MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) – A man who was shot and killed after allegedly robbing and pistol whipping an elderly woman has been identified.

A “Good Samaritan” shot 23-year-old Darren Lamont Evanovich outside a grocery store in Minneapolis Thursday night, police said.

The shooting occurred just after 9:45 p.m. near the Cub Foods on the 2800 block of 26th Avenue South. Police said they received a call saying a robber stole an elderly woman’s purse and pistol whipped her in the head. Not long after, police said they got a second call saying the alleged robber had been shot and killed in the back of Super Grand Buffet, which is located on the same block.

When police arrived on the scene, they said the “Good Samaritan” approached them and said he witnessed the robbery, chased the robber and shot him after confronting him.

The man told police he had a permit to carry a handgun and said where his gun could be found. Police said they detained the man for questioning. He has since been release.

Officers will present their case to the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office in the coming days to see if any criminal charges are warranted.

Since permits to carry handguns were allowed in Minnesota in 2005, there were four lawful and justifiable shootings by permit holders. According to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, there are 88,350 active permits to carry handguns in Minnesota. Fifty-eight of those permits have been revoked, and only one person has been convicted of using a conceal-and-carry gun in a homicide.

Marie Failinger, a law professor at Hamline University, said that the man had the right to defend himself if he felt his life was in danger and he couldn’t run away.

The elderly woman who was pistol whipped suffered a cut on her head, but police said they didn’t consider it a serious injury.

The Hennepin County Medical Examiner says Lamont died due to multiple gunshot wounds.

If you have any information about this shooting/robbery, call police at 612-692-TIPS (8477).

Comments (87)
  1. Smith N. Wesson says:

    If it was a clean shoot – GOOD FOR THE GOOD SAMARITAN.
    He had a permit to carry
    He secured his weapon
    He told the police where to find it
    He stayed at the scene

    As much as I hate to see the general public strapping one on, let this be a lesson to the dirtbags who prey on the vulnerable – there may be someone in the area who has a PTC and who is willing to use it to protect the life of the innocent public.

    I truly hope this was a clean shoot and no charges are brought. Lets wait and see….

    1. Donna says:

      If he had secured his weapon, why did he have to go and show the officers where his gun could be found?

      1. Smith N. Wesson says:

        “Securing” the weapon doesn’t necessarily mean holstering it, Donna. Securing it means you unload load and have it in a place where no one else can get to it and that its not in your hand when the police show up so you don’t get shot.

        Does that help?

    2. SayWhatIMean says:

      This guy is no hero or good Samaritan. He broke the laws of the Conceal and Carry permit in Minnesota. Moreover he’s the guy that will initially get the legislature to further customize the law and possibly ruin it for us law abiding permit holders. This clown broke the law, just as the robber save, for he Killed his Victim! You who support his actions are 100% wrong and support breaking the law! No two ways about it. He chased the cat = #1 rule not to do that you’re told in your carry class. Hell you can’t even chase someone down and kill them in your own house if they are retreating. That’s the freaking LAW people!

      1. sw says:

        What if it was your Mother or Sister? You wouldn’t chase the cat? He chased the cat until the cat turned on him and hissed – he didn’t shoot the cat in the back! He shot the cat in self defense! And that is how most everyone on here sees it – good luck in court to the family if they choose to try and fight it – it has already been stated that the police are not charging the man who shot him – I AGREE TOTALLY with the cops. Also – are you a lawyer or something? I think you are wrong.

  2. YES!!! says:

    Thank you for killing another would be gang banger….good job!!!

  3. Doug says:

    YEAHHHHHHHHH. Finally 1 point for the good guys.

  4. Kevin says:

    Thats why I have a cc permit…..beating and robbing an old woman…..wow what a POS…..takes a real man to beat grand ma with a gun……..Boom Boom…out go the lights…..

  5. red says:

    Some 20 something year old they say. He probably needed some drug $.

    1. @ red says:

      I bet you’re right. The guy deserved to die, not because of his robbery to feed his drug habit, but his unnecessary violence. Drug problems can be rehabilitated, evil people can not.

      “Hey Man, Nice Shot!!”

  6. Redneck Purist says:

    But he was gonna take the money and use it to turn his life around. One of his step-brothers said he was going to become a community organizer. this was all just one big misunderstanding.

    But seriously, it hasn’t happened nearly enough to be a deterrent yet, but the more this kind of thing happens, the more violent people will think twice. You just never know who might be carrying. (like me)

    1. Kieron says:

      Aren’t you funny.

      I’m as liberal as they come, and I’m packing too, because I value personal defense. You just never know, do you. The guy with a PTC isn’t necessarily a redneck or a teabagger. Amazing world, takes all kinds.

  7. Walter says:

    “Police said they detained the man for questioning.”

    How dare a citizen of the United States exercise their right to bear arms.

    1. John Frykman says:

      This has nothing to do with the right to bear arms. There are reasons for firing a loaded gun at an individual to protect your own life of limb. The right to bear arms does not confer the right to be a de facto executioner of a fleeing crime suspect. What if his aim were off and he killed an innocent bystander? By the way, I do have a CC permit. I also know all of the laws that apply to when and how one may legally use a weapon. You do not have special rights because you have a CC permit. If you fire at a fleeing suspect and kill him, you have committed a very, very serious crime. He will most likely be indicted for his own crime now. How does that help the little old lady?

      1. BA says:

        It make the d bags in the world think twices before they commet crime agaisnt others.

      2. MR. TRUTH says:

        100% TRUTH….

    2. @ Walter and his comment says:

      I’m a cc guy too – and I would expect them to detain me until they were satisified. If it was clean and nothing to hide I have nothing to fret.
      If I was packing and looking to make a take down then maybe I shouldn’t be carrying, I maybe should be charged with minimum manslaughter and maybe more.

      The very comment “how dare ” you made above frankly spooks the chit out of many people. For a very good reason. You did it the right way fore the right reason you sure should not be alarmed at being detained. Are you a loose cannon of sorts Walter?

  8. I'm the Jury says:

    Here’s my verdict…


    If there were more of these occurrences, there would be less crime. I realize it’s a slippery slope, but we live in a world that needs ‘real change’.

  9. Taylor J says:

    Great job, one less person need to pay for. Granny can HAZ backup, too..

    1. Joe public says:

      I’m sure the samaritan only shot him because the robber ‘confronted’ him. He was in fear for his life at that point, as the robber had a pistol. I am so glad he did it right. I will acquit him if I’m on the jury. Twice =-)

  10. cwh says:

    Having a carry permit myself and having gone through the course to acquire it, I never once learned that having said permit grants one the authorization to chase after people and shoot them.

    You have a duty to retreat. In this case, it seems the perp retreated and this individual chased him down. I’m glad this individual stepped up and helped this woman but I’m not sure chasing the subject down (and subsequently shooting and killing him) bodes well for the carry movement in Minnesota.

    1. Doctor Love says:

      To “cwh” maybe the next victim would have been you or some one you love $ maybe the perp. was a little more violent by then? How would you feel then? Cops aren’t the only citizens resposible for our society. If that’s the case then soon we’ll all be living in a getto where we’re all suject to thugs & gangs. THINK ABOUT IT!!!!

    2. Michael Anderson says:

      The Good Samaritan witnessed this incident. Chased this coward down to identify him. If the coward had gotten into a vehicle, the Good Samaritan could have gotten the license plate number. The coward turned around to continue his felony assaults and violence. The coward this time didn’t have a grandmother to contend with. A Good Samaritan Hero put the coward in the right place. Now we don’t have to waste tax payers money to give this career criminal a trial and put it in prison.

  11. cwh says:

    We must have been posting at the same time. +1 for that John.

    1. Whitey Fjord says:

      If you liberal idiots read the story, it said he chased the robber and shot him after a confronting him. You don’t typically confront somebody from behind. How do you know this POS wasn’t going for his gun to shoot the Good Samaritan? Let’s wait until the investigation is complete before you spew your anti-gun, liberal drivel. BTW, I can assure you that this economically-challenged POS didn’t have a Conceal Carry. Funny how you don’t mention that?

  12. MeMa says:

    So sad for everyone.

  13. Murder says:

    The person who should be charged with Murder is the woman that took part in the crime that resulted in a death.

  14. Learn to Read says:

    Umm…the woman didn’t take part in the crime, she was the VICTIM. Perhaps you should reread the article.

  15. Murder says:

    There was a woman with the person who was shot. Not the victim.

  16. Such a imbecile says:

    Shaddup ya imbecile. Yeah, the SOB ran, and good guy gave chase – nothing illegal about that. The SOB turnes and displays gun and good guy drops him – nothing illegal about that. Perfectly executed – literally.

    Anybody that shoots and kills gets detained for a while – that’s normal. Just read Ayoob once and you’ll understand…

    As for you, Johhny Rotton – you obviously don’t really know or understand MN law regarding CC, and you’re just another wanna’ be. You are a problem that the rest of will take care of in due time, chump…

    1. Reailty says:

      Take a class in criminal law or read the statue on right to use deadly force. You will be shocked to learn you can not chase someone down after a crime and confront them and shoot them. That is not protected under the law. I agree that the person who robbed the old lady was a POS. I wish we had more strict laws to protect the innocent. But this one is really sticky for he chased and confronted the criminal. He should have shot him when the crime was in progress then it would have been legal.

      1. silly says:

        Laws don’t protect people, laws are for after a crime or honest law abidding people.. If laws did protect then we would all be living in the safest country in the world

      2. Jus Sayin says:

        “I did not know he had a gun. I chased him down because I heard a poor elderly lady say she had her purse robbed. I rounded the corner and the thief stopped and pointed a gun at me. I was able to duck/cover and being that I have a permit to carry and a legal weapon with me, I returned fire to protect myself.”

        There. No violation of the deadly force statute. We are all assuming that he chased the guy to shoot him. He may have not known that there was a gun involved and was suddenly confronted with one at which point he had to take steps to protect his life.

        Let the facts play out people. For all of us touting knowledge of the law, we forget there is a “due process” procedure that includes getting ALL the facts and not just some of them.

        1. Mr D says:

          Exactly. Why do people have such a hard time understanding this?

      3. sw says:

        If you are right, then why is the man not getting charged? You better take that class again – apparently it didn’t do you any good.

    2. Get a grip people says:

      Exactly what I was going to say. The only crime here is the robbery and the pistol whipping. Nothing illegal about defending yourself. The key phrase in the article is the GS chased the robber and shot him AFTER confronting him. Robber was armed and what we don’t know is if he brandished said weapon after being confronted. If so, the opportunity to retreat has passed and the GS shot first clearly defending himself. End of story.

  17. Buggy says:

    Like lyrics from the song from Foster the People “Pumped Up Kicks” — suits this situation perfectly

    All the other kids with the pumped up kicks, you’d better run, better run, outrun my gun.

    All the other kids with the pumped up kicks, you’d better run, better run, faster than my bullet.

    1. Robert says:

      I don’t think that song is about what you think it is about.

  18. Reailty says:

    Unfortunately I see the Good Samaritan getting charged with a couple of charges. The reason I say that is the law does not protect people from chasing down a criminal and confronting them and then shooting them. He would have wanted to shot the criminal right as the act of the crime was happening not block away. The threat for immediate danger had passed when the criminal left the scene. Which then does not allow the use of deadly force. Chasing down a criminal and confronting them is not protected under MN Statute 609.066. Tho my opinion I am glad that this guy took care of that worthless POS punk. If only we had Texas law.

    1. Guy says:

      Then we need to CHANGE the law … add a “hot persuit” permit to use deadly force if it would have been justified during the ORIGIANAL crime.

      1. tom says:

        actually governor moonbeam vetoed that law. namely the stand your ground law

    2. Tessellating Lady says:

      Actually, Minnesota does have a law allowing citizen arrest if witnessing a felony. The shooting sounds like self defense while attempting to effect a citizen arrest.
      I’d love to be on this guy’s jury.

      1. mark loken` says:

        Good to see someone truly taking the time to look closely and critically at this incident instead of merely reacting from a anti-gun/pro gun stance. I wonder about posters like the one above claiming to know all the laws pertaining to conceal carry and stating he has a permit, yet still claiming that the samaritan has committed a major crime in this case. Conceal and carry, or even just permits to open carry, are merely the latest fad/trend in gun control legislation. There has hardly been a decade or perhaps day that some state, federal or local government has not tried to legislate or right to bear arms since the constitution was ratified. All of those laws twist and hide and confuse even the most law abiding citizen as concerns thier right to bear arms. I think that this is done on purpose, so as to convince the average american that only the most recent or locally recent law pertains in any given case, when in fact, as you point out so well, other laws either supercede or at the very least effect on how the new law is applied. I too would like to be on the jury for this one.

    3. B Y Stander says:

      The defense is simple in this case… esp since it was an unwitnessed shooting.

      The shooter chased the DBag down to try to get a description of the DBag and to be able to tell the police where he went. As they rounded the corner, the DBag turned and drew his weapon (remember, the gun was fun next to DBag). Upon realizing that his life was in danger, G. Samaritan drew his weapon and when DBag raised his weapon in the direction of GS, GS shot him in self defense.

      Thank you Ladies n Gentlemen of the Jury.

      (you can’t shoot the criminal in the act coz he used the pistol to HIT the victim, he was not pointing the gun at her so *deadly force* actions would not have been justified, IMHO)

  19. Good shot says:

    Awesome shot thank you

  20. sc00ter76 says:

    Here’s a cookie..Now get out there and finish the rest!

  21. dan says:

    The article stated he chased and confronted the suspect. No where does it say he shot a fleeing suspect. The suspect he confronted was armed with a gun, we have no way of knowing from the article what type of confrontation took place. If he was threatened by an arm suspect who had just robbed and pistol whipped an elderly women, it appears this is a good shoot and there should be not be charges brought against him. We will just have to wait for the rest of the information to come out.

    1. Check the law says:

      Maybe you need to read up on the law and take some instructional training in the protocal – one is not granted the right to chase and pursue and then do a take down unless they are an officer. He evidently was not. If the perp was pulling on him at the initial scene – dump perp and a legal dead one. We dunno all here but chase and then take down is a no-no

  22. Little Tin God says:

    I hope this “Good Samaritan” was an off-duty cop. Or some other off-duty law enforcement individual. Otherwise, he should be brought up of charges. Since when does a private citizen have the right to chase down and kill another person, even if that other person is a felon? If this “Good Samaritan” isn’t charged with something, then I’m going to be more afraid of other “Good Samaritan’s” running around carrying then I am of the bad guys.

    1. Michael Clark says:

      Little Tin, are you nuts??? I would loved to see your reaction if YOU had been the one attacked nby thjis roober. I applaud the Good Samaritan for doing what he did and I hope to hell the county Attorney uses good sense in his/her decision on this one.

    2. Deep Thinker says:

      You should be afraid of everyone, because you sound like a idiot.

  23. sam says:

    Elderly woman? reports on StarTribune give the victim’s age as 53. I’m also 53 and in no way I am “elderly”. What an insult to this woman!

    1. Little Tin God says:

      I’m 66 and don’t consider myself “elderly” either, but then it’s all POV.

      1. Elderly Check says:

        If you’re wearning depends it doesn’t matter what your age is Sam, Mabel; you be old, game over. You want me to call you droopy, old bat, crusty the clown, dry gulch, or elderly? Whadupwichoo?.

    2. Walter says:

      Simmer down old timer, you wouldn’t want to give yourself a heart attack.

  24. Zing says:

    C&C permits are for protecting yourself or someone else from immediate harm. A smart permit holder also knows you don’t even pull your piece if someone has the drop on you. You comply and let the robbery end as soon as possible. This guy is lucky he didn’t get himself or someone else killed with his vigilante stunt. If he is not charged with something he will be very lucky. All that said, I’m sure the world is a better place with out this dirt bag criminal who robbed the lady. i

  25. Sarah says:

    That pig got what he had coming. Maybe that will make these low life’s think twice before robbing and pistol whipping someone. I would like to dance on this idiot’s grave! Let’s take back Minneapolis from these D bags!

  26. Emily says:

    Exactly why did this person shoot the robber? I’m pretty sure a liscense to carry a weapon doesn’t give you the right to perform executions, and it sure doesn’t sound to me like this guy should be walking around armed, if he’s going to use it as an excuse to force confrontations and shoot people.

    1. Your'e a goof says:

      @Emily , you must be a 250lb. big one or you don’t live in Mpls.

  27. Tom Felcyn says:

    What caliber does he use ? I will buy him a box of shells!!

  28. Read this first says:

    Go to chanel 11 and read the report first. The police report says the samaritan chases the suspect to regain the purse. Next the suspect threatens the samaritan. The samaritan pulls his weapon to protect himself. Case closed.

    1. Hartman's warp says:

      Indeed it is if this is true – and he will be charged as he is not a law enforcement officer and had no right to chase and pursue. Not saying I totally agree with this provision of the law but I somewhat get it also.
      It keeps the crazy folk from playing vigilante. First they are not trained to do so, it creates fricken havoc when the police do arrive knowing who is who in a chase, it could put unarmed citizens in the way of some crazy chit going down and they have no clue who is good or bad —— nope. He can take down the perp at the initial point if necessary to protect himself and others but otherwise —- sad to say but he was in the wrong. It’s not the Wild Wild West and it’s not Nazi Germany or Stalin’s crazy era either.

      1. confused says:

        Are you comparing the shooter, who shot and killed an armed robber who violently assaulted his victim and made off with her belongings, to nazi’s or Stalin? Then you Hartman, are a ridiculous.
        You also come across as saying that its sad that we are not like nazi Germany or Stalin… what point are you trying to get across?

  29. tom says:

    If i was on the jury I would give him the NOT GUILTY

  30. BryanT says:

    You do not have a permit. If you did, you would not refer to it as ‘conceal and carry’. You would know that the word ‘conceal’ appears nowhere in MN permit laws. The only people who say ‘conceal and carry’ are those who do not know what they are talking about.

    1. BryanT says:

      This was directed at John Frykman who claimed to have a ‘conceal and carry’ permit, which is something that does not exist. For some reason his post disappeared but my reply did not.

  31. Bill Clintons Cigar says:

    If the robber is black…..and the shooter is white….shouldnt this be a Federal Hate Crime?

    1. Michael Clark says:

      that should have no bearing on this case whatsoever, Bill. Nowhere in this story was race mentioned as any kind of factor

  32. Michael K. Richardson III says:

    I think this man is a role model for Americans to follow. He was carrying a firearm legally, and for the exact purpose the law was enacted for. Police are there to respond to crimes, it is a citizens duty to do whatever you can to prevent them.

  33. Larry Crawford says:

    John you keep saying he shot a fleeing suspect, criminal, bad guy, someone who is going to do this again if he gets away. W ere you there when they interview him or part of the investion to know that he shot the felon in the back. If you know this for sure then present it!!!! The police have already confirmed that there was a comfrontation occurred. We should not jump to any conclusion until it goes to trial, if that happens. That citizen MAY (?) have just saved other victims lives. We don’t know, so we should not be putting labels on him

  34. Jake says:

    In concealed carry class, I was taught NOT to do what this good samaritan did. Whether he gets charged or not, he will have a BIG legal bill. Yes, if he had fired the shot while the woman was getting pistol-whipped, he probably wouldn’t have much to worry about. Even if he beats the criminal rap, he may be subjected to a civil lawsuit. You need to keep you head in these situations, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

  35. Michael says:

    Any one who thinks that guy did wrong is an IDIOT….One less person I have to worry about pistol whipping my wife, daughter, Grand daughter or any one else I knew….Must be a pretty insecure,weak, person to hit an older women.Thank you God for having that guy with the gut’s to do what hade to be done. I would have done the same damn thing.
    When he got his C&C he already new that what he did was going to cost him at least $16,000…If need be, lets get a fund going for this guy.

    1. Jake says:

      I would like to see a fund set up to collect cash to help this good samaritan pay his legal bills, which will be high, whether he is charged or not. It would send a GOOD message to all the perps out there that we ( the GOOD GUYS and GALS) will support each other. It would also be nice if a top of the line attorney would represent him, at something of a discount. It might help convince Freeman or a grand jury to NOT charge him with a crime. This is not just about ONE CCW holder who shot a perp, this is about EVERYBODY who legally carries who could have such an experience, sending a message that we, the law-abiding, are willing to fight back against the thugs amongst us.

    2. Jake says:

      I don’t think that this guy is an idiot, he put his own life on the line, without even a bulletproof vest I would guess, to try and catch a violent, armed thug. Trouble is, the way that the law is written, it leaves him possibly open to prosecution. There will be a lot of very vocal voices on both sides of the aisle to try to advocate their positions on CCW in MN. Every situation like this is unique, so some will try to micro-analyze the situation and second guess the GOOD guy. If the good guy has a good personal history, I think that he stands a good chance of beating any charge, assuming a *reasonable* jury is seated. I would not let a judge decide my innocence or guilt in this matter, not in HENNEPIN COUNTY.

  36. Freeman says:

    The district attorney is obligated to charge this “good samaritan” with manslaughter at the least, and he knows it. There is no reason to shoot someone unless you are literally cornered by someone threatening you with a gun. This guy just had an itchy trigger finger and wanted to play cops and robbers.

  37. James 4:14 says:

    I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

  38. Robbie says:

    Good shot!!! I guess he wont be out robbing people anymore. hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

  39. Poltically Correct says:

    WOW! If he chased him down I hope he gets Charged!. Trigger Happy…. Mofo!. For a purse?.If the guy run there was no threat if he ran. Contents of whats inside of the purse can be replaced.

    I hope the guy that shot this guy suffers for taking a life.Hope the family of the Dead Guy look into it. Two wrong don’t make it right.

  40. Jeff says:

    My hats off to this man And I hope he’s cleared of all charges. Everyone wouldn’t be against this had it been their mother or family member!

  41. enough! says:

    We need to to see more action like this. Thats why more citizens should be packing. That loser got what he deserved. Got him in the back? No matter. No more pistol whipping old ladies. See some one doing a drive by? Take him out.If the danger of hurting others is clear. Some sissy shaking a baby or other severe abuse ? Put a permanent end to it.ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !!

  42. Scott Schwandt says:

    Perp made his bed in hell and now he lies in it. Stinks to be the mother but she should have taught him better, like “You shouldn’t go around pistol whipping and robbing grammas son, because you never know who has a permit to carry.” LIKE ME. As far as the “good samaritan” we don’t know all the details but he did everything proper after the fact.
    When seconds count, police are only minutes away.

  43. mark says:

    The law allows the GS’s action because he was effecting a citizen arrest. If you ae driving a school bus and a driver goes through your stop arm, the police will not act unless the bus driver initiates a citizen arrest. I don’t think people realize that the citizen arrest has official status and follows rules oof evidence just as a police arrest does.

  44. Cornhusker says:

    It’s time to man up and shape the world back into one that is fit for habitation. What did happen and what could have happened are two different things, and if one worries constantly about the bad things that happen, you would never leave your bed in the morning.

    The recently deceased was not guaranteed the freedom and safety to practice his trade unmolested by the citizenry, contrary to what some seem to think. You people who object need to grow up and join the real world, stop electing failed comedians and pro rasslers, and face reality for what it is.

  45. Pookie says:

    Whats all the discussion about?

    The armed citizen got to go home, the lil senior citizen got her purse back, all the cops went home at the end of their shift, unharmed. Darren will spend a few close days with his family and friends, afterwards they can all visit with him as often as they like. Sounds like a fairy tale ending to me.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Watch & Listen LIVE