Good shoot?

It may depend on who initiated aggression in the restroom. If the 22 year old from Detroit started it, the two on one video may not be the determining factor.
If the dead 20 year Old from Pontiac started things in the restroom it will probably be a good shoot, but the 22 year Old from Detroit is going to face civil charges from the woman shot, and probably be trespassed by the mall for failing to comply with the No Firearms Policy. At a minimum.
 
Good or bad. We need a hell of a lot of facts that aren't listed to make a correct statement.
The person who mentioned if the case is a real SD case having a firearm in a public place/ private place open to public. That posts "NO firearms" nothing should come of any charges to the armed person for having the gun, again IF the use was legal. That type of court ruling has been about in states for years. The DAs should know better and not even file that charge.
This applies to people that are not band from owning a firearm by fed or state laws.
The woman who was hit by a stray bullet likely will get a lawyer and want money. Doubt the shooter has anything worth going after. The money is with who owes the property. They pull crap like saying the property owner should have had methods in place that prevent or stop violence. So they owe her money. Can they win? it's a civil law case not criminal law. Who knows the outcome.
 
If it really happened according to the article, there was an altercation in the restroom, then later it restarted at the food court with the attacker bringing a friend. If that is what is determined to be the truth, then I'd say it was justified. If they prove that the altercation never ended, but just started in the bathroom but then extended itself to the food court. then they may say that the shooter had opportunities to end the fight before the gun was pulled and it will be more difficult to be exonerated.
 
Back
Top