Bizarre, Criminal law, Torts

California Armed Robber Who Stabbed Good Samaritan Will Now Reportedly Sue The Victim For Stabbing Him In Self Defense

download-1Ryan Flores, 30, is reportedly planning a tort action against Cregg Jerri, 58, for stabbing him in a California Starbuck.  Such a battery lawsuit would make perfect sense after being stabbed 17 times. The problem is that he was stabbed in the course of an armed robbery and Jerri was credited as the hero who ran forward to protect the staff from the gun-touting Flores. The filing would presumably not contest the right to use the privilege of self-defense but argue that Jerri somehow exceeded that authority.

A still from surveillance video shows a man thwarting a would be robber during an incident at a Fresno Starbucks in July, 2017.

Flores is shown on surveillance video wearing a Transformers mask and threatening a barista. Jerri then springs forward and hits him with a metal chair.  Flores then reportedly cut Jerri in the neck, but Jerri was able to take away the knife and stabbed Flores.

Flores’ mother has come forward to announce a lawsuit, saying that “The guy, in my opinion, went from a good Samaritan to a vigilante. Stabbing somebody that many times, it doesn’t take that many stab wounds to get somebody to succumb to you.”

Since Flores was still alive and had already stabbed Jerri with the same knife, the lawsuit would be, in my view, frivolous.  However, the claim of exceeding the privilege of self-defense is a long-recognized basis for liability.  California courts emphasize that this is a question for the trier of fact:

“The right to use force against another has long been limited by the condition
that the force be no more than ‘ “that which reasonably appears necessary, in
view of all the circumstances of the case, to prevent the impending injury.”
‘When the amount of force used is justifiable under the circumstances, it is not
willful and the actor may escape liability for intentionally injurious conduct that
is otherwise actionable. But if force is applied in excess of that which is
justified, the actor remains subject to liability for the damages resulting from
the excessive use of force. . . . When an alleged act of self-defense or defense
of property is at issue, the question of what force was reasonable and justified
is peculiarly one for determination by the trier of fact.”
Calvillo-Silva v. Home, Grocery (1998) 19 Cal.4th 714, 730–731.  One can claim both a privilege of self-defense and defense of others under the common law.  Indeed, in this case, Jerri began in defense of others and ended up with self-defense.
Some states have “Stand Your Ground” laws or “aggressor doctrines” that can come into play in such cases. Under the aggressor doctrine, a plaintiff is barred from recovery if he acted in such a way to provoke a reasonable person to use physical force in fear or anticipation of further injury.  Louisiana recently got rid of that doctrine but retained the self defense privilege.  Landy v. Bellanger, 2002-1443 (La. 2003).
Our common law rule is derived from England which applies a similar rule for the using of force in self-defense.  As Chief Justice Lord Parker explained in Chisam 47 Cr App Rep 130 (1963) “…. where a forcible and violent felony is attempted upon the person of another, the party assaulted, or his servant, or any other person present, is entitled to repel force by force, and, if necessary, to kill the aggressor ….”
The authority for self defence, of course, doesn’t stop with defending oneself from attack. It is perfectly permissible to use reasonable force to assist another person who is under threat of attack. For example, in Rose (1883) 15 Cox CC 540 the accused was acquitted of murdering his father, whom he shot dead, whilst the father was launching a murderous attack on the accused’s mother.
There is also a common law right to perform a citizen arrest in cases like this. While that right has been curtailed by statutory law, it generally still applies to felonies (like this one) and often misdemeanors committed in your presence.
Jurors tend not to draw the line too narrowly for those responding to lethal threats.  You are allowed to use lethal force in seeking to defend yourself from a lethal threat.  Here Flores was not killed but obviously seriously injured. The standard jury instruction asks if the defendant “used only the amount of force that was reasonably necessary to protect himself.” Watching this video, a jury is likely to conclude that Jerri would have been perfectly within his rights to kill Flores in the course of defending himself.

 It would be hard to imagine a jury finding Jerri to be excessive after being stabbed and thwarting an armed robbery.  With adrenaline and fear surging, most jurors would like view themselves as likely to continue to stabbing the assailant until he is unconscious or dead.

Flores would be much wiser to focus on his next court appearance in October for armed robbery.  Indeed, I am still unclear why he is not charged with attempted murder.

 

 

 

74 thoughts on “California Armed Robber Who Stabbed Good Samaritan Will Now Reportedly Sue The Victim For Stabbing Him In Self Defense”

  1. One of my local television channels ran this story on the evening news, along with the video of the struggle and a brief video of the robber’s alleged mother complaining about the excessive force used on her demon spawn. When the program cut back to the anchors, they were laughing hysterically and decrying the insanity of the mother’s chutzpah. The definition of chutzpah? It’s when a child, who has murdered both of his parents, goes before the judge, begging for mercy, and bases his pleas on the fact that he is an orphan. The only silver lining is that the robber’s wasn’t black. Had he been black, instead of white, riots would have ensued, stores in the town would have been vandalized, looted and torched, and the coffee shop would have been destroyed, at the very least. We should all say a prayer that the dirtbag, who got stabbed by the hero, was merely some white trash. Thank God for small favors.

  2. In the moments of tense, anxious defense, it is hard to exactly give the number of stabs necessary. It should be dismissed.

    It is embarrassing to be beaten so badly by a guy almost twice his age.

  4. “You are allowed to use lethal force in seeking to defend yourself from a lethal threat. ”
    Seems clear cut to me.
    Important question:
    Did or didn’t Jerri get his coffee?
    If he had, he could have said he was jacked up on caffeine.
    I hope Starbucks at least offers to pay Jerri’s legal bills.
    But, this did happen in California so who knows.

  5. Privilege of self defense? Why is it not a right? Would you please explain the difference.

  7. There was a time, during my lifetime, where a judge would call this plaintiffs attorney into his office, throw the complaint at his face and say, “DISMISSED!”

  9. This could have been handled the old fashioned way. As a gentleman’s quarrel.

    Now I’ll play a tune. Marty Robbins is of Paiute Indian heritage. His grandfather was a medicine man. Marty passed away in 1982.

    A handsome stranger rode into town one fine day. Didn’t have to much to say. No one dared to ask his business, he had a big iron on his hip. He was an Arizona Ranger after outlaw Texas Red, a vicious killer. Folks were watching from their windows & everybody held their breath.

    1. Hey, that was on Amazon’s $5 MP3 Album thingie a week or so ago, sooo I bought it! I also got Hank Williams 20 greatest hits, but IIRC, it was only $3.99. My father was into country music so I listened to a lot of it growing up.

      The nice thing about buying it that way, is you can play it on your Roku TV with the Amazon Music App.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  10. Personally , I think Cregg Jerri stabbed too few times. One more time might have been enough

  11. And, of course, his mother has a different surname than he has and appeared on television sporting a baseball cap. What Kenneth Roberts said: what we have in common is commonness.

  12. In a state that has “state-only licensed” law schools an outrage beyond even the normal excessive embarrassments of attorneys at large may actually be possible.

  13. The professor notes, “Ryan Flores, 30, is reportedly planning a tort action against Cregg Jerri, 58, for stabbing him in a California Starbuck. Such a battery lawsuit would make perfect sense after being stabbed 17 times.”

    The Washington D. C. professor, or some entity on his behalf, flashed onto a Fresno Bee “news story.”

    As any trial attorney in Northern or upper Southern California knows, to say nothing of a retired one, Fresno County or any Central Valley jurisdiction is not a particularly warm, fuzz and giving jury pool for victims of civil torts. This is true with respect to serious injuries and clear liability.

    Obviously, this is an example of how one or similar attorneys give the entire profession a “bad public image.”

    The operative word in this “story” whether the presstitute(s) or the blogging professor is “reportedly.”

    The headline of the pressitute or blog definitely draws one’s eye balls.

    Plaintiff or putative plaintiff Ryan Flores may consider the potential for being liable for statutory costs of any lawsuit filed, let alone tried to verdict.

    dennis hanna

  14. Reading between the lines, I am presuming that a lawyer has not yet been consulted. At least, I hope not. By filing a civil lawsuit, Flores would be required to submit to a deposition. At the deposition, he would be required to answer questions about the events surrounding the armed robbery for which he is charged, something he would not otherwise be required to do. He would undoubtedly incriminate himself and thereby prejudice his defense in the criminal case.

  15. “Indeed, I am still unclear why he is not charged with attempted murder.”

    Non-White Privilege.

  16. This is why you need to be packing heat! If it had been be, I would have pulled my 5 shot 38 out of my purse and popped at least 2 caps into Flores, and told him to get down on his knees and freeze. If he did not comply, then I would have popped two into his head, and then gone for my S&W Tactical Knife I keep in my boot.

    I am thinking about getting a second one, for my other boot, so I will not end up walking lopsided or anything.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    2. Squeeky – you either need another tactical knife or an equal amount of weight on the other side. You are going to cripple yourself. 🙂

    3. Take it easy, Rambo. Fights are messy, even with guns drawn.

      For all you know the guy’s buddy could run in and knock you out. Situations like this are rife with risk, which is why the amount of stabs should be considered irrelevant.

  17. I assume since this was a stabbing Cregg Jerri will win.

    But can you imagine if in addition to the stabbing Jerri had called Flores an ethnic slur or a bundle of wood?

  19. I doubt Flores could find a sympathetic jury but it’s possible his case is not entirely baseless. Maybe 10 stabbings were necessary to completely subdue him, another 3 were excuseable because of wild adrenalin and diminished capacity but the final four were were basically recreational. Or maybe not. Acts of heroism are often a socially acceptable form of bullying. Or maybe Jerri is purely heroic. Maybe a little unbalanced. I don’t know.

      1. DSS – Rex makes a decent case for what might be the only case the defendant will be able to present at trial. After reading his presentment of the issue, I am not sure where I would vote were I on the jury. Still, you would have to be an ambulance chaser to take this case.

        1. “Acts of heroism are often a socially acceptable form of bullying. ” is the sort of remark which might be made by a dispomaniacal school psychologist.

          1. DSS – “acts of heroism are often a socially acceptable form of bullying.” That came out of left-field. And I mean very far left field. That I would like to see backed up. For one, we know the author of the statement was NEVER a hero. Two, we know the author of the statement either was a bully or got bullied.

            1. Silly question here, would a blow to the head been more effective at ending the scene? I know what happened is a reflexive response, but curious to know if a heavy blow would have been more effective.

              I guess, it’s all in if you know it’s coming or not. Just would have thought he would have gone for a kidney for the rapid loss in BP though. Hmmmm.

              1. slohrss29 – if stabbing him 17 times did not stop him do you think a rap up the side of the head would do it?

                    1. Yep. Plus, it looked in the video as the assailant was struck directly across both scapulas–the shoulder blades, probably the most effective armored spot on your body. If he would have brought that chair down on his head, it would have been game over. But… another odd thought, I wonder if his moral compass might have not allowed him to deliver what may have been a fatal blow. Don’t worry, I’ll end my OCD on this note…

                    2. Slohrss29, I don’t think the man had much practice in smashing a chair into another’s head. I think he probably tried even though the man was wearing a helmet, but missed. I think he might have done better if he had a sharp axe and took a couple of whacks. 🙂

          2. I looked up “dipsomaniacal”; now I can respond. Maybe I should have written”faux-heroism.” I am not judging Flores–I can’t; I don’t know enough about what happened. But some bullies love it when a potential victim gives them at least the appearance of a semi-valid excuse to cloak their bullying in virtue I suspect you might know what I mean because you alluded to a school psychologist and this behavior is common among school-age bullies. Some cops and prison guards also do it. If only 1 of the 17 stabbings was just for fun Jerri has a case. But I can’t imagine him winning it.

            2. You can see what happened on the video. His family admits he was there to rob the place. “What you mean” is a set of associations which exists inside your head and just about nowhere else.

            3. The criminal used two potentailly deadly weapons a knife and a gun. At the moment I am not concerned with what type of individual took him down.

    2. Rex, you are trying to think too much and that is leading you astray. The criminal used deadly force with both a knife and a gun. Sensible people should recognize that no one facing that type of threat should be going through your type of mental gymnastics. The threat has to be put down and it is in the hands of the one actually doing the job to make such a decision. We are dealing in seconds, not days or hours.

      If it were me and I was using a gun and he violently threatened my family and was physically a threat because of size, skills or whatever, I would unload the entire gun until he ceased all movement. If he then started to get up I would beat his head open with the butt of the gun until all movement ceased.

      1. allan – one of the theories (and practice) of a smaller or older person fighting a larger or younger one, is to make sure the person never get gets up from the floor.

  20. Who saw the lawyers on the bus stop? And then made the call? Or did the defendant have these guys on speed dial? I cannot see the defendant winning this suit.

Comments are closed.