Seattle Bank Teller Fired for Chasing, Apprehending Robber

[Amused]

Seattle Bank Teller Fired for Chasing, Apprehending Robber
Saturday, August 01, 2009

SEATTLE ? A Seattle bank teller has lost his job because he ran down a would-be bank robber and held him until police arrived.

Jim Nicholson, who worked at a Key Bank branch, says he understands the bank's policy that employees comply with robbery demands and avoid dangerous confrontations. But he tells The Seattle Times that his instincts took over when the man demanded money during the Tuesday incident.

Nicholson says he tried to grab the man, then chased him several blocks before knocking him down with help from a passer-by. The man turned out to be unarmed.

The 30-year-old Nicholson was fired Thursday. Key Bank officials declined to comment, but Seattle police and the FBI say they advise tellers against acting against robbers. Instead, police Sgt. Sean Whitcomb says, they should be good witnesses and comply with demands unless their personal safety is in jeopardy.

 

[amdhunter]

Yeah, dumb move.

If the guy was armed, he could have gotten himself (or others) killed. Also, he is opening the bank to a flurry of lawsuits from the robber.

 

[se7en]

I hope he gets hired right back by some other company.

Originally posted by: amdhunter
Also, he is opening the bank to a flurry of lawsuits from the robber.

Only in America can you commit a crime and sue the people you robbed.

 

[TallBill]

On one hand, dumb move. On the other, badass. Bank doesn't give a shit because they are insured against theft and employees are replaceable.

 

[compuwiz1]

All heroics aside, the teller should not have chased the robber. Banks have insurance for this sort of thing and risking his and other's safety was a dumb move. I would also bet that policy prohibits doing what he did.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: se7en
I hope he gets hired right back by some other company.

Originally posted by: amdhunter
Also, he is opening the bank to a flurry of lawsuits from the robber.

Only in America can you commit a crime and sue the people you robbed.

No, that would be the UK too.

 

[mugs]

Bank was right to fire him. Nothing bad happened this time, but if someone gets hurt the next time one of their employees tries to foil a robbery, their lack of enforcement of the policy would be used against them.

I don't think that a company should be liable for the actions of a rogue employee, but most people disagree with me on that so this is the result.

 

[miniMUNCH]

Originally posted by: se7en
I hope he gets hired right back by some other company.

Originally posted by: amdhunter
Also, he is opening the bank to a flurry of lawsuits from the robber.

Only in America can you commit a crime and sue the people you robbed.

Seriously... that one of many things that is horribly wrong in this country.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: se7en

Originally posted by: amdhunter
Also, he is opening the bank to a flurry of lawsuits from the robber.

Only in America can you commit a crime and sue the people you robbed.

You missed the point. The customers would sue the bank for getting shot by the robber.

Option A:
Teller hands over cash, robber leaves quickly, everybody is safe

Option B:
Teller goes cowboy, robber pulls gun and starts shooting wildly, 3 bystanders wounded, bystanders sue bank because of idiot teller.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: se7en
I hope he gets hired right back by some other company.

Originally posted by: amdhunter
Also, he is opening the bank to a flurry of lawsuits from the robber.

Only in America can you commit a crime and sue the people you robbed.

How often does this actually happen? I always hear people talking about it happening all the time, but I don't think I've actually seen a specific case where a criminal successfully sued their victim. I'm sure it has happened, but I don't think it's as commonplace as people seem to think it is.

I think the bank is more concerned about the lawsuits that could result if a criminal killed/injured customers or employees after an employee tried to stop him.

 

[RaistlinZ]

The bank did the right thing. There's no reason to run and put your life in danger over a few dollars the bank is going to get back anyway. He's damn lucky no one got hurt.

 

[91TTZ]

What is wrong with these backwards countries? He could have been caught (or will get caught without a slow bank teller). Animals...

 

[91TTZ]

Man, people are such cowards nowadays. Look at all of these limp-wristed people.

 

[Gibson486]

UMMM....yeah, company did the right thing. I am pretty sure it is the companies policy to let a robber go. If not, an employee could get killed and teh family could sue. It's just bad news no matter how you spin it.

 

[91TTZ]

I think some of the people on this board are less-than-athletic nerds who look down on anything athletic or physical. Of course many people on here will be against the idea that anyone take matters into their own hands. Being so incapable themselves they cannot fathom that someone actually man up and do something about their situation. Instead, they're content acting like cowards and then posting threads about how they're a victim. (+5 victim bonus!)

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
I think some of the people on this board are less-than-athletic nerds who look down on anything athletic or physical. Of course many people on here will be against the idea that anyone take matters into their own hands. Being so incapable themselves they cannot fathom that someone actually man up and do something about their situation. Instead, they're content acting like cowards and then posting threads about how they're a victim. (+5 victim bonus!)

hmm not sure if you are trolling or really this stupid.



Davesimmons pointed out EXACTLY why the bank does not want anyone trying to stop the robber. they have insurance for such shit.

IF a idiot attacks the robber and he pulls the gun and starts shooting and hits a costumer guess who is going to get sued? if you say anything other then the bank you are a idiot.

this is not a case of being brave and standing up for what you think is right. this is a case of protecting your ass

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
I think some of the people on this board are less-than-athletic nerds who look down on anything athletic or physical. Of course many people on here will be against the idea that anyone take matters into their own hands. Being so incapable themselves they cannot fathom that someone actually man up and do something about their situation. Instead, they're content acting like cowards and then posting threads about how they're a victim. (+5 victim bonus!)

hmm not sure if you are trolling or really this stupid.



Davesimmons pointed out EXACTLY why the bank does not want anyone trying to stop the robber. they have insurance for such shit.

Oh, I understand all that. That's a given. But you need to take all the other threads into account and you'll see that it paints a picture for you. One thing remains constant and it's that many posters on here won't man up and take matters into their own hands in any situation. They're content believing that someone else will always come through to do the job for them.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Man, people are such cowards nowadays. Look at all of these limp-wristed people.

FAIL. It has nothing to do with cowardice. I would applaud the guy if he was just a bystander who stopped a criminal. This guy wasn't a bystander, he was an employee who exposed his employer to potentially significant lawsuits.

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Man, people are such cowards nowadays. Look at all of these limp-wristed people.

Meh. If the situation were different I might give chase. Id tend to be " Meh, take it. Its not mine "

Bank robbers always get caught man. I think its gotta be one of the most stupid crimes. They always get them on camera and someone that knows the robber always rats em out with crime stoppers.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Man, people are such cowards nowadays. Look at all of these limp-wristed people.

FAIL. It has nothing to do with cowardice. I would applaud the guy if he was just a bystander who stopped a criminal. This guy wasn't a bystander, he was an employee who exposed his employer to potentially significant lawsuits.

As I said before you posted, I understand that. That fact in this case is basic and obvious.

Why don't you read some more threads on this forum to get a feel of what's really going on here. The situations change but certain things (such as most ATOT members' risk aversion or inability to do anything physical) remain constant.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Man, people are such cowards nowadays. Look at all of these limp-wristed people.

Meh. If the situation were different I might give chase. Id tend to be " Meh, take it. Its not mine "

Bank robbers always get caught man. I think its gotta be one of the most stupid crimes. They always get them on camera and someone that knows the robber always rats em out with crime stoppers.

I agree, I wouldn't have done it. I never commented on the guy who got fired or the bank that fired him. I only commented on some of the cowardly replies from members on here.

 

[StageLeft]

No it was wrong. It has that policy in place to protect its ass, but if this guy had killed himself they would already have been protected. If after this event they reiterate "do not chase robbers!" and somebody else does it, they are still protected. All this does is make them look like pedantic ass-hungry douchebags.

 

[Phokus]

91TTZ strikes again

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Man, people are such cowards nowadays. Look at all of these limp-wristed people.

Meh. If the situation were different I might give chase. Id tend to be " Meh, take it. Its not mine "

Bank robbers always get caught man. I think its gotta be one of the most stupid crimes. They always get them on camera and someone that knows the robber always rats em out with crime stoppers.

I agree, I wouldn't have done it. I never commented on the guy who got fired or the bank that fired him. I only commented on some of the cowardly replies from members on here.

havent you ranted about this before? if you hate the posters here so much why do u keep coming back

 

[Lithium381]

Originally posted by: se7en
I hope he gets hired right back by some other company.

Originally posted by: amdhunter
Also, he is opening the bank to a flurry of lawsuits from the robber.

Only in America can you commit a crime and sue the people you robbed.

yep, criminals have more rights than the law abiding citizens. disgusting