Vigilantism and property crime in Winnipeg

Opinion

On the one hand, vigilante justice is no solution to Winnipeg’s crime problem.

On the other, what exactly do criminals expect if they’re caught in the act by frustrated citizens who are tired of constant thefts? And what are victims supposed to do in a city like Winnipeg, where police response to property theft calls is not always, shall we say, prompt or consistent?

Consider the case of 36-year-old Michael Prince, who is now suing a downtown grocery store owner (and others) after Prince stole a jacket containing a wallet and a car key fob from Dino’s Grocery Mart on Isabel Street.

After taking the jacket, he decided 30 minutes later to go back and try to steal the car connected to the key fob as well.

That did not go as smoothly.

The car was boxed in by other vehicles, and when Prince got into the car, its alarm brought what his lawsuit describes as eight or nine store staff who “punched, kicked and hit him repeatedly” and reportedly also hit him with a hammer. No one was charged in the attack on Prince.

His lawsuit says that “The amount of force used against him was far in excess of what was necessary to execute a citizen’s arrest or detain him pending the arrival of law enforcement personnel.” (It’s an interesting argument, because Prince actually escaped from the scene before police arrived, though his lawsuit says he doesn’t remember how.)

“Prince says he has no memory of fleeing the scene of the assault until he found himself running about a block away from the scene,” the lawsuit reads. “Prince says that when he became aware of his surroundings, he discovered that he was bleeding and had suffered blows to the head, which he later learned were the result of being hit by a hammer wielded by one or more of the assailants.”

His lawsuit says Prince has suffered long-term injuries from the attack: “(S)ince the (incident), he suffers from constant fear, anxiety, apprehensiveness, depression and feelings of worthlessness as a result of the conduct of the defendants” and is unable to maintain employment, along with permanent hearing and vision loss, cranial nerve damage, and ongoing migraines, insomnia and panic attacks.

As a Free Press story on Friday pointed out, Prince has a lengthy record of property thefts, including 17 prior theft convictions; a pre-sentence report in one case said he claimed to be the head of a theft ring that had successfully stolen over $1 million in merchandise over a nine-year span. Incidentally, that same pre-sentence report said Prince was “hoping for significant payment from various things,” including — wait for it — proceeds from a lawsuit for a beating by staff at a grocery store.

From insult to injury.

We could be glib here and say that any workplace, even a theft ring, can have hazards, and if you decide to break the law and steal a car in the course of your chosen employment, you obviously face the risk of personal injury: you can’t simply expect the car’s owner to stand aside and let you drive away unhindered.

At the same time, there’s obviously a threshold of what constitutes reasonable force in detain a criminal while attempting to stop a crime.

If this case goes ahead, the courts will eventually determine where this incident falls on that spectrum: at the same time, should Prince win, one would hope that the judge involved would consider to what degree Prince is largely the architect of his own misfortune, and reduce any damages proportionally.

The bottom line? A violent response to a crime in progress may not be acceptable: it is, however, sadly understandable.