Charged with Involuntary Manslaughter for “Stopping” Thief

Charge with involuntary manslaughter for stopping thief.

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

V.

HASSAN WALID AIYASH

Case Summary:

This case revolves around a gas station attendant who was charged with involuntary manslaughter after a patron was fatally shot inside the store. The attendant remotely locked the store’s door after the patron attempted to leave without paying. The patron became agitated and shot three people, killing one.

Short Background

Samuel McCray went into a Detroit gas station around three o’clock in the morning on May 6, 2023, and tried to buy about four dollars’ worth of snacks and beverages.

Defendant was working as the gas-station attendant at the time. After McCray’s card was declined, McCray threatened to kill defendant and tried to leave with the unpaid-for merchandise.

Defendant stopped McCray by remotely locking the gas station’s only door, trapping McCray and three other patrons inside the gas-station store.

Standing behind bulletproof glass, defendant mocked McCray while the other three patrons pleaded with defendant to unlock the door.

Defendant initially refused, allowing the situation in the store to escalate for several minutes before finally unlocking the door.

But by that time, it was too late—McCray believed that one of the other patrons, Gregory Kelly, had insulted him, so McCray took out a gun and shot Kelly nine times, killing him.

McCray shot another patron, David Langston, three times, and the third patron, Anthony Bowden, three or four times.

On these facts, the prosecution seeks to hold defendant criminally liable for Kelly’s death under a theory of involuntary manslaughter.

The district court bound defendant over on the charge, and the circuit court affirmed.

Full story link and court opinion at end of this article.

Legal Issue:

The primary legal question is whether the attendant’s actions were the proximate cause of the death. Proximate cause requires a reasonably foreseeable link between the defendant’s actions and the harm.

Prosecution’s Argument:

The prosecution argued that the attendant’s actions escalated the situation and led to the shooting, making him liable. The lower court agreed.

Court of Appeals’ Ruling:

The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the patron’s intentional actions were not reasonably foreseeable. The court noted that the attendant had no prior knowledge of the patron’s dangerousness.

Comparison to People v. Crumbley:

The court contrasted this case with People v. Crumbley, where parents were held liable for their son’s school shooting because they knew of his mental health issues and gave him access to a gun.

Importance of the Case:

This case highlights the strict standards for proximate cause in criminal cases, particularly involving third-party actions. It emphasizes that mere escalation of a situation does not automatically lead to criminal liability for unforeseeable violence. The decision also illustrates the court’s caution in expanding criminal liability for third-party actions.

Read full detailed story and court opinion here

Charged with Involuntary Manslaughter for Stopping Thief 20240925_C369689_31_369689.opn.CAO

Note: This article provides a general overview and does not substitute for legal advice. Anyone charged with a crime should consult an attorney for specific legal guidance.