOVING FORWARD and away from him. The next logical step in the matter is to ask, then, how exactly one feels "threatened" and or in danger when the threat is rapidly moving forward away from you? Mind you, after being knock down, you were able to get get up, draw your weapon, and fire--a series of events that takes some time?
Even with all that, the security officer SHOT the person in the PASSENGER SIDE of the car? I mean, how does this make sense.
He was in fear of his life, and he was on the drivers side of car; if he was fearful for his life, does it not make more sense to neutralize the driver? So how then do you shoot the passenger, mind you while on the ground, supposedly?
Anyone with the least bit of common sense can spot the inconsistencies in the Sherriff's office side of the story. And we all know law enforcement agencies often say whatever needs to be said to circumvent the burden of responsibility that comes with blame in situations like this.
Let it be restated, that I am not condoning theft. They should have given a punishment that was tantamount to their grievances. They suspected them of shoplifting largely because they had video evidence of their crimes. So why not just contact the proper authorities--ON-DUTY Police officers--and have them handle it? In the end, that walmart security guard, an off-duty deputy, WAS IN THE WRONG, as far as his contractual obligations with Walmart go, and as far as using "excessive force" is concerned. He could have shot at the tires at the very least.
...

i keep seein the shootin out the tires thing... you guys realize this isnt the movies right? any idea how hard it would be to shoot the tires of a moving vehicle? not really an option...

 

[SneakerProSr.]

they will say anything and everything to make their actions justified


i read this story alot to figure out where some of you were getting that the car was used as a weapon..

apparently you guys didnt read the story.

Dudes in this thread throwing shots left and right talking about folks didn't read the article and saying the cop was justified.

First time I read the article it just didn't make sense.

 

[mmg]

i car with 1 flat is drivable.


you take out the driver.


you guys watch WAY too much TV and had no idea how real life works

 

[huynher]

they will say anything and everything to make their actions justified


i read this story alot to figure out where some of you were getting that the car was used as a weapon..

apparently you guys didnt read the story.

Regardless, shoplifter puts herself in a situation where getting shot at is a possibility. Even if getting killed isn't justified, you shouldn't be doing this.

Crazy world we live in.

 

[stillin729]

i keep seein the shootin out the tires thing... you guys realize this isnt the movies right? any idea how hard it would be to shoot the tires of a moving vehicle? not really an option...

no he just tried it in Grand Theft Auto it works; you are wrong

real life confirmed

 

[decemberlove]

Let's review the sheriffs department story, shall we:
What we know:
1. Shelly Frey was on the passenger side of the car.
2. Shelly Frey was the one who was shot--murdered.
3. The driver of the car was Tiasa Andrews.
4. Campbell, the cop, opened the PASSENGER side of the door and commanded Frey to get out (she refused).
5. "Andrews began to drive away while the deputy was standing between the open door and the driver's seat."
5.5--personally commentary-- So officer campbell FIRST went over to the passenger side of the car to get Fey out, when she refused, he then went over to the drivers side--where Andrews was-- and opened that door.
6. After reading more on the story, multiple news accounts suggests that Andrews revved the car FORWARD and took off. (Wonder why the Sheriff department is saying backwards--ohh yeah, that's right, because if they say backwards then it makes Campbell's story more plausible).
7. Officer Campbell was then knocked off-balance, likely because he was holding on to the car, and fearing for his life, he discharged his weapon.
First thing I ask, how does one fear for their life when a vehicle is moving forward and away from your current position? Fear of being ran over? How is that possible when the car was moving forward and away from him?
So he was knocked down, and he fired the weapon while being on the ground? Let's go deeper.
The person who was shot was the Shelly Frey, who was on the passenger side of the car. Campbell, the cop, was on the drivers side of the car. How the heck does one shoot someone on the passenger side of the car, while being on the ground next to the drivers side, in fear of their life, supposedly? That had to be one bad-*** magical bullet to able to hit a passenger in the passenger side of car while being shot from a gun being controlled by a fearful cop on the ground closest to the drivers side, dont'cha think?
Honestly, that seems way too farfetched so I offer a better scenario.
The better scenario, and the more plausible one, would be that Campbell shot at the car while being on his feet. If he is on his feet, then it doesn't matter where he is positioned, he has both the vision and stature to "neutralize" a potential threat in the car. If this is the case, which I believe it is, then we have a situation where Campbell had enough time to not only get up on his feet after being knocked down, but shoot at the car that was MOVING FORWARD and away from him. The next logical step in the matter is to ask, then, how exactly one feels "threatened" and or in danger when the threat is rapidly moving forward away from you? Mind you, after being knock down, you were able to get get up, draw your weapon, and fire--a series of events that takes some time?
Even with all that, the security officer SHOT the person in the PASSENGER SIDE of the car? I mean, how does this make sense.
He was in fear of his life, and he was on the drivers side of car; if he was fearful for his life, does it not make more sense to neutralize the driver? So how then do you shoot the passenger, mind you while on the ground, supposedly?
Anyone with the least bit of common sense can spot the inconsistencies in the Sherriff's office side of the story. And we all know law enforcement agencies often say whatever needs to be said to circumvent the burden of responsibility that comes with blame in situations like this.
Let it be restated, that I am not condoning theft. They should have given a punishment that was tantamount to their grievances. They suspected them of shoplifting largely because they had video evidence of their crimes. So why not just contact the proper authorities--ON-DUTY Police officers--and have them handle it? In the end, that walmart security guard, an off-duty deputy, WAS IN THE WRONG, as far as his contractual obligations with Walmart go, and as far as using "excessive force" is concerned. He could have shot at the tires at the very least.
...

We could analyze this step-by-step but it's all speculation from our computers. Standard procedure would be the officer to pursue these women and the entire time none of them were cooperating. They struck the officer which is a felony by itself so the officer could only be safe assuming that these women will try anything to escape. So with that in his mind and the heat of the moment he tries to stop them by trying to block the car.

The discrepancy here is that we don't know anything. We know he's at the driver's side of the car but I've never been in a situation like that and I'm also not a physics major so we don't really know if he would have been killed. What we DO know is that there is potential for death with any sort of moving vehicle.

He may have panicked and it may have been excessive but the women werent cooperating and that's just what could happen if you break the law. It's that plain and simple.

 

[decemberlove]

Regardless, shoplifter puts herself in a situation where getting shot at is a possibility. Even if getting killed isn't justified, you shouldn't be doing this.
Crazy world we live in.

Repped for competency

 

[SneakerProSr.]

Let's review the sheriffs department story, shall we:
What we know:
1. Shelly Frey was on the passenger side of the car.
2. Shelly Frey was the one who was shot--murdered.
3. The driver of the car was Tiasa Andrews.
4. Campbell, the cop, opened the PASSENGER side of the door and commanded Frey to get out (she refused).
5. "Andrews began to drive away while the deputy was standing between the open door and the driver's seat."
5.5--personally commentary-- So officer campbell FIRST went over to the passenger side of the car to get Fey out, when she refused, he then went over to the drivers side--where Andrews was-- and opened that door.
6. After reading more on the story, multiple news accounts suggests that Andrews revved the car FORWARD and took off. (Wonder why the Sheriff department is saying backwards--ohh yeah, that's right, because if they say backwards then it makes Campbell's story more plausible).
7. Officer Campbell was then knocked off-balance, likely because he was holding on to the car, and fearing for his life, he discharged his weapon.
First thing I ask, how does one fear for their life when a vehicle is moving forward and away from your current position? Fear of being ran over? How is that possible when the car was moving forward and away from him?
So he was knocked down, and he fired the weapon while being on the ground? Let's go deeper.
The person who was shot was the Shelly Frey, who was on the passenger side of the car. Campbell, the cop, was on the drivers side of the car. How the heck does one shoot someone on the passenger side of the car, while being on the ground next to the drivers side, in fear of their life, supposedly? That had to be one bad-*** magical bullet to able to hit a passenger in the passenger side of car while being shot from a gun being controlled by a fearful cop on the ground closest to the drivers side, dont'cha think?
Honestly, that seems way too farfetched so I offer a better scenario.
The better scenario, and the more plausible one, would be that Campbell shot at the car while being on his feet. If he is on his feet, then it doesn't matter where he is positioned, he has both the vision and stature to "neutralize" a potential threat in the car. If this is the case, which I believe it is, then we have a situation where Campbell had enough time to not only get up on his feet after being knocked down, but shoot at the car that was MOVING FORWARD and away from him. The next logical step in the matter is to ask, then, how exactly one feels "threatened" and or in danger when the threat is rapidly moving forward away from you? Mind you, after being knock down, you were able to get get up, draw your weapon, and fire--a series of events that takes some time?
Even with all that, the security officer SHOT the person in the PASSENGER SIDE of the car? I mean, how does this make sense.
He was in fear of his life, and he was on the drivers side of car; if he was fearful for his life, does it not make more sense to neutralize the driver? So how then do you shoot the passenger, mind you while on the ground, supposedly?
Anyone with the least bit of common sense can spot the inconsistencies in the Sherriff's office side of the story. And we all know law enforcement agencies often say whatever needs to be said to circumvent the burden of responsibility that comes with blame in situations like this.
Let it be restated, that I am not condoning theft. They should have given a punishment that was tantamount to their grievances. They suspected them of shoplifting largely because they had video evidence of their crimes. So why not just contact the proper authorities--ON-DUTY Police officers--and have them handle it? In the end, that walmart security guard, an off-duty deputy, WAS IN THE WRONG, as far as his contractual obligations with Walmart go, and as far as using "excessive force" is concerned. He could have shot at the tires at the very least.
...

We could analyze this step-by-step but it's all speculation from our computers. Standard procedure would be the officer to pursue these women and the entire time none of them were cooperating. They struck the officer which is a felony by itself so the officer could only be safe assuming that these women will try anything to escape. So with that in his mind and the heat of the moment he tries to stop them by trying to block the car.

The discrepancy here is that we don't know anything. We know he's at the driver's side of the car but I've never been in a situation like that and I'm also not a physics major so we don't really know if he would have been killed. What we DO know is that there is potential for death with any sort of moving vehicle.

He may have panicked and it may have been excessive but the women werent cooperating and that's just what could happen if you break the law. It's that plain and simple.

Yup people deserve to be killed for participating in misdemeanors.

 

[stillin729]

Yup people deserve to be killed for participating in misdemeanors.

if she bought the items was there any risk of this?

 

[decemberlove]

Yup people deserve to be killed for participating in misdemeanors.

Assaulting a Police Officer (APO) is, in fact, a felony.

Yet again, another NT'er that fails to read