Results 1 to 10 of 31
-
September 15th, 2011 10:40 AM #1
The wife tore the lining of her bag and hid the firearm inside according to news report. Unless SM has a xray machine or used a severe search... Walang sustento galing kay mister kasi.
2 dead in QC mall shooting | Inquirer News
MANILA, Philippines – A woman shot and killed her husband and a civilian guard inside a shopping mall in Quezon City Wednesday night, police said.
Sheila Macapugay fired at Abel Macapugay, a sales clerk at SM North EDSA, at past 7 p.m., said Senior Police Officer 2 Roldan Dapat of the Criminal Investigation and Detection Unit of Quezon City Police District Station 2.
Ricardo Inamac III, a civilian guard who tried to wrestle the firearm from her, was also shot.
Both victims were rushed to the Quezon City General Hospital but were declared dead on arrival, said Dapat.
He said that charges were being readied against the suspect who has been put under police custody.
He said that an investigation was ongoing to determine how Macapugay was able to carry a gun inside the shopping mall.
The motive behind the shooting is unclear as of posting time
-
-
-
September 15th, 2011 11:11 AM #4
Kaya iyong (dati) kong GF na kasama sa shooting team,- nilayuan ko.... :hysterical:
14.1K:tvcomedy:
-
September 15th, 2011 11:43 AM #5
hinde pala nadetect ng mga harry potter wand ng mga guard yun baril?
-
September 15th, 2011 01:13 PM #6
-
September 15th, 2011 01:16 PM #7
Could the mall be help accountable in this case for not detecting the firearm?
Any lawyers here?
-
September 15th, 2011 02:28 PM #8
The only question to be determined in a court of law would be, was the mall's management grossly negligent?
In my opinion, no. For this mall at least (SM North) security personnel are in place in the entrances of the store and the parking areas. The security guards conduct routine checks on packages or bags brought in by patrons. You also have roving guards going around the mall premises. These guards are at least given the bare minimum equipment to do their job (i.e. metal detectors, guns, flashlights, etc.)
Based on this, the mall can very well say that it exerted reasonable effort to ensure the security of its patrons and employees and that no amount of checking, short of a complete search of both the patron and his packages or bags would have prevented the shooting.
On the other hand, the mall can be questioned on its actions after the shooting. I.e., did it do enough in time to save the lives of the employee and the security guard? Now that's something else.
-
September 18th, 2011 10:09 PM #9
Based on the news clippings, the woman may invoke Section 26 of Republic Act 9262. this, in addition to the justifying circumstance under the Revised Penal Code, may be invoked as special justifying circumstance that would absolve the wife. this is the battered woman syndrome provision.
-
Be careful with channels like "China Observer" on YouTube. There is a clear bias in their posts and...
Xiaomi E-Car