You are cop for a day, what do you do???

[Bunnykid68]

Right handed, blue eyed, and he left Pittsburg at 65 miles an hour

Heading which way?

 

[Signal23]

It was reckless because he pulled it out with the grip in his firing hand. The clerk had no idea of his intentions and therefore was given reason to believe momentarily that his life was in danger. He pushed the panic button because he was, in his mind, being robbed. The actions of the OP's suspect were not intended as criminal, but because of the careless way he acted, he placed the clerk in fear for his life. Had the clerk been armed and shot the suspect, he would not be convicted. In my opinion the violation of the law occured because instead of simply readjusting his pants, he pulled the gun out of his pocket by the grip in what could be readily construed as ready to engage. The clerks statement of he might have pointed it at me is pushing things closer to a pointing a firearms charge on scene, thats IC 35-47-4-3 for anyone wondering.

(a) This section does not apply to a law enforcement officer who is acting within the scope of the law enforcement officer's official duties or to a person who is justified in using reasonable force against another person under:
(1) IC 35-41-3-2; or
(2) IC 35-41-3-3.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally points a firearm at another person commits a Class D felony. However, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if the firearm was not loaded.



Dirtebiker, it clearly states in the OP that the gun was being held in the right hand by the grip. The cashier also stated that the suspect may have pointed the gun at him.
I take it out of my pocket, I hold the slurpie and slim jim in my left hand, gun in my right,

but I did clearly have it out and grabbed it by the grip in manner to surprise the guy at the counter, he want something done, he tells the cops "I am not sure, but I think he pointed it at me".....

Based on further review of the video it states the the cop on scene is almost certain of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Based on my interpretation of the OPS original post, I change my answer slightly. The suspect is going to be arrested for criminal recklessness, IC 35-42-2-2, and pointing a firearm IC 35-47-4-3. He may be innocent, he may not, but by the preponderance of evidence I have reasonable suspicion a crime has been committed and probable cause to make the arrest. He did remove the firearm from his pocket, an act that was reckless in the situation, he should have just held his pants up and readjusted, he did in fact in the clerks statement point the firearm. Upon Terry stop and search he was found to be carrying a firearm. Upon review of the camera footage the suspect has been seen removing a firearm from his pocket by the grip. It does not get any clearer than that, the intent was not there which is why it is not an armed robbery or battery charge. However, the reckless behavior and pointing of a firearm is present.

My whole point in a nut shell, It could be nothing or it could be, in this example, shot in self defense.....all I said is HE COULD BE ARRESTED, oh and the same IC, because it is the one that applies best.

 

[Signal23]

Heading which way?

Forward, brandishing a slurppy, the blue ones

 

[Bunnykid68]

Forward, brandishing a slurppy, the blue ones

awww, he is good to go then

 

[public servant]

awww, he is going to jail then

FIFY

 

[steve666]

 

[Fargo]

It was reckless because he pulled it out with the grip in his firing hand. The clerk had no idea of his intentions and therefore was given reason to believe momentarily that his life was in danger. He pushed the panic button because he was, in his mind, being robbed. The actions of the OP's suspect were not intended as criminal, but because of the careless way he acted, he placed the clerk in fear for his life. Had the clerk been armed and shot the suspect, he would not be convicted. In my opinion the violation of the law occured because instead of simply readjusting his pants, he pulled the gun out of his pocket by the grip in what could be readily construed as ready to engage. The clerks statement of he might have pointed it at me is pushing things closer to a pointing a firearms charge on scene, thats IC 35-47-4-3 for anyone wondering.

(a) This section does not apply to a law enforcement officer who is acting within the scope of the law enforcement officer's official duties or to a person who is justified in using reasonable force against another person under:
(1) IC 35-41-3-2; or
(2) IC 35-41-3-3.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally points a firearm at another person commits a Class D felony. However, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if the firearm was not loaded.



Dirtebiker, it clearly states in the OP that the gun was being held in the right hand by the grip. The cashier also stated that the suspect may have pointed the gun at him.
I take it out of my pocket, I hold the slurpie and slim jim in my left hand, gun in my right,

but I did clearly have it out and grabbed it by the grip in manner to surprise the guy at the counter, he want something done, he tells the cops "I am not sure, but I think he pointed it at me".....

Based on further review of the video it states the the cop on scene is almost certain of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Based on my interpretation of the OPS original post, I change my answer slightly. The suspect is going to be arrested for criminal recklessness, IC 35-42-2-2, and pointing a firearm IC 35-47-4-3. He may be innocent, he may not, but by the preponderance of evidence I have reasonable suspicion a crime has been committed and probable cause to make the arrest. He did remove the firearm from his pocket, an act that was reckless in the situation, he should have just held his pants up and readjusted, he did in fact in the clerks statement point the firearm. Upon Terry stop and search he was found to be carrying a firearm. Upon review of the camera footage the suspect has been seen removing a firearm from his pocket by the grip. It does not get any clearer than that, the intent was not there which is why it is not an armed robbery or battery charge. However, the reckless behavior and pointing of a firearm is present.

Reread the pointing statute, it requires specific INTENT: something you acknowledge to be missing. Also, once again, do you know the legal definition of "reckless" and if so what is it?

Joe