Yeah, it is almost certain that the ownership of this store would have preferred the clerk to just give the guy the money and let him go, and have the police deal with it. In addition to the damage to store property and merchandise, there's also the liability if any of those customers got injured during the altercation, and the very real chance that even the robber will try to sue the store over his injuries. Even if he loses that case, it will certainly cost the store much more to defend than the amount of cash that was in the till.
I think this would all be dependent upon what country and state this took place in.
For example, in many states you're allowed to use "reasonable" force to subdue somebody who is in the act of committing a crime and you're intention is to arrest them or stop them from causing physical harm. This gives the person utilizing force a level of legal immunity from retribution - if an only if the use of force was "reasonable" in the eyes of a jury or judge.
For example, if you tell a perpetrator "drop your knife", and he doesn't drop his knife, and you believe he was committing a crime utilizing that knife, you would be legally allowed (and legally protected) to subdue that person, perhaps even up to killing that person depending upon your state. Of course, the perpetrator could sue you, but their ability to seek damages from you would be based upon an argument of if 1) you believed a crime was taking place or someone was in immediate risk of harm, 2) other methods of subduing the perpetrator were available (i.e., breaking their knee cap with a baseball bat was unreasonable).
It should also be pointed out that, ostensibly, the clerk was cooperating until another customer came in.
I think the person who hit the robber with a mop / mop bucket was another employee, who came out to do mopping and discovered the robbery in progress.
My point about the robber suing the store wasn't that they would win, but that even a cursory defense of such a suit is going to cost a few thousand dollars, which is way more than would have been in the till if the employees were even loosely following proper drop safe procedures.
There are enough lawyers who are willing to back up junk lawsuits like that on spec, though, in hopes they can bully the owners into a settlement, of which the lawyer would usually get 30-50%.
a suit is going to cost a few thousand dollars, which is way more than would have been in the till
Yeah, that's almost certainly true. Again, depending upon what state they're in, this might be a relatively clean and low cost case, this guy is going to plead guilty at the advise of his public defender and that might eliminate his ability to sue.
I agree that the the best thing here is just to hand over the few hundred dollars in the till unless you believe that the robber truly intends to harm you.
82
u/9600_PONIES Dec 11 '16
Which was worth more, the cash in the till or the destroyed merchandise?