Mother Of Teen Killed During Robbery Suing OKC Pharmacist

[SoonerKnight]

One time or 6 times it does not matter. Was he reasonably in fear for his life? Also, what was his mental state at the time? I think the pharmacist did the right thing!! Dead is dead! The kid chose to walk in and try and rob someone! I think that is called occupational risk! I do not believe that an Oklahoma jury will come back with a guilty verdict!

I don't care what the video shows the kid was endagering the pharmicists life and there was more than one thug that came in to rob him. I am sure he got tunnel vision and kept firing until the bullets were gone. Actually, maybe the conceal carry laws need to be looked at for better training so that people are trained to stop shooting when threat has stopped. LEO's are taught to shoot to stop the threat! What do they teach in a conceal carry class. What I figure just gun safety and that's it.

The D.A. I guess had to take this case but to try and get first degree murder is complete and total bull**** because the fact is the thug came to him and it was not premeditated. A good psychiatrist will shred the prosecution and a defense attorney can make an argument based on what would you do in that situation! This case is bogus.

[SoonerHoops]

The D.A. I guess had to take this case but to try and get first degree murder is complete and total bull**** because the fact is the thug came to him and it was not premeditated. A good psychiatrist will shred the prosecution and a defense attorney can make an argument based on what would you do in that situation! This case is bogus.


Dude, look up the legal definition of premeditated then apply it to the facts of this case. Of course the killing was premeditated. The only question was whether that premeditation was justified or not.

[SoonerKnight]

Dude, look up the legal definition of premeditated then apply it to the facts of this case. Of course the killing was premeditated. The only question was whether that premeditation was justified or not.

How about you look up premeditated and then talk! He did not pre-plan to shoot him 6 times! :rolleyes: Therfore not premeditated! He reacted and at best the jury would find for 2nd degree murder!! Try learning the difference! The DA is shooting for the stars on this one because they can give the jury multiple options and this is one of them! :rolleyes:

[SoonerKnight]

pre·med·i·tat·ed:

Characterized by deliberate purpose, previous consideration, and some degree of planning: a premeditated crime.

thought out in advance; planned premeditated murder.

Each state has there own take on this but still I believe that the emotion of the moment and the fact that he was put in a life or death situation is key to this case. Also, his testimony will be key! I think that he should testify and explain to the jury what went through his mind!

Oklahoma definition:

First Degree Murder: A person commits murder in the first degree when that person unlawfully and with malice aforethought causes the death of another human being. Malice is that deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a human being, which is manifested by external circumstances capable of proof.

Second Degree Murder: When perpetrated by an act imminently dangerous to another person and evincing a depraved mind, regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual; or When perpetrated by a person engaged in the commission of any felony other than the unlawful acts set out in Section 1, subsection B, of this act.

First Degree Manslaughter: Homicide is manslaughter in the first degree in the following cases:

When perpetrated without a design to effect death by a person while engaged in the commission of a misdemeanor.
When perpetrated without a design to effect death, and in a heat of passion, but in a cruel and unusual manner, or by means of a dangerous weapon; unless it is committed under such circumstances as constitute excusable or justifiable homicide.
When perpetrated unnecessarily either while resisting an attempt by the person killed to commit a crime, or after such attempt shall have failed

[pphilfran]

How about you look up premeditated and then talk! He did not pre-plan to shoot him 6 times! :rolleyes: Therfore not premeditated! He reacted and at best the jury would find for 2nd degree murder!! Try learning the difference! The DA is shooting for the stars on this one because they can give the jury multiple options and this is one of them! :rolleyes:

The first shot was not premeditated...the additional shots could be construed as premeditated...a lot of time to think about what he was going to do as he casually walked past the injured kid...down the hallway to get a new weapon...stroll up to the kid and pop him 5 more times...

Was the kid on the floor a threat to the shooters life?

That is the key to the case...if there is another vid of the kid laying there motionless with a gun shot to the head...and then gets shot 5 more times it could get sticky for the defense...no additional vid and no way they get a conviction...

[Turd_Ferguson]

The first shot was not premeditated...the additional shots could be construed as premeditated...a lot of time to think about what he was going to do as he casually walked past the injured kid...down the hallway to get a new weapon...stroll up to the kid and pop him 5 more times...

Was the kid on the floor a threat to the shooters life?

That is the key to the case...if there is another vid of the kid laying there motionless with a gun shot to the head...and then gets shot 5 more times it could get sticky for the defense...no additional vid and no way they get a conviction...I like how you throw in "casually" and "stroll"...those words wouldn't help your cause now would they?

[Memtig14]

Didn't look like execution to me just self-defense...put me on the jury...:D

Me too, I'll vote with you.

[olevetonahill]

I like how you throw in "casually" and "stroll"...those words wouldn't help your cause now would they?

You caught that also to ,Huh?

Yea some of these Peeps talk like the Dude was just calmly going about his bidness , then Decides to Just go ahead and kill the little maggot.

What was it? maybe 2-3 minutes total time between when the maggots entered the store and that robber was shot to ****?

I swear some of these peeps need to turn in their Man card, they wouldnt know an adrenalin rush from a ****in cold chill.:rolleyes:

[pphilfran]

I like how you throw in "casually" and "stroll"...those words wouldn't help your cause now would they?

He wasn't walking with any sense of urgency...

[Memtig14]

Let someone stick a gun in your face to rob you and see how blank your mind goes and how outrageous your behavior gets in defending yourself.


Don't start no crap.......won't be no crap.

[Turd_Ferguson]

He wasn't walking with any sense of urgency...How do you know how HE walks with urgency? Doesn't he have a back brace? Maybe that was his urgent type of walk...

[sanantoniosooner]

Let someone stick a gun in your face to rob you and see how blank your mind goes and how outrageous your behavior gets in defending yourself.


Don't start no crap.......won't be no crap.

If I was in his shoes, I wouldn't want this to be my defense.

[olevetonahill]

If I was in his shoes, I wouldn't want this to be my defense.

Why ,Bro? Its all gonna come down to his State of mind at the time .

[pphilfran]

Listen...legally if the kid was incapacitated and then an additional five shots were put into him the guy is guilty...

But I have not seen any video that shows if that is true...so I would have doubt about what had happened and I would vote to acquit...

When you are in cahoots (yee haa) with some guy that is robbing a store by waving a gun you get whatever comes your way...the kid paid the ultimate sacrifice for his stupidity...

Various pieced of video are in this piece...

YHshsgpsxFg

[sanantoniosooner]

"blank mind" "outrageous behavior" and "don't start no crap there won't be no crap" don't exactly paint a picture of stability.

[olevetonahill]

But IF J.E. was still in fear for his life, then he was justified.
Like i said its( I believe) gonna come down to HIS state of mind at the time of him shooting the punk a second time.

[pphilfran]

How do you know how HE walks with urgency? Doesn't he have a back brace? Maybe that was his urgent type of walk...

I understand your point and would take it into consideration....I couldn't convict him without further evidence...

To convict I would need...

1. Video of the kid being down and not moving and then getting shot 5 more times...

2. 100% accurate autopsy report showing the kid was alive prior to the last 5 shots...

[sanantoniosooner]

This was my first opportunity to see the video.

The kid never had a weapon and was incapacitated. The family doesn't deserve crap, but that dude isn't even close to a hero. Emptying a gun into anybody that isn't moving is BS.

[olevetonahill]

"blank mind" "outrageous behavior" and "don't start no crap there won't be no crap" don't exactly paint a picture of stability.

I dont for a Minute believe that J.E. was in a stable Mind set at all during that robbery

[pphilfran]

But IF J.E. was still in fear for his life, then he was justified.
Like i said its( I believe) gonna come down to HIS state of mind at the time of him shooting the punk a second time.

Fair point...

If I were prosecuting I would bring up (pound in to the jury)him being in the armed forces...and he seems to be proud of that fact...he should be able to handle stressful situations...

This would be a great jury to be on

[SoonerHoops]

How about you look up premeditated and then talk! He did not pre-plan to shoot him 6 times! :rolleyes: Therfore not premeditated! He reacted and at best the jury would find for 2nd degree murder!! Try learning the difference! The DA is shooting for the stars on this one because they can give the jury multiple options and this is one of them! :rolleyes:


Lol. Trust me, I know what it means. I promise I've studied it just a few minutes longer than reading a wikipedia.entry

[olevetonahill]

This was my first opportunity to see the video.

The kid never had a weapon and was incapacitated. The family doesn't deserve crap, but that dude isn't even close to a hero. Emptying a gun into anybody that isn't moving is BS.


The kid never had a weapon and was incapacitated

But See SAS there is the rub, AT THE TIME there is no way that JE could have known that the punk dint have a weapon, Nor does the Vid Show that the Punk was totally incapacitated, You cannot see the punk on the Vid that was released to the public.
If that punked have even twitched I think AT THE TIME I prolly would have made sure he couldnt hurt anyone.

[StoopTroup]

I saw the video just now and couldn't see where he shot the kid 5 times. For all I know from that video...he could have shot that kid 5 times in the abdomen and the final bullet that stopped him was in the head....

At the very last...it just looks like he might be checking to see if the kid was alive....

[pphilfran]

One other item...he seems to motivate pretty well when he was going out the door chasing after the gunman...much slower as he moves past the down kid...

[pphilfran]

I saw the video just now and couldn't see where he shot the kid 5 times. For all I know from that video...he could have shot that kid 5 times in the abdomen and the final bullet that stopped him was in the head....

At the very last...it just looks like he might be checking to see if the kid was alive....

He performed his exam with a six shooter....;)

[olevetonahill]

One other item...he seems to motivate pretty well when he was going out the door chasing after the gunman...much slower as he moves past the down kid...

Never had Back Probs huh? Never had a serious Adrenalin rush Huh?;)

[sanantoniosooner]

I think the interpretation of what happened in the video has to take into account what the authorities have to say happened based on their investigation.

I'm pretty sure they can tell if the head shot happened first or last based on the scene.

I wont waste much time because nobody will change their minds, but that was cold blooded in...my...opinion...

[StoopTroup]

Back Problems? The Dude is in a pharmacy....he's probably feeling pretty good by the end of the day....lol

[pphilfran]

Never had Back Probs huh? Never had a serious Adrenalin rush Huh?;)

I am just playing the prosecution side...

The defense has at least these two items...

His state of mind...I would try to shoot that down by overplaying his military service...

His back issues...I would compare walking speed prior to and after the initial shooting...

With the two parameters I posted earlier I would probably vote to convict...but I am also sure that at least one juror will vote to acquit no matter the video evidence...imo no way he gets convicted....

He has a good chance of getting OJ'd and lose a civil suit..

[SoonerHoops]

I

He has a good chance of getting OJ'd and lose a civil suit..


Wont matter, they'll never recover money even if they do win.

[pphilfran]

Wont matter, they'll never recover money even if they do win.

Cause there won't be any...still won't stop em from trying to make his life even more miserable....

[StoopTroup]

If that guy with back problems had chased that kid down and drug him back to the store for the Police....I would say he doesn't have a back problem...lol

[StoopTroup]

If the back brace don't fit.....you must acquit!

[pphilfran]

If the back brace don't fit.....you must acquit!

:)

[olevetonahill]

I think the interpretation of what happened in the video has to take into account what the authorities have to say happened based on their investigation.

I'm pretty sure they can tell if the head shot happened first or last based on the scene.

I wont waste much time because nobody will change their minds, but that was cold blooded in...my...opinion...

This I agree with Bro.
Now do I think he should have went on and killed the punk? NO, But my point/points have always been NONE of us where there, None of knows for sure exactly what happened.

Personally I wont be upset with which ever way the verdict goes tho.

As far as losing the Civil suit wont all he have to do is File Bankruptcy?

[pphilfran]

This I agree with Bro.
Now do I think he should have went on and killed the punk? NO, But my point/points have always been NONE of us where there, None of knows for sure exactly what happened.

Personally I wont be upset with which ever way the verdict goes tho.

As far as losing the Civil suit wont all he have to do is File Bankruptcy?

Yep...but he could have to file regardless...it looks to me that if he gets acquitted momma is gonna drag him back to court and keep the pressure/uncertainty on...

[olevetonahill]

Yep...but he could have to file regardless...it looks to me that if he gets acquitted momma is gonna drag him back to court and keep the pressure/uncertainty on...

I think She has an attorney that promised her that the Pharmacy will settle just to avoid the Legal cost of a Civil suit And they may well do just that.
Id guess she gets No More than 5 -10 Thou from em, Depending on how big a company that pharmacy is.

[StoopTroup]

I think She has an attorney that promised her that the Pharmacy will settle just to avoid the Legal cost of a Civil suit And they may well do just that.
Id guess she gets No More than 5 -10 Thou from em, Depending on how big a company that pharmacy is.

Ummmm....she's getting backed by the NAACP

I'm guessing the KKK isn't allowed or willing to back the Pharmacist. (j/k)

Seriously....Why....if she's got such a good case.....does she need the NAACP?

[SoonerHoops]

I think She has an attorney that promised her that the Pharmacy will settle just to avoid the Legal cost of a Civil suit And they may well do just that.
Id guess she gets No More than 5 -10 Thou from em, Depending on how big a company that pharmacy is.


Um, no. The pharmacy's insurance company will not cover. And Ersland was not in the scope of his employment when he killed the kid. And no wrongful death lawsuit settles for 5-10.

[olevetonahill]

I think She has an attorney that promised her that the Pharmacy will settle just to avoid the Legal cost of a Civil suit And they may well do just that.
Id guess she gets No More than 5 -10 Thou from em, Depending on how big a company that pharmacy is.


Um, no. The pharmacy's insurance company will not cover. And Ersland was not in the scope of his employment when he killed the kid. And no wrongful death lawsuit settles for 5-10.

Well dont you just know every ****in thing.:P
Now Mr. attorney, Would you please explain WHY the Pharmacy's Ins. wont cover?
Plus whether he was in the "Scope of his employment" or not he was still In the company's employ at the time.

Plus I dont really GAS
The Punks Mom is Only after some quick cash and Id be willing to bet that she settles . ;)

[StoopTroup]

Vet....The guys at the Courthouse Metal Detectors get all the good scoop. :D ;)

[olevetonahill]

Vet....The guys at the Courthouse Metal Detectors get all the good scoop. :D ;)

Well hell, I cant compete, i just need to STFU then dont i?:O :D

[SoonerKnight]

Fair point...

If I were prosecuting I would bring up (pound in to the jury)him being in the armed forces...and he seems to be proud of that fact...he should be able to handle stressful situations...

This would be a great jury to be on

And I would counter that trained police officer that train for shootouts after they have a real fire fight can not remember how many shots they fired and often say "My mind went blank!"

Fight or flight reflex!

[Memtig14]

My brother used to be like y'all are and defend this kid, or blame the Pharmacist "for going too far" (which may be pretty easy to define from the luxury of your safe home).....

But since he was robbed at gun point not to long ago........he keeps much quieter about these kind of things. I think having a gun waved in his face has affected his opinion about being quite so forgiving of those poor misguided criminals that threaten innocent people's lives.

[sanantoniosooner]

there's a whole lot of territory between forgiving and cold blooded.

[SoonerofAlabama]

How is this a good case? The kid was shot trying to rob a pharmacy and she tries to get the money. I know there have been some stupid cases that have gone to the wrong side, but there is no way.

[SoonerKnight]

I say the pharmacist will not get convicted!!

[SoonerHoops]

Well dont you just know every ****in thing.:P
Now Mr. attorney, Would you please explain WHY the Pharmacy's Ins. wont cover?
Plus whether he was in the "Scope of his employment" or not he was still In the company's employ at the time.

Plus I dont really GAS
The Punks Mom is Only after some quick cash and Id be willing to bet that she settles . ;)


Insurance policies have an exclusion for intentional torts, which is what this event was. Therefore, the pharmacy and/or Ersland are not covered under the policy.

Regardless, the pharmacy could be liable for the acts of their employee under the doctrine of vicarious liability. However, for that doctrine to apply, the employee must have been acting in the scope of his employment. Generally, shootouts (or any intentional torts) are not in the scope of a pharmacist's employment.

I'm sure if your son or daughter were wrongfully killed, you wouldn't bring a lawsuit would you? Because you'd just be willing to make some quick cash, right?

[SoonerKnight]

Insurance policies have an exclusion for intentional torts, which is what this event was. Therefore, the pharmacy and/or Ersland are not covered under the policy.

Regardless, the pharmacy could be liable for the acts of their employee under the doctrine of vicarious liability. However, for that doctrine to apply, the employee must have been acting in the scope of his employment. Generally, shootouts (or any intentional torts) are not in the scope of a pharmacist's employment.

I'm sure if your son or daughter were wrongfully killed, you wouldn't bring a lawsuit would you? Because you'd just be willing to make some quick cash, right?

Define this! Because if my son/daughter was killed robbing a store I would be ashamed!!

[olevetonahill]

I say the pharmacist will not get convicted!!

Agreed ;)

[StoopTroup]

Define this! Because if my son/daughter was killed robbing a store I would be ashamed!!

He wasn't robbing it....

I saw the video and it looked like they must have really had the a/c down cold because he had to put a stocking cap on.

[okie52]

Article (http://www.news9.com/story/14670426/mother-of-teen-killed-during-robbery-suing-okc-pharmacist)



Maybe the first time.

the mother suing is her taking the best of a bad situation. Its amazing how bad parenting is gonna possibly pay off for her.

Ive seen the video, the clerk was ok to shoot first, but not the other five times. What do you guys think?

I am really disappointed in prater...he could have at least tacked on a hate crime as well as murder.

It would have been even worse had this kid been on a pathway to citizenship.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

I am really disappointed in prater...he could have at least tacked on a hate crime as well as murder.

It would have been even worse had this kid been on a pathway to citizenship.

In what way would it have been worse?

[StoopTroup]

In what way would it have been worse?

I can think of a few ways but it's against the rules to post lewdness on the board....

[okie52]

In what way would it have been worse?

The kid could have just left some migrant kids meeting where he learned how to juice the system...that would be a real loss to this country.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

I can think of a few ways but it's against the rules to post lewdness on the board....

troup, you've never been at a loss for words before ... except for your period phase.

[StoopTroup]

troup, you've never been at a loss for words before ... except for your period phase.

:D

[StoopTroup]

I think my Wife made the coffee extra strong this morning....lol

[Sooner_Tuf]

I'm sure if your son or daughter were wrongfully killed, you wouldn't bring a lawsuit would you? Because you'd just be willing to make some quick cash, right?

You should ask one of my kids what they think I would do.


Ersland should sue the mother. If she were doing her job he wouldn't have been halfway across the metro pulling a stickup.

[StoopTroup]

Did that thar boy take a knife to a gun fight?

[SoonerKnight]

Naw! He just forget his brains at the house! Hell everyone knows what happens when you try and rob a store in Oklahoma! You get your *** shot and possibly shot more than once!! :D

[badger]

I've been reading about testimony. Apparently they are trying to get experts to say that the attempted robber could have made movements even while unconscious, and that the shot would have eventually killed him anyway, so the defense is working hard to prove that the additional shots were either necessary, or didn't do any additional harm.

Hmm...

[sanantoniosooner]

5 shots to the gut............tis but a scratch...........

[The Profit]

5 shots to the gut............tis but a scratch...........



"
and what did Mercutio utter after that? Tis not deep as well nor as wide as a church door, but twill serve. Tomorrow, ye shall find me a grave man."

[soonercruiser]

I've been reading about testimony. Apparently they are trying to get experts to say that the attempted robber could have made movements even while unconscious, and that the shot would have eventually killed him anyway, so the defense is working hard to prove that the additional shots were either necessary, or didn't do any additional harm.

Hmm...

That story came out early; as there even was a local news story about a pathologist or neurologist who was quoted as saying someone shot in the head can make involuntary movements (or have seizure like movements) for a hour or so afterwards.

[badger]

The jury's been deliberating for about a half hour now. Link (http://newsok.com/jurors-begin-deliberations-in-pharmacists-murder-trial/article/3571241?custom_click=lead_story_title)

I think the prosecutor portrayed Ersland as a liar, which may discredit his testimony that the teen robber made movements afterward, even with the defense's expert saying it was possible.

The defense had to combat the prosecutor's expert saying the exact opposite, that it was highly unlikely that it there were any movements, plus the video tape, which doesn't show anything either way.

The video tape is really the most damaging evidence, that Ersland would shoot initially, chase the other suspect, come back into the store and look at the shot robber, then go back for a different gun and shoot the robber again.

It will really come down to whether the jury feels that Ersland had the right to kill the robber, considering the deadly force that the group of robbers brought to the pharmacy he worked at.

My gut is saying they will, considering the circumstances, even if Ersland might not have been telling the truth all of the time. His life was threatened, as were his co-workers, he had to be sure that he was not going to be attacked again. Not guilty, jury will return within 3 hours.

[The Profit]

I thought it was supposed to take 3 weeks. Oh well, I hope they, at least, convict him of 1st degree manslaughter. He needs to spend some time in prison in the general population.

[badger]

I was surprised it was over that fast too. Then again, the jury might take forever to decide what to do. Then again, I think juries only get $20 a day :D

[The Profit]

I was surprised it was over that fast too. Then again, the jury might take forever to decide what to do. Then again, I think juries only get $20 a day :D




Yeah, but they get free food.

[badger]

Yeah, but they get free food.

A hotel room also, right? If their deliberations go overnight?

[The Profit]

A hotel room also, right? If their deliberations go overnight?




Yeah, I think I read where the judge told them to be ready to stay until they get a verdict.

[okie52]

I thought it was supposed to take 3 weeks. Oh well, I hope they, at least, convict him of 1st degree manslaughter. He needs to spend some time in prison in the general population.

Nawww, he just needs to be fined for excessive noise. $250 tops.

[nighttrain12]

I don't think I would want this guy to be my pharmacist. It sounds as if he likes to 'over-medicate' people. ;)

[nighttrain12]

Jurors have reached a verdict! Announcement very soon!

[The Profit]

Jurors have reached a verdict! Announcement very soon!




That soon...I would say the verdict is Not Guilty.

[SoonerHoops]

That soon...I would say the verdict is Not Guilty.


Exactly.

[nighttrain12]

All it means is all 12 jurors saw it the same pretty quickly. Remember though, there is a lesser charge they could convict him on.

[okie52]

What was the lesser charge?

[nighttrain12]

What was the lesser charge?

1st degree manslaughter, (4 years to life) is the lesser charge.

[The Profit]

YES

[OUMallen]

GUILTY of first degree murder. Life.

[The Profit]

Guilty First Degree Murder. Life in prison.

[okie52]

1st degree manslaughter, (4 years to life) is the lesser charge.

I doubt that severe of a charge will fly either.

[okie52]

Wow. Shocking.

[The Profit]

Wow. Shocking.




I was surprised. This gives me a little more pride in my home state.

[nighttrain12]

It is shocking to me too. Obviously the jury believed the boy on the ground was still alive but incapacitated.

[SoonerHoops]

Wow, I was dead wrong interpreting how quickly the jury returned. Prater must have kicked some serious arse.

[OUMallen]

Pleased with the verdict. Not so pleased with the sentence.

[The Profit]

Pleased with the verdict. Not so pleased with the sentence.




I would agree Mallen. I would have been happy with 5 years to serve and never again being allowed to own a firearm.

[okie52]

I was surprised. This gives me a little more pride in my home state.

I am very surprised, too. A strange situation where the victim and the robbers all go to jail.

[nighttrain12]

Ersland had a huge credibility problem with his changing stories to police. He needed to convince a jury (without testifying), that the kid moved and was still a danger to others, but based on the prosecutors evidence, it turned out to be a slam dunk case.

[The Profit]

I am very surprised, too. A strange situation where the victim and the robbers all go to jail.



Remember, he was only a victim until he consciously decided to become a murderer.

[OUMallen]

I am very surprised, too. A strange situation where the victim and the robbers all go to jail.

It was like a law school final exam question, and you'd run out of time before finishing writing.

[SoonerHoops]

It was like a law school final exam question, and you'd run out of time before finishing writing.


That's for sure. A great exam question (unless you're the examinee)

[okie52]

Remember, he was only a victim until he consciously decided to become a murderer.

He was a victim for the whole incident. His inability to handle a situation that was forced upon him shouldn't merit this verdict. The jurors should be ashamed.

Hopefully the judge can reduce the sentence.

I wonder if the jurors will be making public statements?

[OUMallen]

He was a victim for the whole incident. His inability to handle a situation that was forced upon him shouldn't merit this verdict. The jurors should be ashamed.

Hopefully the judge can reduce the sentence.

I wonder if the jurors will be making public statements?

He was not a victim for the whole incident. Say what you will about the verdict- there is plenty of room to argue fairly.

But in no way can you say he was a victim 100% of the time during the event.

[The Profit]

He was a victim for the whole incident. His inability to handle a situation that was forced upon him shouldn't merit this verdict. The jurors should be ashamed.

Hopefully the judge can reduce the sentence.

I wonder if the jurors will be making public statements?




My old friend Okie, the case was always a slam-dunk case. Whether or not an Oklahoma jury would convict him was a completely different story. This clown was convicted by his actions that were video taped for everyone to see, and then by his lies to the police, a medical doctor, etc.

I am very proud of this jury. It took guts to do the right thing. A not guilty verdict would have been the easy way out.

[pphilfran]

I too am surprised they convicted the guy...

[badger]

Law experts: Since the jury returned after four hours of deliberation, could a defense argue that they made a decision in haste and successfully appeal on those grounds? Usually a fast verdict is "not guilty"

I thought it would be a "not guilty" verdict. I didn't hope for one, I just thought there'd be a "not guilty" verdict.

Thinking about it more, I think the jury made the correct decision, based solely on the fact that the shooting was not done all at one time. If he shot the robber five times immediately, I think it would be a different verdict. The fact that the video shows Ersland leave the store to chase the other robber, return to the store, retrieve a different gun and start shooting again... and then telling 911 a different order of events from the video's version... there's too much there to not come back with a guilty verdict.

I can't help but feel a little bit sorry for the guy though, as he was thrust into a situation beyond his control to begin with.

[okie52]

He was not a victim for the whole incident. Say what you will about the verdict- there is plenty of room to argue fairly.

But in no way can you say he was a victim 100% of the time during the event.

None of this would have happened had he not been robbed at gunpoint. His reaction to this may have been improper at the end by using excessive force but he was the victim, nonetheless.

[okie52]

My old friend Okie, the case was always a slam-dunk case. Whether or not an Oklahoma jury would convict him was a completely different story. This clown was convicted by his actions that were video taped for everyone to see, and then by his lies to the police, a medical doctor, etc.

I am very proud of this jury. It took guts to do the right thing. A not guilty verdict would have been the easy way out.

This guy may have been a clown but he reacted to a situation that was life or death...none of which was his doing.

[sanantoniosooner]

he turned from victim to vigilante at some point.

That's MY opinion and it wont change :D

[OUMallen]

This guy may have been a clown but he reacted to a situation that was life or death...none of which was his doing.

It wasn't life or death when he was outside and safe from the unconscious kid inside.

[Viking Kitten]

I would guess any appeal would be based on the defense request to have Judge Elliott remove himself from the case and Elliott's subsequent refusal.

[okie52]

It wasn't life or death when he was outside and safe from the unconscious kid inside.

Haha...no it was like the whole ordeal never happened within a couple of minutes.

[badger]

After all of these tornadoes in the area, I'm not sure I'd call Ersland a "victim" like I'd those that lost their homes, families and everything they hold dear a "victim."

Now that I think about it like that, I would love to be able to shoot a gun at a tornado to make it disappear and not cause any harm to anyone.

[Mjcpr]

Yes, I know it's about legal issues. Yes, I know the pharmacist "legally" probably commited a crime. Yes, I know that a jury in Oklahoma will not convict him of anything serious, and for this I am proud to be an Okie.

Good call.

[okie52]

I wonder if this will hurt Prater?

We've had DA's in the past that I doubt would have prosecuted this case.

[badger]

In tune with the thread subject line, will the mother of the robber have any assets to sue for? After attorney fees, is there anything left to collect? Would the mother be able to sue Ersland's attorneys for anything he's paid out to them so far, arguing that they've been paid since her son was killed and that she should be entitled to those assets, not the attorneys?

Sorry for the weird questions. I used to watch a lot of "The Practice."

[XingTheRubicon]

at least the piece of sh*t that he shot is still dead

[OUMallen]

at least the piece of sh*t that he shot is still dead

Even militant Islam is kinder to robbers than this post. :eek:

[yermom]

meh, losing a hand for stealing is one thing

getting killed during an armed robbery is another

i'm not going to really shed any tears for this kid

[OUMallen]

meh, losing a hand for stealing is one thing

getting killed during an armed robbery is another

i'm not going to really shed any tears for this kid

Some of us value life more than others, I suppose.

[yermom]

i don't really feel like killing to protect property is justified, but getting killed while threatening the life of someone should be pretty much expected.

if you rob someone at gun point you should expect get shot.

[Fraggle145]

meh, losing a hand for stealing is one thing

getting killed during an armed robbery is another

i'm not going to really shed any tears for this kid

Me either. He held a gun at someone. Until you have had that done to you, you have no idea how ****ed up it is to commit just that act. I've had it done to me and I can tell you I am glad he is dead.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Some of us value life more than others, I suppose.

Militant Islamists certainly do. 9/11 was an accident.

Ersland's conviction will likely be overturned on appeal. If he can still afford counsel after this fiasco.

Premeditated murder for killing an armed robber?

[SoonerHoops]

Militant Islamists certainly do. 9/11 was an accident.

Ersland's conviction will likely be overturned on appeal. If he can still afford counsel after this fiasco.

Premeditated murder for killing an armed robber?


Haha. A prediction from someone who obviously knows nothing about the criminal appellate process is a very worthwhile opinion....

[C&CDean]

Haha. A prediction from someone who obviously knows nothing about the criminal appellate process is a very worthwhile opinion....

The next time you belittle a non-bloodsucking attorney will be the last hoopboy. I tire of your holier-than-thou schtick.

[Midtowner]

Ersland's conviction will likely be overturned on appeal.

From a legal perspective, that's hilarious.

You have no Earthly idea what you are talking about.

[OUMallen]

Militant Islamists certainly do. 9/11 was an accident.

Ersland's conviction will likely be overturned on appeal. If he can still afford counsel after this fiasco.

Premeditated murder for killing an armed robber?

You know not of what you speak.

[C&CDean]

Good call.

They must have got their POS jury from your neck of the woods Pat.

[C&CDean]

From a legal perspective, that's hilarious.

You have no Earthly idea what you are talking about.

So, you gonna have a party now? Act like a muslim when they shoot down an American plane? You got your wish, hope you love it. A poor, dumb bastard's life is ****ed because of a punk-assed thug. You're loving it. You're seriously ****ed up.

[SoonerHoops]

They must have got their POS jury from your neck of the woods Pat.


Feel tough now that you called 12 Oklahomans who listened to witnesses and evidence for a week POS's because they determined the defendant was guilty, an opinion you disagree with because you obviously know so much about the facts of the case and the credibility of the witnesses, right?


Ersland's attorneys have the same rights during voir dire as Prater did.

[SoonerHoops]

The next time you belittle a non-bloodsucking attorney will be the last hoopboy. I tire of your holier-than-thou schtick.


Um, ok? Cool.

[OUMallen]

So, you gonna have a party now? Act like a muslim when they shoot down an American plane? You got your wish, hope you love it. A poor, dumb bastard's life is ****ed because of a punk-assed thug. You're loving it. You're seriously ****ed up.

Dean, I'm not sure he was celebrating. It's just funny when people say something will be overturned because, well, they simply don't like it.

I mean, if something's going to be overturned, let's hear some real talk about it. Mid knows what he's talking about.

[SoonerHoops]

So, you gonna have a party now? Act like a muslim when they shoot down an American plane? You got your wish, hope you love it. A poor, dumb bastard's life is ****ed because of a punk-assed thug. You're loving it. You're seriously ****ed up.


Telling someone that they are seriously ****ed up after comparing them to a muslim shooting down an American plane is irony at its finest.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Well, the kid is still dead thankfully so I can be happy about that. In fact I think I'll go have a beer over it.

[pphilfran]

Come on CC...take like a man....

[olevetonahill]

So, you gonna have a party now? Act like a muslim when they shoot down an American plane? You got your wish, hope you love it. A poor, dumb bastard's life is ****ed because of a punk-assed thug. You're loving it. You're seriously ****ed up.

Dean, Im wondering if their feelings and **** would be the same if JE had been their Dad/Uncle/brother/ Cousin . Or if they had been related to one of the females employees.:rolleyes:

[C&CDean]

Dean, I'm not sure he was celebrating. It's just funny when people say something will be overturned because, well, they simply don't like it.

I mean, if something's going to be overturned, let's hear some real talk about it. Mid knows what he's talking about.

Dude, it ain't that. This schmuck has been praying for Ersland's head on a platter for the past month. I'm not talking legalities. That's y'all's business. I'm just talking somebody spouting muslim-like hate for a guy who is for all intents and purposes a victim. Jerome Ersland would not be a murderer today if it wasn't for those little **********s. That's where my head is, not Brown vs. Board of Education, blah blah blah...

You guys treat it like a game. Normal folks don't. Get it?

[C&CDean]

Telling someone that they are seriously ****ed up after comparing them to a muslim shooting down an American plane is irony at its finest.

Strike two mother****er.

[OUMallen]

Dean, Im wondering if their feelings and **** would be the same if JE had been their Dad/Uncle/brother/ Cousin . Or if they had been related to one of the females employees.:rolleyes:

Sometimes life is hard. This is such an interesting story because reasonable people can REALLY differ on how it should come down.

Me, personally- absolutely guilty of 1st degree murder, but should have a very light sentence.

[pphilfran]

Dude, it ain't that. This schmuck has been praying for Ersland's head on a platter for the past month. I'm not talking legalities. That's y'all's business. I'm just talking somebody spouting muslim-like hate for a guy who is for all intents and purposes a victim. Jerome Ersland would not be a murderer today if it wasn't for those little **********s. That's where my head is, not Brown vs. Board of Education, blah blah blah...

You guys treat it like a game. Normal folks don't. Get it?

Mid was just talking facts....Ersland would not be a murderer today if he hadn't taken those last 5 shots....

[SoonerHoops]

Strike two mother****er.


Lol. Whatever you say Dean. It's amazing how you can dish out stuff but can't take it like a man.

[C&CDean]

Mid was just talking facts....Ersland would not be a murderer today if he hadn't taken those last 5 shots....

Easy to say from the leather-bound library of a lawyer.

It's obvious not many of y'all have ever stared down a loaded gun handled by a shaking thief. It's actually a shame.

[C&CDean]

Lol. Whatever you say Dean. It's amazing how you can dish out stuff but can't take it like a man.

Take what? You're a POS **** stirrer. It's fine if you know the law, it's not fine when you belittle others for having an opinion (no matter how far away from legal "facts" it might be). That's your problem. Sometimes - nay, oftentimes, the normal folks' view > you JDs.

My beef with you is that you're condescending to lay folks. That's it. I don't GAS about your opinion on this matter. Quit being a condescening prick and you might get to hang around.

[pphilfran]

Easy to say from the leather-bound library of a lawyer.

It's obvious not many of y'all have ever stared down a loaded gun handled by a shaking thief. It's actually a shame.

CC the guy overstepped his bounds...he lied about what went down....he lost credibility and with that loss his statements of the kid moving lost credibility..

This verdict shows that if you are going to use a firearm you must use it with a level head...if you are going to go over the edge with a lethal weapon you probably shouldn't be carrying a lethal weapon...

[pphilfran]

Take what? You're a POS **** stirrer. It's fine if you know the law, it's not fine when you belittle others for having an opinion (no matter how far away from legal "facts" it might be). That's your problem. Sometimes - nay, oftentimes, the normal folks' view > you JDs.

My beef with you is that you're condescending to lay folks. That's it. I don't GAS about your opinion on this matter. Quit being a condescening prick and you might get to hang around.

CC...you are at least as rude and intolerant as anyone on this board...I'm done with this thread...

[C&CDean]

CC the guy overstepped his bounds...he lied about what went down....he lost credibility and with that loss his statements of the kid moving lost credibility..

This verdict shows that if you are going to use a firearm you must use it with a level head...if you are going to go over the edge with a lethal weapon you probably shouldn't be carrying a lethal weapon...

Got it. Good. Ersland's only **** up was that he knicked the little POS in the head rather than drilling it dead-center.

I hope some day you guys with all the Monday morning QBing legaleze expertise face what this poor, dumb bastard faced. You'll feel much differently, trust me.

[C&CDean]

CC...you are at least as rude and intolerant as anyone on this board...I'm done with this thread...

Thank you, thank you very much...

[yermom]

yeah, that sure seems where he screwed up was the lying/cover up

most of the opinions here aren't based on legality though

should he be in jail based on laws? probably

should he be in jail based on what's right? that's a little murkier.

[C&CDean]

yeah, that sure seems where he screwed up was the lying/cover up

most of the opinions here aren't based on legality though

should he be in jail based on laws? probably

should he be in jail based on what's right? that's a little murkier.

Wow. It takes a nerd to get it. :P

[SoonerHoops]

Take what? You're a POS **** stirrer. It's fine if you know the law, it's not fine when you belittle others for having an opinion (no matter how far away from legal "facts" it might be). That's your problem. Sometimes - nay, oftentimes, the normal folks' view > you JDs.

My beef with you is that you're condescending to lay folks. That's it. I don't GAS about your opinion on this matter. Quit being a condescening prick and you might get to hang around.


Let's be honest here and call a spade a spade Dean. You don't like my posts because you don't agree with them. If I was on your side, behind Ersland, you wouldn't have a single problem with anything I could or would post.

[Mongo]

CC...you are at least as rude and intolerant as anyone on this board...I'm done with this thread...

Dean is a softie. you rub his bald head and he'll purr like a kitty

[Ctina]

Hubby was just telling me that when this first came out, he was working with a guy who used to be in that kind of life. He told hubby that when those guys made the kid go in there, they weren't playing, the kid was in a do or die situation either way. He was fubar.

The first shot was justified. The follow up shots were not.

[C&CDean]

Let's be honest here and call a spade a spade Dean. You don't like my posts because you don't agree with them. If I was on your side, behind Ersland, you wouldn't have a single problem with anything I could or would post.

Wrong again. I don't like your posts because I can find several of them that made fun/insulted lay people. You must be a young lawyer, because most of the ones who are mature know better than to play that way. You know the law. Good. I'm not insulting you for spending the time/effort to go to school and do your thing. Please do not continue to insult people who have an opinion that might not exactly jibe with the "LAW." Get it? Legally, Jerome Ersland is a murderer. Morally (based on my personal - and many others' personal life experiences looking down the barrell of a loaded gun) not so much. That's why I hope some day you get that wonderful real-life experience. Then, you just might be posting something I could get on board with.

[SoonerHoops]

It's good to know you wish for those who don't agree with your opinions to get assaulted. Stay classy, Dean.

[C&CDean]

It's good to know you wish for those who don't agree with your opinions to get assaulted. Stay classy, Dean.

Yup. That's it.

It's comforting to know you don't really have to be intelligent to get through law school. There's still hope for the childrens...

Have you ever been assaulted at gun point? The answer is glaringly obvious. Someday, if you ever are, you might just wise up. But prolly not.

[Fraggle145]

Have you ever been assaulted at gun point? The answer is glaringly obvious. Someday, if you ever are, you might just wise up. But prolly not.

No ****. Everything goes out the window when the gun is in your face.

[SoonerHoops]

Yup. That's it.

It's comforting to know you don't really have to be intelligent to get through law school. There's still hope for the childrens...

Have you ever been assaulted at gun point? The answer is glaringly obvious. Someday, if you ever are, you might just wise up. But prolly not.


Whether I have or haven't doesn't change what the law says. I have spoken with individuals who have served in combat and others who have faced a gun assault who are adamant that Ersland is guilty. So, keep questioning my intelligence, if that somehow makes you feel better. Your posts speak for themselves.

[Fraggle145]

Got it. Good. Ersland's only **** up was that he knicked the little POS in the head rather than drilling it dead-center.

I hope some day you guys with all the Monday morning QBing legaleze expertise face what this poor, dumb bastard faced. You'll feel much differently, trust me.

Its crazy that if he just woulda killed him the first time it all would've been okay.

[Fraggle145]

Whether I have or haven't doesn't change what the law says. I have spoken with individuals who have served in combat and others who have faced a gun assault who are adamant that Ersland is guilty. So, keep questioning my intelligence, if that somehow makes you feel better. Your posts speak for themselves.

You suck at reading comprehension. Dean hasnt been talking about the law.

[C&CDean]

No ****. Everything goes out the window when the gun is in your face.

Indeed. I highly recommend it for balance/fairness in one's thought processes.

Twice in my life I've faced it. Both times, if I would have been prepared I would have kilt the mother****er dead about 400 times for the fear/panic/pain he caused. Not all to me, but to those I love. It's disheartening to know that most of the lawyers on this board would party down when I went to jail for protecting what was mine.

From those times on, Dean is never "not prepared." Ever.

[SoonerHoops]

You suck at reading comprehension. Dean hasnt been talking about the law.


Facepalm.

[C&CDean]

Whether I have or haven't doesn't change what the law says. I have spoken with individuals who have served in combat and others who have faced a gun assault who are adamant that Ersland is guilty. So, keep questioning my intelligence, if that somehow makes you feel better. Your posts speak for themselves.

You guys sure are good at "speaking with individuals who walked that mile" or calling in the "expert witness" ain't ya?

Meh. Doleo, who couldn't spell his way out of a wet paper sack gets more IQ respect than you do dude. Actually, that ain't fair. I love Doleo, and he's actually quite intelligent. You two should hook up. He'd educate you. A. Lot.

[C&CDean]

Facepalm.

You need your legal assistant to pull up the fark you're looking for.

[SoonerHoops]

You guys sure are good at "speaking with individuals who walked that mile" or calling in the "expert witness" ain't ya?

Meh. Doleo, who couldn't spell his way out of a wet paper sack gets more IQ respect than you do dude. Actually, that ain't fair. I love Doleo, and he's actually quite intelligent. You two should hook up. He'd educate you. A. Lot.


Exactly. Don't agree with my argument, so I must have a low IQ. Again, your posts speak for themselves.

[Midtowner]

Got it. Good. Ersland's only **** up was that he knicked the little POS in the head rather than drilling it dead-center.


The jury disagreed.

If you mean to imply that I'm glad about the conviction? I am. This is about the rule of law. You don't get to got off for murder solely because the sumbitch needed killing. We live in a civilized society where firearms are used for self-defense only. If the jury didn't believe Ersland was acting in self-defense (and they obviously didn't), then are we just going to invest every Tom Dick & Harry out there with the power to kill someone because they subjectively believe that person is worthy of death?

I don't think you have thought your position through very well.

[SoonerHoops]

The jury disagreed.

If you mean to imply that I'm glad about the conviction? I am. This is about the rule of law. You don't get to got off for murder solely because the sumbitch needed killing. We live in a civilized society where firearms are used for self-defense only. If the jury didn't believe Ersland was acting in self-defense (and they obviously didn't), then are we just going to invest every Tom Dick & Harry out there with the power to kill someone because they subjectively believe that person is worthy of death?

I don't think you have thought your position through very well.


Careful, you'll be accused of being a **** stirrer with a low IQ because you're making an argument that lacks support from the powers who be.

[Midtowner]

Indeed. I highly recommend it for balance/fairness in one's thought processes.

Twice in my life I've faced it. Both times, if I would have been prepared I would have kilt the mother****er dead about 400 times for the fear/panic/pain he caused. Not all to me, but to those I love. It's disheartening to know that most of the lawyers on this board would party down when I went to jail for protecting what was mine.

From those times on, Dean is never "not prepared." Ever.

If you're talking about your personal safety or someone else's, I have no qualms with you using whatever force necessary. But your stuff, which is probably covered by insurance, is not worth a human life, even if it's a human life, which you have judged to not deserve to be in existence.

[Midtowner]

Careful, you'll be accused of being a **** stirrer with a low IQ because you're making an argument that lacks support from the powers who be.

I've already been compared to a Muslim terrorist... :rolleyes:

[C&CDean]

So, it's the two final ambulance chasers still hanging in here. Goody.

For guys who are supposed to spend their lives arguing in front of juries - then spending lunch together going "good job Bob - no, good job to you Charles" you guys are a bunch of punkassed bitches. Just sayin'.

I've spent way too much time around your kind. I don't have a ton of respect for most of you. Sue me.

[GKeeper316]

But your stuff, which is probably covered by insurance, is not worth a human life.

i disagree. material possessions and natural resources are the only reason to take a human life imo.

protect what's yours.

[Turd_Ferguson]

The jury disagreed.

If you mean to imply that I'm glad about the conviction? I am. This is about the rule of law. You don't get to got off for murder solely because the sumbitch needed killing. We live in a civilized society where firearms are used for self-defense only. If the jury didn't believe Ersland was acting in self-defense (and they obviously didn't), then are we just going to invest every Tom Dick & Harry out there with the power to kill someone because they subjectively believe that person is worthy of death?

I don't think you have thought your position through very well.Anybody that comes into your life wearing a stocking and wielding a gun deserves whatever they get...

[C&CDean]

Anybody that comes into your life wearing a stocking and wielding a gun deserves whatever they get...

Lunch at the "CLUB" doesn't include armed negroes. Keep up.

[SoonerHoops]

So, it's the two final ambulance chasers still hanging in here. Goody.

For guys who are supposed to spend their lives arguing in front of juries - then spending lunch together going "good job Bob - no, good job to you Charles" you guys are a bunch of punkassed bitches. Just sayin'.

I've spent way too much time around your kind. I don't have a ton of respect for most of you. Sue me.


Otherwise known as the "I know I'm totally wrong, I look ridiculous with my argument, so I'm forced to personally attack my opponent by questioning their employment and intelligent" post. Well done, Dean.


Btw, I'm tired of you being condescending to the lawyers here. This is your second warning.

[C&CDean]

Otherwise known as the "I know I'm totally wrong, I look ridiculous with my argument, so I'm forced to personally attack my opponent by questioning their employment and intelligent" post. Well done, Dean.


Btw, I'm tired of you being condescending to the lawyers here. This is your second warning.

Gosh. You are so sharp. I'm thinking plastic butterknife at least...

For a guy who is supposed to "get it" you pretty much don't.

Here's the deal. I'm the jury, judge, and excecutioner. How bad would that suck in real life? You'd be **** out of a job, no? This ain't your make-believe courtroom, and nobody here cares who's legal tablet you've carried. Here, you're just an average chump like all the rest of us. Nobody cares that you finished 481st in a class of 482 in law school. Prove to me why you shoudn't be gone. Hurry up, cause I don't have a lot of patience.

[SoonerHoops]

Hey Dean, great news! My legal assistant found that fark we were looking for...


http://thxforthe.info/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/dontworry-imfromtheinternet.jpg

[okie52]

How about I would have have never convicted the guy even if he was guilty.

Now who thinks this guy deserves a life sentence....since that is the reality of convicting him? These noble jurors could have gone for the manslaughter charge and instead chose the harshest possible punishment.

[C&CDean]

Hey Dean, great news! My legal assistant found that fark we were looking for...


http://thxforthe.info/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/dontworry-imfromtheinternet.jpg

A solid D. Minus.

[SoonerHoops]

A solid D. Minus.


Stern, but fair.

[47straight]

I think he was probably guilty of manslaughter, not murder. But he didn't get to testify about how scared ****less he was when he pulled the second gun, because he didn't take the stand.

So why didn't he take the stand? Probably because he had made contradicting statements earlier and it wouldn't have looked good.



If any of you ever find yourself defending yourself with deadly force, even if you think you were 100% justified legally and morally, shut your mouth. Do not talk to the cops until you get a lawyer.

[okie52]

Or just kill him with the first shot.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Haha. A prediction from someone who obviously knows nothing about the criminal appellate process is a very worthwhile opinion....

So obviously in your opinion it will be a real shocker if there is an appeal in this case? Is that what you are saying your Honor?

[Midtowner]

Or just kill him with the first shot.

Or don't calmly step over his body with your back turned towards him, rummage around for another gun, walk right back up to him and squeeze the trigger five more times. There's that too.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Well the moral of this story is to rid your businesses of any "security" cameras and make sure there is plenty of space in your dumpster. Oh and don't call the police if you are robbed.

[okie52]

Or don't calmly step over his body with your back turned towards him, rummage around for another gun, walk right back up to him and squeeze the trigger five more times. There's that too.

Or just turn off the video....

[C&CDean]

Or don't calmly step over his body with your back turned towards him, rummage around for another gun, walk right back up to him and squeeze the trigger five more times. There's that too.

You watch way too many crime/lawyer dramas I'm a thinking.

[SoonerHoops]

So obviously in your opinion it will be a real shocker if there is an appeal in this case? Is that what you are saying your Honor?


Of course there's going to be an appeal.

[GKeeper316]

If any of you ever find yourself defending yourself with deadly force, even if you think you were 100% justified legally and morally, shut your mouth. Do not talk to the cops until you get a lawyer.

no.

the correct answer is get the **** to costa rica and not entrust your fate to 12 average americans.

at least, that was my lawyers advice if ever facing a murder charge.

[Midtowner]

You watch way too many crime/lawyer dramas I'm a thinking.

No, just the drama where Ersland stepped over the victim's body with his back turned towards him, rummage around for another gun, walked right back up to him and squeeze the trigger five more times.

[CrimsonKel]

I disagree with the verdict. I think its unfair and wrong. I hope it gets reversed on appeal. I'm pretty mad at Mr. Prater and I can hardly wait to vote for his opponent in the next election.

[C&CDean]

No, just the drama where Ersland stepped over the victim's body with his back turned towards him, rummage around for another gun, walked right back up to him and squeeze the trigger five more times.

OK. You got your wish. He's broke, broken, and going to prison. Does that make you happy in your pants?

[Midtowner]

Justice isn't always a happy thing. It's just what civilization demands.

[okie52]

Justice isn't always a happy thing. It's just what civilization demands.

This wasn't close to justice.

[Thaumaturge]

I am strongly opposed to murder.

[okie52]

I am strongly opposed to murder.

Armed robbery? Yes..no...in between?

[Midtowner]

This wasn't close to justice.

Do you think justice can be carried out by a vigilante, or that a criminal deserves due process once he is no longer a threat to anyone?

[Thaumaturge]

Armed robbery? Yes..no...in between?

Was he accused of armed robbery as well? I would also oppose that.

[okie52]

Was he accused of armed robbery as well? I would also oppose that.

Sounds like you were a juror.....they didn't seem to oppose armed robbery. You should have spoken up.

[Thaumaturge]

The problem with the jury selection process is that God-complexes tend to get one disqualified. Thus, we get such miscarriages of justice as this verdict.

[olevetonahill]

Sometimes life is hard. This is such an interesting story because reasonable people can REALLY differ on how it should come down.

Me, personally- absolutely guilty of 1st degree murder, but should have a very light sentence.

Heres the thing, IF the punks NEVER entered the store with a Gun With the INTENT ton Rob and Maybe cause Bodily Harm, JE would never have been in the Position to have to KILL said PUNK.

[okie52]

Which god complex?.....that there is or isn't a God?

Enquiring minds need to know.

[Midtowner]

But he never "had to" kill said punk. He shot him once, incapacitated him, then came back and executed him.

He didn't have to execute him.

Some of y'all are so damn dense, I swear.

[olevetonahill]

CC the guy overstepped his bounds...he lied about what went down....he lost credibility and with that loss his statements of the kid moving lost credibility..

This verdict shows that if you are going to use a firearm you must use it with a level head...if you are going to go over the edge with a lethal weapon you probably shouldn't be carrying a lethal weapon...

****,****, ****.

IF you OVER reacted and then thot about it, Would YOU not have tried to Help your case?:rolleyes:

[C&CDean]

Some of y'all are so damn dense, I swear.

Indeed.

Like I said, someday you just might have the priviledge of being in his boots. Who wants to bet you ain't so chilly and ****?

[olevetonahill]

Got it. Good. Ersland's only **** up was that he knicked the little POS in the head rather than drilling it dead-center.

I hope some day you guys with all the Monday morning QBing legaleze expertise face what this poor, dumb bastard faced. You'll feel much differently, trust me.

Double Tap.;)

[okie52]

But he never "had to" kill said punk. He shot him once, incapacitated him, then came back and executed him.

He didn't have to execute him.

Some of y'all are so damn dense, I swear.

Oh lord.....you're view of justice is a life sentence for a guy robbed at gunpoint killing one of the assailants. He could have gone on out on the street and killed an innocent person and fared the same. Talk about dense.

[C&CDean]

Oh lord.....you're view of justice is a life sentence for a guy robbed at gunpoint killing one of the assailants. He could have gone on out on the street and killed an innocent person and fared the same. Talk about dense.

-sigh- you're not an attorney. you don't get it. -sigh-

meh.

[okie52]

-sigh- you're not an attorney. you don't get it. -sigh-

meh.

I hope I don't ever "get it".

[Midtowner]

Oh lord.....you're view of justice is a life sentence for a guy robbed at gunpoint killing one of the assailants. He could have gone on out on the street and killed an innocent person and fared the same. Talk about dense.

A guy who successfully defended the threat and would have been a hero, except he took the law into his own hands and executed someone. That's murder.

[SoonerHoops]

you're not an attorney. you don't get it.



Signature and life motto worthy....

[Thaumaturge]

A guy who successfully defended the threat and would have been a hero, except he took the law into his own hands and executed someone. That's murder.

For your cool head and clarity of thought, I award 10 points to Gryffindor!

[okie52]

A guy who successfully defended the threat and would have been a hero, except he took the law into his own hands and executed someone. That's murder.

To who? Besides these puzzy jurors he was still a hero to many. And, of course, his fate is the same as a guy who killed an innocent person on the street...is that justice to you?

[Dio]

David Prater: making the world safe for armed felons, one pharmacist at a time.

[tulsaoilerfan]

Well i sure hope if someone comes into my house with a gun that i don't use too much force when i shoot the mother****er dead

[Midtowner]

To who? Besides these puzzy jurors he was still a hero to many. And, of course, his fate is the same as a guy who killed an innocent person on the street...is that justice to you?

Exactly! You understand!

He killed a person who was the same as an innocent person on the street.

The person he killed was not a threat to him and had not been proven guilty of anything at all. Good job.

[SoonerHoops]

Well i sure hope if someone comes into my house with a gun that i don't use too much force when i shoot the mother****er dead


It's your house. Unload on him/her/it/zombie.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Exactly! You understand!

He killed a person who was the same as an innocent person on the street.

The person he killed was not a threat to him and had not been proven guilty of anything at all. Good job.Man you are fuuuuuuu*k'd up...

[olevetonahill]

Whether I have or haven't doesn't change what the law says. I have spoken with individuals who have served in combat and others who have faced a gun assault who are adamant that Ersland is guilty. So, keep questioning my intelligence, if that somehow makes you feel better. Your posts speak for themselves.

This Olevet says Make sure the punk is DEAD:rolleyes:

[tulsaoilerfan]

It's your house. Unload on him/her/it/zombie.

Yeah but what if i shoot them too many times after they are allegedly no longer a threat? Whos entitled to make that judgment anyway?

[olevetonahill]

But he never "had to" kill said punk. He shot him once, incapacitated him, then came back and executed him.

He didn't have to execute him.

Some of y'all are so damn dense, I swear.

Says the dude that never "Been there done that":rolleyes:

[Spray]

You vigilantes come to an agreement about this yet?

[olevetonahill]

You vigilantes come to an agreement about this yet?

Yea, Ima thinkin WE need to Spring JE

[Turd_Ferguson]

You vigilantes come to an agreement about this yet?The best thing they could have done was to charge him with murder, have him serve no time, then give him a medal for helping keep OKC beautiful...

[okie52]

Exactly! You understand!

He killed a person who was the same as an innocent person on the street.

The person he killed was not a threat to him and had not been proven guilty of anything at all. Good job.

Yep, the guy lying on the floor was an innocent bystander. the jury pool was really lax in not getting there in 2-3 minutes.

As I highlighted above....the defense rests.

[Crimsontothecore]

In my opinion Ersland, with the first shot, eliminated the threat to himself. With the additional shots he eliminated future threats this punk would have undoubtedly been to his future victims.

Just astonishing to me that this thug would be just as dead if the first shot had been fatal, yet in that scenario this poor pharmacist would not be heading for prison for the rest of his life. Prison is for people who are threats to society, not those who defend themselves against armed robbers.

What a great message to send to the scum of our society. Go ahead and rob people, the court system will punish anyone who tries to stop you.

What a disgrace!

[SoonerHoops]

What a great message to send to the scum of our society. Go ahead and rob people, the court system will punish anyone who tries to stop you.




The law is no different today than it was yesterday.

[Crimsontothecore]

The law is no different today than it was yesterday.

But yesterday a hero was still a free man. Law is the same, justice isn't.

[SoonerHoops]

But yesterday a hero was still a free man. Law is the same, justice isn't.


Which goes to show, the court system is going to deal with robbers tomorrow just as they would have yesterday. Similarly, the system is going to deal with those who stop robbers under the same laws they did yesterday. Nothing changed.

[olevetonahill]

The law is no different today than it was yesterday,Thanks to idiots like me.

FIFY:rolleyes:

[SoonerHoops]

Originally Posted by SoonerHoops
The law is no different today than it was yesterday,Thanks to idiots like me.

FIFY:rolleyes:


Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[olevetonahill]

Which goes to show, the court system is going to deal with robbers tomorrow just as they would have yesterday. Similarly, the system is going to deal with those who stop robbers under the same laws they did yesterday. Nothing changed.

With your continuous Spiel Im reminded of the old saying
"Rave on Cat shat, some one will come along and cover you up.":rolleyes:

[olevetonahill]

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Why thank you, Thank you very much.:rolleyes:
**** off dip ****

[SoonerHoops]

With your continuous Spiel Im reminded of the old saying
"Rave on Cat shat, some one will come along and cover you up.":rolleyes:


That's exactly the saying that came to my mind as well.

[olevetonahill]

Kiss My GRITS
Was the LAW fulfilled ?I guess
Was JUSTICE served? NO WAY IN HELL:rolleyes:

[olevetonahill]

That's exactly the saying that came to my mind as well.

And yet NO One has covered yer shat yet.:texan:

[Crimsontothecore]

Which goes to show, the court system is going to deal with robbers tomorrow just as they would have yesterday. Similarly, the system is going to deal with those who stop robbers under the same laws they did yesterday. Nothing changed.

Actually, plenty has changed. There was a time in our country when a victim of an armed robbery would have be applauded for standing up to his assailants. And it wouldn't have mattered if the thug was shot once or ten times.

[SoonerHoops]

Olevet, are you related to James the Marvel in any way? A friend wants to know.

[SoonerHoops]

Actually, plenty has changed. There was a time in our country when a victim of an armed robbery would have be applauded for standing up to his assailants. And it wouldn't have mattered if the thug was shot once or ten times.


I think everyone applauds Ersland for standing up to his assailants. I know I certainly do. That's not really an issue.

[olevetonahill]

Olevet, are you related to James the Marvel in any way? A friend wants to know.

You LIE, Cause YOU have no friends :P

[StoopTroup]

Can the pharmacist sue the maker of the mask the kid was wearing for scaring the crap out of him since they are continuing to make these woven devices of terror? :D

[SoonerHoops]

You LIE, Cause YOU have no friends :P


Not entirely accurate. Dean and I are friends. He loves hearing my lawyer stories over lunch.

[Crimsontothecore]

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Do you really consider your thoughts on this subject rational? How rational is it to send a person to prison when he is absolutely NO THREAT to society at all? Oh, I guess he's a threat if you stick a gun in his face and try to rob him, but ask yourself this; On that fateful morning, who got out of bed to go to work and earn an honest living and who got out of bed intending to victimize someone at gunpoint for their own gain? Is your sense of right and wrong so skewed that you seriously think the punk was killed unjustly?

[Ctina]

-sigh- you're not an attorney. you don't get it. -sigh-

meh.

I'm not an attorney but I get it. The guy stepped over the unconscious kid's body, got another gun, and unloaded into him. Watch the video. This guy is moving awfully slow for someone who feels so threatened.

DSBBlEhmWNQ&feature=related

[Blue]

Do you really consider your thoughts on this subject rational? How rational is it to send a person to prison when he is absolutely NO THREAT to society at all? Oh, I guess he's a threat if you stick a gun in his face and try to rob him, but ask yourself this; On that fateful morning, who got out of bed to go to work and earn an honest living and who got out of bed intending to victimize someone at gunpoint for their own gain? Is your sense of right and wrong so skewed that you seriously think the punk was killed unjustly?

QFT.

[StoopTroup]

Not entirely accurate. Dean and I are friends. He loves hearing my lawyer stories over lunch.

Now we know who's painted toenails those were...

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/8765/dsc0298ic.jpg

[SoonerHoops]

Do you really consider your thoughts on this subject rational? How rational is it to send a person to prison when he is absolutely NO THREAT to society at all? Oh, I guess he's a threat if you stick a gun in his face and try to rob him, but ask yourself this; On that fateful morning, who got out of bed to go to work and earn an honest living and who got out of bed intending to victimize someone at gunpoint for their own gain? Is your sense of right and wrong so skewed that you seriously think the punk was killed unjustly?


Yeah, I consider my thoughts on this subject rational. I would think that much is supported by some pretty darn good lawyers and 12 jurors. Legally, he's guilty. By the letter of the law, he's guilty. If you want to morally argue he should not be convicted of murder, that's fine. We'll agree to disagree.


How rational is it to send a person to prison when he is no threat to society? Pretty dang rational. Was Martha Stewart a threat to society? Is the man who comes home and finds his wife in bed with another man, and kills them both in a fit of rage a threat to society? How about the man who has a couple of drinks then beats his best friend to hell in an argument about a girl, is he a threat to society? Sorry, the standard for sending someone to jail is not about whether they are a threat to society or not, it's whether they broke the law or not.

[StoopTroup]

He's wearing a back brace

[StoopTroup]

Yeah, I consider my thoughts on this subject rational. I would think that much is supported by some pretty darn good lawyers and 12 jurors. Legally, he's guilty. By the letter of the law, he's guilty. If you want to morally argue he should not be convicted of murder, that's fine. We'll agree to disagree.



I bet the magic #12 doesn't work out.

[Crimsontothecore]

I'm not an attorney but I get it. The guy stepped over the unconscious kid's body, got another gun, and unloaded into him. Watch the video. This guy is moving awfully slow for someone who feels so threatened.

I get it too. Ersland wanted to make absolutely sure that this armed robber was dead and would never rob again. What I don't get is why anyone would have a problem with that.

[SoonerHoops]

I get it too. Ersland wanted to make absolutely sure that this armed robber was dead and would never rob again. What I don't get is why anyone would have a problem with that.


Probably because it's against the law...?

[Crimsontothecore]

Yeah, I consider my thoughts on this subject rational. I would think that much is supported by some pretty darn good lawyers and 12 jurors. Legally, he's guilty. By the letter of the law, he's guilty. If you want to morally argue he should not be convicted of murder, that's fine. We'll agree to disagree.


How rational is it to send a person to prison when he is no threat to society? Pretty dang rational. Was Martha Stewart a threat to society? Is the man who comes home and finds his wife in bed with another man, and kills them both in a fit of rage a threat to society? How about the man who has a couple of drinks then beats his best friend to hell in an argument about a girl, is he a threat to society? Sorry, the standard for sending someone to jail is not about whether they are a threat to society or not, it's whether they broke the law or not.

But self defense isn't against the law. Using deadly force against someone threatening you with a deadly weapon isn't against the law either.

Your examples are not even remotely similar to the facts of this case. Your examples are of people (except Stewart) who initiate violence against someone who is not threatening bodily harm. try again.

[Crimsontothecore]

Probably because it's against the law...?

To defend ones self against an armed assailant by using deadly force is against the law? wrong again.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Of course there's going to be an appeal.

So you're little rant earlier was for what reason?

[SoonerHoops]

But self defense isn't against the law. Using deadly force against someone threatening you with a deadly weapon isn't against the law either.

Your examples are not even remotely similar to the facts of this case. Your examples are of people (except Stewart) who initiate violence against someone who is not threatening bodily harm. try again.


You're right, self-defense isn't against the law. However, what I believe and obviously what the State proved is that the individual on the floor was not an imminent threat to Ersland or anyone else, and therefore, under the law, you cannot validly claim self-defense for killing someone who is not a threat to your safety.

My examples were not intended to be similar to the facts of this case. They were showing that just because someone isn't a threat to society does not mean they should stay out of jail. They broke the law, they were convicted by a jury of their peers, and now they must do the time, regardless of their threat level to society.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Probably because it's against the law...?

You know if he did the same thing today the law would protect him. Now the same law that protects households protects businesses.

[SoonerHoops]

So you're little rant earlier was for what reason?


Ersland's conviction will likely be overturned on appeal.

..

[Crimsontothecore]

You're right, self-defense isn't against the law. However, what I believe and obviously what the State proved is that the individual on the floor was not an imminent threat to Ersland or anyone else, and therefore, under the law, you cannot validly claim self-defense for killing someone who is not a threat to your safety.

My examples were not intended to be similar to the facts of this case. They were showing that just because someone isn't a threat to society does not mean they should stay out of jail. They broke the law, they were convicted by a jury of their peers, and now they must do the time, regardless of their threat level to society.

The state in no way "proved" that Ersland didn't perceive the thug as a threat.

[SoonerHoops]

You know if he did the same thing today the law would protect him. Now the same law that protects households protects businesses.


Technically, not until November 1.