A gruesome incident unfolded at a Times Square CVS store, where a deranged serial shoplifter met a tragic end at the hands of a shelf stocker now charged with manslaughter. The trial of Scotty Enoe shed light on the events that led to the fatal stabbing of Charles Brito, a 50-year-old homeless man, in July 2023.
Witnesses recounted the chilling moments when Brito entered the Broadway and West 49th Street store, shouting, “I can kill y’all, I can kill everybody,” as recalled by CVS manager-in-training Katrina Rivera. The atmosphere quickly turned tense as Brito made violent threats and engaged in physical altercations with Enoe.
Enoe, now facing charges of manslaughter, maintains that he acted in self-defense during the confrontation with Brito, a notorious shoplifter in the area. The brawl escalated as Brito repeatedly punched Enoe, leaving him bruised and battered against the cooler doors.
Prosecutors alleged that Enoe resorted to using a small folding knife, stabbing Brito multiple times, including two fatal blows to the liver. The chaotic scene unfolded as Brito staggered out of the store, bleeding profusely, before succumbing to his injuries.
During the trial, witnesses described Brito as aggressive and threatening, with his actions leading to a violent clash with Enoe. The defense highlighted Enoe’s injuries, including a swollen eye and busted lip, as evidence of the intense physical struggle that transpired.
Jurors are now tasked with determining whether Enoe’s actions were justified in the face of imminent danger. The trial has raised questions about safety protocols at the store, with a CVS security guard testifying that his role was limited to observation and reporting, rather than physical intervention in criminal situations.
Enoe, who is currently out on bail, faces a lengthy prison sentence if convicted. The outcome of the trial hinges on the jury’s assessment of whether Enoe’s response was proportionate to the threat posed by Brito, or if it exceeded the bounds of reasonable self-defense.
The tragic incident serves as a sobering reminder of the risks faced by frontline workers in retail environments, where confrontations with violent individuals can escalate rapidly. The trial’s conclusion will have far-reaching implications for the legal standards governing self-defense in such circumstances.
