I just read the interview from the Herald, and I believe the old guy when he said he was holding on because he was scared. But, the old guy claimed that was before the kid 'gave-up' the first time. The guy then went to get some wire to restrain the boy until the cops showed...and then another struggle started....and ultimately the kid gave up a second time by giving up his ghost.

The old guy did admit that the kid intially had no intention of sticking around to face the cops, and he tried to stop him which resulted in the two of them trading blows, which the old man was losing. Because he was losing that battle he held on, for what he believed was his dear life.

The kid was initially going to walk/run away, I am not so sure this old guy should not be punished for at the very least manslaughter. By keeping the kid there, he escalated the situation. He knew the kid's name, his nephew probably knew where to get ahold of him. He ideally had another option open to him.

Which brings in a whole new issue...would the police have responded to an attempted burglary and pursued the suspect? Given the experiences of some of you, that seems like a stretch for today's LE policy.

What a mess...
_________________________
A veteran - whether active duty, retired, or national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point, wrote a blank check made payable to "The United States of America," for an amount of "up to and including my life."