Seattle bank teller chases robber, loses job

[Howzit]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090802/ap_on_fe_st/us_odd_robbery_teller

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, 30, who had worked for more than two years at a Key Bank branch near the Seattle Center, says he understands the bank's strict policy that employees comply with robbery demands and avoid confrontations.

But he told The Seattle Times that instinct took over when a thin man in a beanie cap, dark clothing and sunglasses pushed a black backpack across the bank counter on Tuesday and demanded money. Nicholson threw the bag to the floor, lunged toward the man and demanded to see a weapon. The man bolted for the door with Nicholson in pursuit.

He chased him several blocks before knocking him to the ground with the help of a passer-by. Nicholson then held the man until police arrived. On Thursday, Nicholson was fired. Key Bank spokeswoman Anne Foster declined to comment on Nicholson and his actions.

Seattle police Sgt. Sean Whitcomb said the best course for citizens is to be good witnesses to crimes.


Was this teller brave or stupid? If citizens are to "just witness crimes", are cops to just investigate them? What about crime prevention?

[Poll_Blind]

1. What he did could have wound up with everyone in the branch, dead.

I don't know who this teller is, as a person. I have no idea, I mean, what kind of person he is. If he is a normal person who was otherwise taken over by adrenaline, lost their head and went into a fight or flight mode kinda thing then I think he should keep his job.

But there's one weird part of this excerpt (I haven't read the full article yet):

The teller demanded to see a weapon

There is something about doing that that, to me, thinks that Key probably made the right decision.

PB

[wtmusic]

2. Whatever he was - he shouldn't have been fired.

The guy risked his life and caught a robber who might have hurt someone next time.

[rustydog]

4. He violated standing company (industry) policy willingly

and placed the lives of co workers and customers in danger.

I feel for him. but he needs to be accountable for his irresponsible action.

[WillowTree]

8. He endangered his own life and those of everyone in the bank with his cowboy heroics.

Damned right he should have been fired.

[armyowalgreens]

3. The teller was stupid. You don't fuck with someone who might have a gun.

You comply with their demands as long as they aren't demanding that you come with them.

[Cha]

5. Maybe there's a future

in law enforcement for him?

[TexasObserver]

6. The teller was stupid. Very stupid.

And he should have been fired.

It's pretty simple. His job is to not get shot or otherwise badly injured. The bank robber can get caught in due time by those whose job it is to catch him. The teller's job is to NOT give pursuit.

Imagine if this teller had gotten badly injured, say hit by a car, as he gave chase. He could end up in a wheel chair, and the bank could end up paying millions because of it.

Bottom line is he has a job, and that job has requirements, and he knowingly violated them.

[rollingrock]

7. His "instincts took over?"

the teller sounds like a bit of a loose cannon, lack of self control.

[joecool65]

9. Catch 22 here

The teller did violate company policy. But, did the teller prevent future bank robberies from occurring by chasing down the criminal, thus saving the bank from future losses and preventing a fugitive from justice from being on the loose? How many time and money did the bank teller save the police by acting on instinct?
It seems like the teller had a pretty good idea the bank robber did not have a deadly weapon and probably knew he could physically apprehend the fugitive.

[Horse with no Name]

10. Stupid. Incredibly stupid.

He could have gotten everyone killed.
Anyone that handles large amounts of money is told that.
Give it to them. Just give it to them.