More proof that the disabled can do just as well anything the rest of us can do

I didn't see anything about evading police

So we know what leg he was wearing a cast on, we got an estimate of his age, but no description of his ethnicity? That's Newsday-speak for protected minority.

If by evades you mean "limped off to the liquor store" then yes, yes he did

The man, who looked to be in his 30s, entered the Subway at 4703 Boundary Ave. at 8:58 p.m., went to the counter and demanded that the clerk open the register and put money on the counter.

The male clerk, 18, complied and the suspect, who did not display a weapon, took the money and left on foot eastbound toward Merritts Road.

So, a guy walks in, asks for money, without a weapon, gets it and leaves? And an 18 year old kid doesn't think he can take a 30-something with a broken foot? Bizzare.

Police investigators now as busy as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest trying to break this case

cue the usual suspect pics!

i can't imagine why...

They were all too busy getting each others backs to bother stopping a crime in progress.

no slashies required

Should've sent in Obama!

to make a joke about this would be easier than identifying a streetlight in a blurry picture

Holy Keyser Soze!

how the hell do i manage to post that in the wrong thread?


/it's getting late

Headline would have been better if the guy had only one leg. Escapes on foot. Har.

In this case, Famous Last Words.

In case you don't know, the guy that draws Quads!

JLobes: The man, who looked to be in his 30s, entered the Subway at 4703 Boundary Ave. at 8:58 p.m., went to the counter and demanded that the clerk open the register and put money on the counter.

The male clerk, 18, complied and the suspect, who did not display a weapon, took the money and left on foot eastbound toward Merritts Road.

So, a guy walks in, asks for money, without a weapon, gets it and leaves? And an 18 year old kid doesn't think he can take a 30-something with a broken foot? Bizzare.

Most national stores have the policy of give the money no fighting
because if someone gets shot they can be held liable as well.
If a clerk DOES fight back and wins, more than likely they get fired for violating policy.
Look at it this way CC gets held up by guy with gun, clerk fights shopper gets hit then clerk wins. CC ends up shelling out money to the victim because it was "avoidable"
Now, the clerk in this case could have asked to see the weapon and they might have left if he had nothing
OR the clerk saw a "gun bulge" and policy wins

He had Shox on.




There was nothing they could do.

House??