Welcome to GSL

This login is for the website administrators.

Please use the member login link in the main navigation bar to access the members sections.

Member Login
Lost your password?

Unbelievable: Hack attorney claims store clerk shouldn’t have defended his life with gun

May 29, 2013

Simply unbelievable.  This attorney must have hailed from one of the most liberal law schools on the east coast.

The attorney, a former prosecutor, claims the store clerk who faced the armed robbers should have ran from the store or called police instead of using a gun to defend his life and that of other innocents present.  This lawyer (are you listening Amavalise Jaramillo, you pathetic hack?) should be disbarred.

Dead robber’s widow sues shop clerk

Albuquerque, NM (KRQE) – The wife of an armed robbery suspect shot dead by a shop clerk said the clerk was wrong, and now she has filed a civil lawsuit claiming wrongful death.

The lawsuit was filed Tuesday on behalf of the Ramon Sedillo’s widow and child. Sedillo was shot and killed in October 2012 after police say he walked into Full Spectrum Smoke Shop armed with a gun and intending to rob the store.

Instead, the store clerk, Matthew Beasley, fired his gun at Sedillo killing him and injuring his 17-year-old alleged accomplice.Sedillo’s widow is  now suing the store clerk saying he was in the wrong.

Sedillo’s attorney, Amavalise Jaramillo, the attorney for Sedillo’s widow, said it all comes down to who had more fault in the case.

While Jaramillo acknowledges the suspect’s role in what happened, he said Beasley shares more blame.

“He does bear some fault, but it’s like a pie.  You divide out the fault accordingly, and Mr. Beasley could have done something different,” Jaramillo said.

The suit alleges surveillance video shows Beasley watching Sedillo and his accomplice getting ready to commit the crime. Jaramillo claims the clerk should have then called police or left the store instead of shooting Sedillo.

The lawsuit states the clerk decided to “ambush” the thieves.

59 Responses to Unbelievable: Hack attorney claims store clerk shouldn’t have defended his life with gun

  1. Ron on May 29, 2013 at 7:54 am

    This lawyer is equal to the POS thief. Face it, Ramon was just trying to feed his family and I’ll bet this was going to be his last robbery. The next day he was scheduled to start his new job working for the Billy Graham Crusades.

    • mike on May 29, 2013 at 1:28 pm

      F- off DUDE you know he wasnt trying to feed his family.. that is BS he got what was coming to him..

      • Mark on May 29, 2013 at 1:42 pm

        Mike you may want to look up a little known literary concept known as satire. Ron’s comment was dripping with sarcasm.

      • archangeljames on May 29, 2013 at 9:25 pm

        lmmfaooo Right Ron. Too funny and your sarcasm rawked

      • Bmman on May 31, 2013 at 10:59 am

        Dude he was being sarcastic now approving.

    • Howie on May 31, 2013 at 11:12 am

      Hey Ron I agree with you, the only problem I see, the store owner should have been a better shot and killed both… Good ole 2nd amendment at work…

  2. chuck Morris on May 29, 2013 at 9:23 am

    Well, these scumbags need to find a different line of work.

    • julie ortega on May 29, 2013 at 4:14 pm

      I completely agree with u!!

    • Brian on May 29, 2013 at 6:35 pm

      How about worm chow?

  3. Bob on May 29, 2013 at 9:27 am

    Too many living lawyers.

  4. keith on May 29, 2013 at 9:32 am

    Unbelievable!! Who pays for this case to be heard?

    • Heather on May 29, 2013 at 1:49 pm

      Sadly the people of the state (if a state case) or all of us (If a US court room)

      • Expat on May 29, 2013 at 2:19 pm

        Nope, civil case. Schister will get a third of whats collected. They don’t care about the clerk, just the insurance he has. The insurance company will settle out of court as it’s cheaper than defending. Works like a charm.

      • Art on May 29, 2013 at 4:52 pm

        They better NOT find this guy defending his rights GUILTY! Any one of us would have done the same. If we can not constitutionally stand up and defend our rights then we are all in very serious trouble here. If you have a gun and intent harm to anyone…EXPECT harm to come to you!!! You are NOT above any laws because your HAVE A GUN..Goes for police too! Come on people. This is just fact that has gone on way too long and too many BULL SH’T laws are letting these rights go. Next thing you know we will be prosecuted for displaying a flag as it has already happened in England! There are much higher powers at stake here. AND THEY HAVE BIGGER GUNS. Fear not the guns…fear the sickened holding them.

      • Chris on May 29, 2013 at 9:49 pm

        Art,
        You do know the difference between a civil trial and a criminal, don’t you?
        This is a civil trial. The store clerk cannot be sent to jail, even if he loses the lawsuit. But this will never make it to trial as any judge with any sense will dismiss it.

  5. Biff Sarin on May 29, 2013 at 9:40 am

    It’s a crying shame that the clerk didn’t kill both of them. Would have saved us taxpayers at least one criminal trial for the survivor and probably several as this 17 year old is just beginning his life of crime.

    Lady quite whining because your husband was shot to death. If a person chooses to skydive then no one should be surprised if one their chute doesn’t open and they die. Likewise, if you choose to commit armed robbery, no one should be surprised if one day you are shot to death. That is a consequence of the decision he made for himself.

    • Tim on May 29, 2013 at 12:35 pm

      Both criminals choice to go into the story to take what was NOT theirs with guns in their hands. The store clerk had every right to shoot them both to death. They put the store clerk and them self in danger of dying by doing so. The store clerk could not have known if the criminals had the intentions of killing him, after all he would have been a witness and the victim. They were carrying weapons that were meant to kill or a tool for defense. The attorney is after the fame and money.

    • Art on May 29, 2013 at 4:54 pm

      Here Here!

  6. MrApple on May 29, 2013 at 9:55 am

    I say screw the robber and screw the attorney. The robber took a chance and paid the price for his actions. I feel sorry for the widow and child but maybe next time she will find a man who makes better decisions with his life.

  7. Jeff Cantwell on May 29, 2013 at 10:08 am

    If there is any justice, the judge should toss the case with prejudice, unable to refile.

  8. Navy Chief on May 29, 2013 at 12:08 pm

    This is unbelievable, you get sued trying to protect your place of employment and its property. The law has become cupable in a lot of the problems we have in this country by allowing suits like this; the judge should have thrown it out for no cause of action since the deceased was in the act of committing a crime!

  9. just wondering on May 29, 2013 at 12:17 pm

    what is wrong with people a guy walks into your store with a gun with the intent to take what he is to damn lazy to go out and work for and the clerk is the one being sued.
    News flash you walk into my house or place of work with a gun with the intent to do evil you will be shot and i do not shoot to disable

  10. Rob Morse on May 29, 2013 at 12:29 pm

    I think the widow owes the store clerk. She stood to benefit from the robbery. Didn’t she support the criminal?

  11. C. Wyatt Hertz on May 29, 2013 at 12:33 pm

    Any judge who would actually let this one come to trial should be disbarred.

    • Kalashnikat on May 29, 2013 at 1:01 pm

      Defrocked, disbarred, disrobed, tarred, and feathered, and given a courtesy shuttle to the edge of town tied to a fence rail…

      • jim on May 29, 2013 at 4:16 pm

        You forgot to say if he has any balls they should be taken away.

  12. ex-marine & patiot on May 29, 2013 at 12:39 pm

    The clerk had every right to defend his self & the stores property , if he had tried to call the police,& or run , he would have probably been shot him self ! I noticed both the victim & lawyer were both Hispanic , looking for some easy money ! !

    • Jamie on May 29, 2013 at 2:17 pm

      AMEN!! ex-marine!!! Hipanics looking for easy money!! Like they don’t get enough already!!!!!!

  13. tbsaxon on May 29, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    This is what our country is coming to we will be seeing more of these law suits as people in today’s america feel that everything is theirs for nothing including those that rob, and especially non americans

    • Jamie on May 29, 2013 at 2:20 pm

      Definitely the nonamericans!! I don’t understand why we have let them have sooo much??!!! When is it going to stop??!!

  14. bucko on May 29, 2013 at 12:56 pm

    I might get sued or charged with a crime if I suggested maybe somebody should shoot this attorney, so I won’t do that.

  15. Freedom Force on May 29, 2013 at 1:00 pm

    I would love to read a story about this LAWYER being put in jail, now that would be FUN.

  16. jjc49mc on May 29, 2013 at 1:03 pm

    Lady! go get a job like the rest of us have to do to get MONEY!

    • Jamie on May 29, 2013 at 2:21 pm

      AMEN!!

    • Noel on May 30, 2013 at 12:07 am

      She is probably on welfare and food stamps, I don’t want to say maybe not here in US legally…

  17. Bear on May 29, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    What a quack! Doesn’t this attorney know when a person walks into a store with a mask and a gun that person has every intention of causing harm. Must be an Obama butt buddy!

  18. Lynn Greer on May 29, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    This lady has it all wrong! How about the store owner sues her for her husband coming in the store with the intent to take from him what he rightfully earned?? Check to see if she’s here legally and if not deport her and her kid. She doesn’t get what it is to be an American. Where people are supposed to get out and work for what they want or need, not steal it

    • Jamie on May 29, 2013 at 2:22 pm

      Couldn’t have said it better myself!

    • Shayne on May 29, 2013 at 5:30 pm

      Maybe the clerk could at least sue her for the cost replacement bullets… That would fire things up a little!

    • Noel on May 30, 2013 at 12:10 am

      No not the clerk but his wife should sue for the anguish that it caused her to hear her husband almost died in an armed robbery

  19. Cliff Hicks on May 29, 2013 at 1:47 pm

    What ambulance chasing scum lawyer would defend this POS criminals wifes claim? Defense attourneys… Lowest life form!!!

  20. Nightmyst on May 29, 2013 at 2:11 pm

    Well, why don’t we make use of our Freedom of Speech to help a fellow patriot while we still have it?? Nothing like putting pressure on hacks by making their phones ring off the hook. Share!

    Jaramillo Amavalise Law Offices
    (505) 304-0405
    413 Los Lentes Rd Ne
    Los Lunas, NM 87031

  21. Rich P on May 29, 2013 at 2:13 pm

    That’s an interesting argument for sure. So, with this idea in mind, anyone who defends themself against: Rape, Murder, Arson, Theft, etc. has options. They could do something else besides defend themselves with a weapon. Gotcha.

    • Noel on May 30, 2013 at 12:13 am

      your right, what if it was your wife, child or parents, would you let it continue or would you take action to end the encounter, with deadly force if required????? think about that….

  22. richard schafer on May 29, 2013 at 2:17 pm

    If she wins, that’s like sayin it’s ok to be an armed robber!!! WTF’s the matter with these attorneys??? He was a criminal and a fellon doing an armed robbery!!!!!!

  23. Dan on May 29, 2013 at 3:20 pm

    Now he is a good thief, a dead one.
    Lady go make a mockery of law to whatever rock you crawled from under

  24. Alan Miller on May 29, 2013 at 3:45 pm

    The robber got what was coming to him. The store clerk should be given a medal as he probably prevented someone innocent getting hurt and more robberies by these criminals.

  25. Saundra on May 29, 2013 at 4:03 pm

    Whats truly sad is since this is a civil case, the actions that caused the robber his life will not be called in to question. The facts of the case are that the store clerk willfully and willingly took the life of another. They nit pick the laws a part to serve their needs!! More power to the person willing to not be pushed around by lazy worthless punks who do nothing but live off the work of others; like this criminal tried to do.

  26. Jim on May 29, 2013 at 4:06 pm

    I like how the Lawyer says the Clerk could have done something different. And that he ambushed him. Hey Lawyer! Maybe if the criminal didn’t enter the store to rob it, things would have turned out better. WTF

  27. Lynn on May 29, 2013 at 4:49 pm

    Hopefully the judge will be smart enough to dismiss this idiotic suit. Bar Association should look into dis-barring this hack attorney.

  28. KK on May 29, 2013 at 5:08 pm

    The clerk needs to counter-sue the scum bag’s estate for the emotional trauma his actions caused. The estate probably contains nothing, but it would make a statement, and maybe make her back off.

  29. mic on May 29, 2013 at 6:02 pm

    Just more proof our country is in trouble! a minority group comes along and suddenly we have to change our country to suit them. Thanks to Tolerance and P/C! I hope the judge throws this case out, but if the mans wife is not already on welfare she soon will be.

  30. Daniel on May 29, 2013 at 7:09 pm

    I hope he shot the asshole twice.

  31. Dave on May 30, 2013 at 7:03 am

    The wife is just upset she lost her husband & now she has to get a job. no welfare for her sorry butt…

  32. SED on May 30, 2013 at 8:45 am

    This is exactly the type of Civil suit that we warn students about who attend our GSL Defense Training. If you utilize deadly force, you must be aware that there can be both criminal and civil complications against the defender. All of you railing against the attorney should also think about this: he would not be filing this suit if some jury somewhere had not awarded money to a scumbag who got himself shot. Dumb juries and legislators who write the law are the root cause of this problem.

  33. John J Sabrowski on May 30, 2013 at 4:32 pm

    The robber was shot in an attempt to disarm him/her, as to not allow the act of robbery from being carried out. It is no different than shooting people with guns in hand who come into your home and you do not know that person. What do you think? Just stand there to see if you get shot first, then shoot the strange insurgent intruder who came in unwelcome in the first place? Right, the defense attorney is part of the gang of robbers as an accessory to the crime of armed robbery in action. Case needs to tossed out of court. Boy, what a story, the robber was on his way to evangelize with the Billy Graham troop the next. Just catch up on collecting some excess cash first via an attempt to rob a store. Huuuhuuuu….

  34. Rocky on May 31, 2013 at 2:47 pm

    I’ve never met a lawyer that was not a lying piece ocrap. Piece ocrap got what he deserved. wouldn’t make the news if he had killed the clerk and they sued. So what, she claiming loss of income. GUESS WHAT DIPSHIT HE HAD NO INCOME.

    • AV on May 31, 2013 at 9:04 pm

      The police needs to investigate a little deeper because it seems to me that the so called “widow” could be in this robbery together with thew other 2 thieves.

  35. er on June 5, 2013 at 3:32 pm

    Clear back (and probably prior) to the start of our Nation’s forming in 1776, to just call someone else a “lawyer” was considered FIGHTIN’ WORDS! Feel free to check out the “Hell Freezes Over” album by the Eagles. The cut entitled “Get Over It” should be the theme song for all the law abiding, conservative minded, hard working folks in this GREAT Land of ours. The trouble is that the other side of the isle has been allowed to borrow in tighter that a troop of ticks. Time to get the tweezers.
    God Bless America….she’s gonna need it!