Mother Of Teen Killed During Robbery Suing OKC Pharmacist

[SoonerHoops]

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


The State proved that the kid was not a threat. Period. Beyond a reasonable doubt, that individual was not an imminent threat to the safety of Jerome Ersland or any of his employees. Therefore, self-defense does not apply.

[StoopTroup]

What does the State know? People say that kid is dead and I'm still worried I'll have to pump a clip in him...

[Breadburner]

Should have used a .45 no need for a follow up....

[Curly Bill]

Should have used a .45 no need for a follow up....

:rolleyes: Just about the only thing worse than political lefties are peeps that think the .45 is magical. :D

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Why are our tax dollars being wasted on this crap? Get a jury, get it to court, make a decision, get it over with.

My God, it's been two years, lets wrap this thing up one way or another.

[Fraggle145]

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.

NO. NO. NO.

That mother****ing piece of trash that he killed was not an innocent person. He just held him at gunpoint. Or did you forget that?

The kid was not innocent. How much more evidence did he need that the kid was guilty of assaulting him with a deadly weapon and that the kid had intent to kill him? If you point a gun at someone that means you will kill them. The end. I wouldnt have stopped either.

[SoonerHoops]

Hey Fraggle, I enjoyed your spek. That took some guts. Mad respect for you.

[Fraggle145]

Hey Fraggle, I enjoyed your spek. That took some guts. Mad respect for you.

Good. Blow me dooshnozzle. Keep complaining about spek. What are you the new Leroy troll?

You dont get it. And you wont until you have someone put a gun in your face. Once that happens I guarantee you wouldve done the same thing. Make sure that guy never has a chance to do that you, your family, or anyone else again.

[SoonerHoops]

Good. Blow me dooshnozzle. Keep complaining about spek. What are you the new Leroy troll?

You dont get it. And you wont until you have someone put a gun in your face. Once that happens I guarantee you wouldve done the same thing. Make sure that guy never has a chance to do that you, your family, or anyone else again.


I distinctly remember thanking you for the spek, not complaining. Real men always spek. It's the thing to do.

[Fraggle145]

I distinctly remember thanking you for the spek, not complaining. Real men always spek. It's the thing to do.

Good. Then I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Instead of being a trolling condescending piece of **** you could actually try listening to people's opinions instead of always trying to get the last word. It took me a long time to learn that, and I confess I'm still not that good at it.

[SoonerHoops]

Good. Then I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Instead of being a trolling condescending piece of **** you could actually try listening to people's opinions instead of always trying to get the last word. It took me a long time to learn that, and I confess I'm still not that good at it.


Lol, coming from someone who took the time to spek about 15 of my posts in this thread with short commentary about how "worthless" or unintelligent each post was. You just can't make this stuff up....

[Fraggle145]

Lol, coming from someone who took the time to spek about 15 of my posts in this thread with short commentary about how "worthless" or unintelligent each post was. You just can't make this stuff up....

So, I thought you enjoyed it? It was good for me.

[olevetonahill]

The State proved that the kid was not a threat. Period. Beyond a reasonable doubt, that individual was not an imminent threat to the safety of Jerome Ersland or any of his employees. Therefore, self-defense does not apply.

Dip Shat,
Ersland PROVED beyond a Doubt, That the PUNK will NEVER Be a Threat to society EVER again
You suck Donkey balls.

[olevetonahill]

Lol, coming from someone who took the time to spek about 15 of my posts in this thread with short commentary about how "worthless" or unintelligent each post was. You just can't make this stuff up....

Thank GOD for PHIL , You would be in Bolivia :cool:
**** off dip ****.

[Spray]

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.

Because he's not a cop?

That slippery slope is a bitch...

[Midtowner]

NO. NO. NO.

That mother****ing piece of trash that he killed was not an innocent person. He just held him at gunpoint. Or did you forget that?

The kid was not innocent. How much more evidence did he need that the kid was guilty of assaulting him with a deadly weapon and that the kid had intent to kill him? If you point a gun at someone that means you will kill them. The end. I wouldnt have stopped either.

Wrong. The fact is that the victim was not armed. Ingram, the kid who Ersland chased out the door was the one with the gun, which by the way, Ersland told detectives was fired at him, when Ersland was the only one who fired any shots.

And intent to kill Ersland? Now you're just making things up. You can't prove that, and it's irrelevant. When Ersland killed Parker, the threat had passed and the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Erlsand wasn't acting in self defense.

You don't get to rewrite the facts to suit your (wrong) preconceived notions.

[jk the sooner fan]

if the kid was indeed such a threat.....i dunno, had it been me, i would have never taken my eyes off of him - or left to go retrieve another gun - or whatever it was that Ersland did as depicted on that video

normally if you feel threatened to the point you need to use deadly force - you dont turn your back on that threat

anybody that says different is not thinking rationally

kids do stupid things when they're teenagers.....while i agree that he was a punk - that isnt an offense punishable by death

i dont know whether to be amused or encouraged however, that one of the board liberals is all for this form of "justice"

[pphilfran]

:pop: :pop:

[Ike]

if the kid was indeed such a threat.....i dunno, had it been me, i would have never taken my eyes off of him - or left to go retrieve another gun - or whatever it was that Ersland did as depicted on that video

normally if you feel threatened to the point you need to use deadly force - you dont turn your back on that threat

anybody that says different is not thinking rationally

kids do stupid things when they're teenagers.....while i agree that he was a punk - that isnt an offense punishable by death

i dont know whether to be amused or encouraged however, that one of the board liberals is all for this form of "justice"

Wow...I pretty much agree with JK. This might be a first.

However, I'm also not sure that life in prison constitutes justice in this case.

[jk the sooner fan]

Wow...I pretty much agree with JK. This might be a first.

However, I'm also not sure that life in prison constitutes justice in this case.

his attorney would have been smart to push hard for some sort of plea deal on a lesser included offense - manslaughter maybe.....and perhaps his atty did just that, i dont know - but life is a tough pill to swallow in this case

[OutlandTrophy]

I understand why he was convicted but I thought maybe manslaughter 2 might be a better all around charge.

[Ike]

his attorney would have been smart to push hard for some sort of plea deal on a lesser included offense - manslaughter maybe.....and perhaps his atty did just that, i dont know - but life is a tough pill to swallow in this case

I don't know. I wonder if his attorney thought he had public opinion so much on his side that he rejected any kind of plea deal...

[Mjcpr]

I don't know. I wonder if his attorney thought he had public opinion so much on his side that he rejected any kind of plea deal...

Was Dean his lawyer?

[jk the sooner fan]

I don't know. I wonder if his attorney thought he had public opinion so much on his side that he rejected any kind of plea deal...

I think Ersland himself probably felt that way

[C&CDean]

Lol, coming from someone who took the time to spek about 15 of my posts in this thread with short commentary about how "worthless" or unintelligent each post was. You just can't make this stuff up....

Whining about spek is against the board rules.

[C&CDean]

Was Dean his lawyer?

Dude, that's a low blow. I don't work/live in a cesspool.

[OhU1]

Wow...I pretty much agree with JK. This might be a first.

However, I'm also not sure that life in prison constitutes justice in this case.

I was about to say the same thing re agreeing with JK.

Several posts on this thread indicate Ersland did the right thing by coming back and "finishing the job" and protecting society by ensuring an armed robber was dead and would never rob again. Some on here have claimed they had a gun in their face and wish they could have killed the guy. I understand that. Why not go hunt the criminal down now? What is the time line where it is no longer laudable to "finish the job". 10 minutes, 10 days?

I am surprised the jury came back with 1st degree murder. I didn't hear the evidence and testimony but I have no trouble believing that someone who just faced an armed robbery would be so shook up as to not be in their right mind or thinking straight. An example of a manslaughter killing would be you catch a man in bed with your wife, as he is leaving the house he spits in your face and punches you. You beat him silly knocking him out and continue to hit him, then as you stand up you stomp on his unconscious head and he dies. Basically you are justified to defend yourself and anyone would understand you kicking the guy's *** but the 5th extra blow and the head stomp in anger might get you a manslaughter charge.

Ersland also struck me as possibly being mentally vulnerable to begin with. I don't think the man should go to prison for more than 4 years (which would be the potential on a manslaughter charge I think).

[jk the sooner fan]

Whining about spek is against the board rules.

you know, this is by far the "dumbest rule" on this board

especially when somebody goes to the trouble of spekking somebody 15+ times - they ARE LOOKING FOR A REACTION.......jeebus its not that difficult a concept to grasp

[jk the sooner fan]

i realize how painful it is for many to "agree with me" :)

[Ike]

i realize how painful it is for many to "agree with me" :)

I'm just giving you a hard time...I agree with you more times than I let on...Sometimes I like to be an argumentative prick, and you are a good sport about it. ;)

[Mongo]

I don't think that should ever happen and I think he should go do his time on Death Row like everyone else who have killed multiple amounts of people and that he doesn't deserve years of therapy....he deserves Life in Prison without the possibility of parole

I've heard this **** before and still yet....Charles Manson gets a parole hearing....

Honestly....I hope you are right but you just never know that for sure. These guys get religion and then start letter writing campaigns and then a Politician who can get votes considers releasing them into Society....


OK...how about this. We put him in a chair in the back of the space shuttle. He has an unlimited supply or air and solar powered communication and he can get therapy via telepathy. Then we can blow the bolts to the base if his chair and he can do his time orbiting the Earth.

Then there is the possibility that something years from now happens where a bleeding heart thinks he was just disturbed and decides that he is no longer a threat.

You Murder...you go to jail.

He and his Lawyers are trying to buy him an easy way out in this life.

There is no easy way.

You murder someone...you do the rest of you time behind bars

He killed 1 person. If you don't want stuff like this happening in the future....put his *** away and get on with it so that these others who might copy-cat him know....Justice will be swift....and you will do hard time

[jk the sooner fan]

I'm just giving you a hard time...I agree with you more times than I let on...Sometimes I like to be an argumentative prick, and you are a good sport about it. ;)

i've been told that arguing with me is like masturbating with a handful of thumb tacks - its painful but in the end it'll feel good - or something like that

[soonersponge]

Lol, coming from someone who took the time to spek about 15 of my posts in this thread with short commentary about how "worthless" or unintelligent each post was. You just can't make this stuff up....


I enjoy your posting. Gives perspective to things. Some people don't like hearing certain sides which is kind of sad. Open mind, like Socali's open bunghole!

[C&CDean]

you know, this is by far the "dumbest rule" on this board

especially when somebody goes to the trouble of spekking somebody 15+ times - they ARE LOOKING FOR A REACTION.......jeebus its not that difficult a concept to grasp

No, the dumbest thing ever on this board was granting amnesty.:texan:

[SoCaliSooner]

I don't think that should ever happen and I think he should go do his time on Death Row like everyone else who have killed multiple amounts of people and that he doesn't deserve years of therapy....he deserves Life in Prison without the possibility of parole

I've heard this **** before and still yet....Charles Manson gets a parole hearing....

Honestly....I hope you are right but you just never know that for sure. These guys get religion and then start letter writing campaigns and then a Politician who can get votes considers releasing them into Society....


OK...how about this. We put him in a chair in the back of the space shuttle. He has an unlimited supply or air and solar powered communication and he can get therapy via telepathy. Then we can blow the bolts to the base if his chair and he can do his time orbiting the Earth.

Then there is the possibility that something years from now happens where a bleeding heart thinks he was just disturbed and decides that he is no longer a threat.

You Murder...you go to jail.

He and his Lawyers are trying to buy him an easy way out in this life.

There is no easy way.

You murder someone...you do the rest of you time behind bars

He killed 1 person. If you don't want stuff like this happening in the future....put his *** away and get on with it so that these others who might copy-cat him know....Justice will be swift....and you will do hard time

I agree with 100% of these well thought out statements. We can't have this guy getting away with it.

[jk the sooner fan]

No, the dumbest thing ever on this board was granting amnesty.:texan:

well - you know where the switch is oh masterful one

[Mongo]

I agree with 100% of these well thought out statements. We can't have this guy getting away with it.

:D

[C&CDean]

well - you know where the switch is oh masterful one

I do?

[OutlandTrophy]

I agree with 100% of these well thought out statements. We can't have this guy getting away with it.

I concur. I'd also like to add that if anyone disagrees with mongo and SoCali than maybe Jerome should be made to live with you and he should be given a handgun.

[Mongo]

No, the dumbest thing ever on this board was granting amnesty.:texan:

so.... you are saying jk should go **** himself?.......


:D

[jk the sooner fan]

I concur. I'd also like to add that if anyone disagrees with mongo and SoCali than maybe Jerome should be made to live with you and he should be given a handgun.

well the upside is that on "good days" you've got access to all those drugs

[C&CDean]

well the upside is that on "good days" you've got access to all those drugs

And a really wicked back brace.

[Mjcpr]

so.... you are saying jk should go **** himself?.......

:D

Can he keep his ****ing $10?

[sanantoniosooner]

No, the dumbest thing ever on this board was granting amnesty.:texan:

yeah, this place was so much better without those people

[Turd_Ferguson]

I concur. I'd also like to add that if anyone disagrees with mongo and SoCali than maybe Jerome should be made to live with you and he should be given a handgun.I thought he was gonna let him have Mongos ****buddy:confused:

[jk the sooner fan]

so.... you are saying jk should go **** himself?.......


:D

we all know how that ended up the last time :)

[jk the sooner fan]

yeah, this place was so much better without those people

we have new "those people" now

they arent good for the board either ;)

[C&CDean]

We do?

[sanantoniosooner]

we have new "those people" now

they arent good for the board either ;)

One of the new "those people" negged me because he thought I was talking about them. :D

[jk the sooner fan]

One of the new "those people" negged me because he thought I was talking about them. :D

WE DONT TALK ABOUT NEG SPEK!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GAH

[C&CDean]

We don't whine about it.

[Mjcpr]

You can talk, but don't whine.

[jk the sooner fan]

We don't whine about it.

we could have lots of fun jumping back and forth over that thin line :)

[C&CDean]

We could?

[Mongo]

we have had enough of this thread.


Lock it up Dean

[jk the sooner fan]

you're very inquisitive today

are these rhetorical?

[C&CDean]

Mebbe.

[sanantoniosooner]

http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/0812/rhetorical-question-farley-demotivational-poster-1228258302.jpg
you're very inquisitive today

are these rhetorical?

[Fraggle145]

Wrong. The fact is that the victim was not armed. Ingram, the kid who Ersland chased out the door was the one with the gun, which by the way, Ersland told detectives was fired at him, when Ersland was the only one who fired any shots.

And intent to kill Ersland? Now you're just making things up. You can't prove that, and it's irrelevant. When Ersland killed Parker, the threat had passed and the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Erlsand wasn't acting in self defense.

You don't get to rewrite the facts to suit your (wrong) preconceived notions.

If you point a gun at someone that's intent to kill to me.

What do they always say in gun safety courses about pointing guns at people?. What does your dad say about pointing a gun at something?

Something that I do wonder is how much jury selection played into this? Everyone knows that lawyers try to get smart people, and people that can think for themselves off juries.

[sanantoniosooner]

If you point a gun at someone that's intent to kill to me.

What do they always say in gun safety courses about pointing guns at people?. What does your dad say about pointing a gun at something?

Something that I do wonder is how much jury selection played into this? Everyone knows that lawyers try to get smart people, and people that can think for themselves off juries.

Everyone that disagrees with you MUST be an idiot.

It's the only rational explanation.

[jk the sooner fan]

If you point a gun at someone that's intent to kill to me.



wait, so if i point a gun at someone (take Dean for instance) thats intent to kill YOU???

raising a gun at somebody isnt always done with the intent to kill - you'd have a really tough time arguing that in a court of law - it certainly constitutes a threat, but you simply can not infer the intent

i could shoot you in the foot and you'd have a hard time proving that i intended to kill you

[Fraggle145]

I am surprised the jury came back with 1st degree murder. I didn't hear the evidence and testimony but I have no trouble believing that someone who just faced an armed robbery would be so shook up as to not be in their right mind or thinking straight. An example of a manslaughter killing would be you catch a man in bed with your wife, as he is leaving the house he spits in your face and punches you. You beat him silly knocking him out and continue to hit him, then as you stand up you stomp on his unconscious head and he dies. Basically you are justified to defend yourself and anyone would understand you kicking the guy's *** but the 5th extra blow and the head stomp in anger might get you a manslaughter charge.

Ersland also struck me as possibly being mentally vulnerable to begin with. I don't think the man should go to prison for more than 4 years (which would be the potential on a manslaughter charge I think).

See that's what I am saying. I can see a lesser charge, but I still think that is kind of stupid.

None of this would have happened without the kids initial actions. The fact that this keeps getting glossed over bothers me.

[jk the sooner fan]

None of this would have happened without the kids initial actions. The fact that this keeps getting glossed over bothers me.

he died for his crime........Ersland is just getting some jail time for his

i hardly think thats "glossing over" what he did

[sanantoniosooner]

i could shoot you in the foot and you'd have a hard time proving that i intended to kill you

It's indisputable that the terminator was only out to injure people in the second movie when he was just shooting them in the leg.

[Fraggle145]

wait, so if i point a gun at someone (take Dean for instance) thats intent to kill YOU???

raising a gun at somebody isnt always done with the intent to kill - you'd have a really tough time arguing that in a court of law - it certainly constitutes a threat, but you simply can not infer the intent

i could shoot you in the foot and you'd have a hard time proving that i intended to kill you

Notice I said to me. Its just my opinion, but if you point a gun at something one of the first sort of rules is that you are ready to use it.

[jk the sooner fan]

Notice I said to me. Its just my opinion, but if you point a gun at something one of the first sort of rules is that you are ready to use it.

no - what you said was "if you point a gun at SOMEONE, it means they intend to kill ME'

i think what you meant to say - and i'm sure your zoology degree got in the way of this - was that "if you point a gun at ME, it means they intend to kill ME"

[Condescending Sooner]

NO. NO. NO.

That mother****ing piece of trash that he killed was not an innocent person. He just held him at gunpoint. Or did you forget that?

The kid was not innocent. How much more evidence did he need that the kid was guilty of assaulting him with a deadly weapon and that the kid had intent to kill him? If you point a gun at someone that means you will kill them. The end. I wouldnt have stopped either.

The only problem with your rant is the kid did not have a gun. You sure are some legal expert. Didn't even see any evidence, and know nothing about the facts of the case.

[Fraggle145]

he died for his crime........Ersland is just getting some jail time for his

i hardly think thats "glossing over" what he did

Ersland's "crime" never would have happened without the kid perpetrating a crime on Ersland.

[jk the sooner fan]

Ersland's "crime" never would have happened without the kid perpetrating a crime on Ersland.

Erslands crime could have been prevented had he exercised some sound judgment

he exercised about as much judgment as the teenager did before going into the store

you should stick to id'ing snakes - you're much better at that than interpreting the law

[Fraggle145]

The only problem with your rant is the kid did not have a gun. You sure are some legal expert. Didn't even see any evidence, and know nothing about the facts of the case.

**** you stalker. I never claimed to be an expert. I saw the evidence that is out there on internet the same as you did and I am stating my opinion about the situation.

[sanantoniosooner]

Ersland's "crime" never would have happened without the kid perpetrating a crime on Ersland.

I blame the manufacturer of the back brace. Had they not produced that product, he would have been home that day and this wouldn't have happened.

[jk the sooner fan]

**** you stalker. .

wow - you're getting really angry about this

[C&CDean]

i could shoot you in the foot and you'd have a hard time proving that i intended to kill you

You CID guys weren't much for marksmanship...

[PrideTrombone]

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.

This is the most retarded thing I have ever read. An innocent person on the street does not commit armed robbery. And if someone is armed-robbing me, that's all the proof I need.

[Fraggle145]

Erslands crime could have been prevented had he exercised some sound judgment

he exercised about as much judgment as the teenager did before going into the store

you should stick to id'ing snakes - you're much better at that than interpreting the law

See that is what bothers me about it. Why does he have to use sound judgement after being put in a life or death situation by people who werent using sound judgement. Sound judgement usually doesnt hang around for those life or death situations (unless you are trained for it).

[jk the sooner fan]

You CID guys weren't much for marksmanship...

oh i could plant one square between your eyes, but i'd survive the inquiry much easier if i shot your big toe off :P

[Fraggle145]

wow - you're getting really angry about this

That prick and I have had a disagreement for a long time. It has nothing to do with this thread etc...

[Midtowner]

If you point a gun at someone that's intent to kill to me.

Again, the kid who got shot did not have a gun or any weapon at all.


What do they always say in gun safety courses about pointing guns at people?. What does your dad say about pointing a gun at something?

I highly doubt the victim here had a gun safety class or a father in his life to teach him the finer points of gun safety.


Something that I do wonder is how much jury selection played into this? Everyone knows that lawyers try to get smart people, and people that can think for themselves off juries.

Picking smart people for a jury can be a disaster, actually. And in high profile cases, you're generally looking for people who have been living under rocks who haven't heard about the case being tried in front of them.

[sanantoniosooner]

See that is what bothers me about it. Why does he have to use sound judgement after being put in a life or death situation by people who werent using sound judgement. Sound judgement usually doesnt hang around for those life or death situations (unless you are trained for it).

Because if he doesn't use sound judgment he could be a danger to innocent people that are around. A threat is not a good reason to lose your head and be absolved of whatever happens.

[Midtowner]

This is the most retarded thing I have ever read. An innocent person on the street does not wave a gun in your face and demand money. And if someone is waving said gun in my face, that's all the proof I need.

Let's say someone holds a gun in your face, steals your money and leaves. Does that grant you license to hunt him down and kill him at a later date?

[jk the sooner fan]

See that is what bothers me about it. Why does he have to use sound judgement after being put in a life or death situation by people who werent using sound judgement. Sound judgement usually doesnt hang around for those life or death situations (unless you are trained for it).

because the law requires it - thats why - the law requires that if you take deadly force as an option to defend yourself - there has to be a certain set of circumstances

those circumstances were clearly not in existence, no matter how much you want it to be so - the kid was lying on the floor motionless -WITHOUT A GUN - Ersland turned his back on the threat (would you do this if you truly felt threatened? seriously?)

[C&CDean]

Again, the kid who got shot did not have a gun or any weapon at all.



I highly doubt the victim here had a gun safety class or a father in his life to teach him the finer points of gun safety.



Picking smart people for a jury can be a disaster, actually. And in high profile cases, you're generally looking for people who have been living under rocks who haven't heard about the case being tried in front of them.

Uh, I think that's what he said there sporto.

[OUMallen]

See that is what bothers me about it. Why does he have to use sound judgement after being put in a life or death situation by people who werent using sound judgement. Sound judgement usually doesnt hang around for those life or death situations (unless you are trained for it).

It's not about sound judgment. In order to have a defense to murder based on self-defense, you need to satisfy the following, if I remember right:

1. OBJECTIVELY- The other guy must cause a REASONABLE fear of IMMINENT death or severe bodily harm.
2. SUBJECTIVELY- You actually DO fear imminent death or bodily harm.

Arguments:
Objectively, the evidence tends to show that the kid was unconscious and probably not moving at all. Hard to say that someone lying unconscious is creating a reasonable fear of significant harm. We can't see the kid on video though, and let's say for argument's sake that he was twitching a little or whatever. Still not REALLY a threat of imminent death or major bodily harm.

Subjectively, and here's the strong argument against JE: he shows absolutely no fear of harm at all. He re-enters the store, which is not something that someone afraid of death would do. He walks (doesn't run) past the unconscious kid, which shows he doesn't fear the kid. Turns his back to the kid to get the other gun. Calmly walks BACK to the kid and empties 5 into him. That's not someone that's afraid.


SO, legally, the situation doesn't have anything to do with "sound judgment" really. It has to do with the following, and it's almost algebraic: did he kill? Yes. Is there a defense that would excuse or justify the killing? Let's try self-defense. Does he satisfy the legal test? No.

There's no defense to murder called "the unconscious kid attempted to rob me a minute ago."


And even though this may be distasteful, it's done this way because the law places the highest, highest priority on life. Much, much higher than 98% of the posters on this board.

[3rdgensooner]

Seems like there was a fair amount of baiting and tackling go on in this thread.

[Fraggle145]

wvJiYrRcfQo&NR

[pphilfran]

Seems like there was a fair amount of baiting and tackling go on in this thread.

:pop:

[Condescending Sooner]

**** you stalker. I never claimed to be an expert. I saw the evidence that is out there on internet the same as you did and I am stating my opinion about the situation.

**** you too, loser. I have seen the evidence and was at the trial. Most of the people on here saw nothing but a fuzzy video, and think they know what the verdict should be.

Also, Ersland was his own worst enemy. He lied about everything from the beginning and tried to plant evidence on more than one occasion well after the shooting. That doesn't sound like an innocent man does it? Also, his defense did a very poor job in my opinion. I think his sentence was harsh, but that's what murder 1 will get you. He still hasn't been formally sentenced, and has appeals left.

Maybe in the future, he will get a different defense team, or the one he has will actually put forth some effort into his defense.

[jk the sooner fan]

Seems like there was a fair amount of baiting and tackling go on in this thread.

otherwise known as an internet dick fight :)

[JDMT]

I HAVE THE BEETUUUUSSS!!!!!!!!!!

[C&CDean]

Reign it in boys.

[Fraggle145]

It's not about sound judgment. In order to have a defense to murder based on self-defense, you need to satisfy the following, if I remember right:

1. OBJECTIVELY- The other guy must cause a REASONABLE fear of IMMINENT death or severe bodily harm.
2. SUBJECTIVELY- You actually DO fear imminent death or bodily harm.

Arguments:
Objectively, the evidence tends to show that the kid was unconscious and probably not moving at all. Hard to say that someone lying unconscious is creating a reasonable fear of significant harm. We can't see the kid on video though, and let's say for argument's sake that he was twitching a little or whatever. Still not REALLY a threat of imminent death or major bodily harm.

Subjectively, and here's the strong argument against JE: he shows absolutely no fear of harm at all. He re-enters the store, which is not something that someone afraid of death would do. He walks (doesn't run) past the unconscious kid, which shows he doesn't fear the kid. Turns his back to the kid to get the other gun. Calmly walks BACK to the kid and empties 5 into him. That's not someone that's afraid.


SO, legally, the situation doesn't have anything to do with "sound judgment" really. It has to do with the following, and it's almost algebraic: did he kill? Yes. Is there a defense that would excuse or justify the killing? Self-defense. Does he satisfy the legal test? No.

There's no defense to murder called "the unconscious kid attempted to rob me a minute ago."

So how long after a life threatening situation do you have before you are supposed to turn back into a rational human being?

[jk the sooner fan]

the very moment the situation is no longer "life threatening"

[soonerbub]

Going to the back of the store to reload or get another piece = premeditation = murder in the first

There's a reason that chick with the scales wears a blindfold.*




*I never went to law skool

[Fraggle145]

the very moment the situation is no longer "life threatening"

If only it were that simple...

[OUMallen]

So how long after a life threatening situation do you have before you are supposed to turn back into a rational human being?

"Rational human being" isn't the legal standard. But what you're asking is "what constitutes 'imminent'?"

Imminent is a very short period of time, and the risk must be sustained the entire time. Imminent isn't happening when he runs outside then back in, and the risk was gone anyway because the kid was on the ground unconscious.

You don't get to go kill someone because you were assaulted a minute ago.


As a more nuanced point, and really a huge legal contributing factor if this ever gets appealed to the highest level is that he was "safe" outside and away from the threat inside. Once he re-enters voluntarily into the threat, he probably doesn't have self-defense as something to lean on. If he's REALLY scared, he stays outside. (Counterargument- he could have been coming back in to protect the other employees)


Are we having fun yet?

[OUMallen]

There's a reason that chick with the scales wears a blindfold.*



True dat

[The Profit]

I read the newspaper account of the trial and verdict this morning, and a couple of things stood out to me. I think Prater made a great point when he said that people, who fear for their lives, do not turn their backs to the danger, which is what Ersland is seen doing on videotape while he searches for the 2nd gun.

I also read where he thought he would be found guilty, and had given his dog away.

I guess it isn't always wise for a defendant to take the stand, but in this case it might have helped him.

I would have been happy with a manslaughter conviction, and a suspended sentence with the stipulation that he could never own a firearm again, but his actions, after the shooting, really doomed him.

[Pricetag]

Prater's "hairdo" is atrocious. You aren't fooling anyone, dude. Shave that facade off.

[The Profit]

Another interesting tidbit. I was watching channel 4 news last night. They allowed viewers to call in with their opinion of the verdict. One goober called in and said, "I bet all 12 members of the jury were black," and then hung up. The Ogle (I can't ever remember which Ogle is which, and does it really matter) then commented, "in fact, none of the 12 jurors were black."

[okie52]

Another interesting tidbit. I was watching channel 4 news last night. They allowed viewers to call in with their opinion of the verdict. One goober called in and said, "I bet all 12 members of the jury were black," and then hung up. The Ogle (I can't ever remember which Ogle is which, and does it really matter) then commented, "in fact, none of the 12 jurors were black."

I watched the news reports on the verdict....never once saw the jurors pictured. I wonder if that was by design/security?

[The Profit]

I watched the news reports on the verdict....never once saw the jurors pictured. I wonder if that was by design/security?



I think it was for security. I don't believe they should be shown unless they choose to be.

[DIB]

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

***I am not a dooshbag lawyer, so hopefully that makes my condescension more palatable***


The facts seem rather simple.

A 15 year old kid was coerced by career criminals into participating in an armed robbery. He was unarmed. The video clearly shows that he was still putting on his mask, when he was shot. Ersland then chased the armed assailant out to the parking lot. He then returned, calmly stepped over the incapacitated assailant, turns his back to him, grabs another gun and returns to execute the kid. I don't understand how anyone can look at the facts and call what Ersland did anything but murder.

Everyone seems to be demonizing the kid, when the facts showed that he had little choice in the matter. You want to go after someone, then go after the guys that threatened a fifteen year old kid to get him to rob a store.


Now, you can all go back to twisting and making up facts to justify your righteous indignation.

[Turd_Ferguson]

The facts seem rather simple.

A 15 year old kid was coerced by career criminals into participating in an armed robbery.

Everyone seems to be demonizing the kid, when the facts showed that he had little choice in the matter. You want to go after someone, then go after the guys that threatened a fifteen year old kid to get him to rob a store.Man, you got some kinda ****ed up thought process...

[The Profit]

Man, you got some kinda ****ed up thought process...




Not according to the all-white jury.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Not according to the all-white jury.It wasn't all white...

[OUMallen]

***I am not a dooshbag lawyer, so hopefully that makes my condescension more palatable***



F off.

[The Profit]

It wasn't all white...




Okay....The no blacks on it jury

[Fraggle145]

A 15 year old kid was coerced by career criminals into participating in an armed robbery.

Maybe I just missed it, but I dont get that from the video. Is there evidence for this out there that I just havent seen?

[Turd_Ferguson]

Okay....The no blacks on it jury:D:D

[StoopTroup]

The Pharmacist shouldn't have executed the kid....but maybe when he saw half of his brain laying on the floor....he did him a favor? maybe if the kid made it through he might have been a huge problem for the State or his Momma who obviously cares? If the rest of his life required someone to wipe his *** and feed him with a spoon because of a loss of motor skills....is it possible what he did was mercy?

[The Profit]

Maybe I just missed it, but I dont get that from the video. Is there evidence for this out there that I just havent seen?





Yes, the two Murder 1 convictions that happened three weeks ago.

[DIB]

Man, you got some kinda ****ed up thought process...

How is it ****ed up? His "partner" testified that the criminals that sent them inside threatened them to get them to rob the pharmacy. I'm not saying that it justifies anything, but it shows that maybe, just maybe, the kid wasn't the waste of air that some have called him.

[okie52]

How is it ****ed up? His "partner" testified that the criminals that sent them inside threatened them to get them to rob the pharmacy. I'm not saying that it justifies anything, but it shows that maybe, just maybe, the kid wasn't the waste of air that some have called him.

So you think a life sentence for Ersland was justice?

[The Profit]

So you think a life sentence for Ersland was justice?




Do you think a completely not guilty verdict for Ersland would have constituted justice?

[OUMallen]

The Pharmacist shouldn't have executed the kid....but maybe when he saw half of his brain laying on the floor....he did him a favor? maybe if the kid made it through he might have been a huge problem for the State or his Momma who obviously cares? If the rest of his life required someone to wipe his *** and feed him with a spoon because of a loss of motor skills....is it possible what he did was mercy?

Is this post serious? Or joking. hard to tell on the itnernets.

[StoopTroup]

All I care about is what Nancy Grace thinks

[StoopTroup]

Is this post serious? Or joking. hard to tell on the itnernets.

Serious. I didn't read anything about his condition from the first wound. Would he have been able to live a normal life?

[DIB]

F off.

I was just joking. I like lawyers. They haven't given me a reason to hate them, yet.


Maybe I just missed it, but I dont get that from the video. Is there evidence for this out there that I just havent seen?


Prosecutors say two men, Anthony D. Morrison, 44, and Emanuel Mitchell, 33, recruited the teens and helped plan the robbery. They were convicted of first-degree murder in early May and sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. Near the end of their trial, Mitchell slugged Prater in the face at the end of Prater's closing statement in the penalty phase. Deputies jumped on Mitchell to subdue him and took him away.

If you google it, I'm sure you can find the testimony about how they coerced the kids.

[OUMallen]

So you think a life sentence for Ersland was justice?

I don't.

[DIB]

So you think a life sentence for Ersland was justice?

Life is probably too harsh. I think I would have liked to have seen 15 to life with the possibility of parole.

[OUMallen]

Serious. I didn't read anything about his condition from the first wound. Would he have been able to live a normal life?

Oh, then: Come on man. That's an awful lot of philosophical empathy for him to cognize in a short amoutn of time. And even IF he did, it is NOT his decision to freaking KILL someone based on that.

If so, then I'm going to run around and start killing all the Down Syndrome infants I can find and expect to not go to jail.

[2121Sooner]

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:

Personally Im gonna say a Thank God its over ,then a Prayer for the Young man who made the shot. Those who think hes a Happy Guy have never had to make that shot.

Sure Right now hes elated, years to come he will have live with it.
May God Help him

[jk the sooner fan]

Personally Im gonna say a Thank God its over ,then a Prayer for the Young man who made the shot. Those who think hes a Happy Guy have never had to make that shot.

Sure Right now hes elated, years to come he will have live with it.
May God Help him

i see what you did there :D

[badger]

Wow, this thread's been busy since the verdict. Here are a few questions for you all to consider in a civil, non-angry like way plzkthx:

1- The court of public opinion seems to be very negative toward the outcome of this case. Did the Oklahoma County District Attorney (David Prater, right?) commit political suicide by pursuing this case and seeking a first-degree murder conviction?

2- Was there any possibility of getting Ersland for a lesser charge, such as second-degree murder or manslaughter?

3- Without the surveillance video tape, is there no case against Ersland? Were there any other key pieces of evidence that really seemed to convince the jury to say "guilty" after four hours?

4- On what grounds will the defense appeal? Is there any chance of a successful appeal?

5- And once again, in tune with the thread's original subject, will there by any grounds for a civil suit now, seeing how Ersland's assets are likely gone and his life is likely over?

6- I noticed in testimony that there were a lot of sustained objections regarding previous robberies at this location. Why were those deemed irrelevant to this case by the judge?

Just hypothetical here:

- What if the one who was killed pointed the gun instead of the one who ran?
- What if the first bullet killed the robber?
- What if the robbers were adults?
- What if Ersland really had been shot or attacked at all during the robbery?

Would any of those factors made the outcome of this verdict any different?

[okie52]

Do you think a completely not guilty verdict for Ersland would have constituted justice?

No, but given the choices of 1st degree murder and/or manslaughter and knowing the potential sentences they carried, I would have acquitted him.

Now if Prater had fashioned some lesser charge that would have punished Ersland in a much less severe manner I might have gone for that.

He11, the guy is already financially devastated, I am not sure how much more punishment he needs to receive.

[okie52]

Life is probably too harsh. I think I would have liked to have seen 15 to life with the possibility of parole.

Isn't Ersland in his 60's? I am not sure that 15 years wouldn't just about constitute life.

[jk the sooner fan]

Wow, this thread's been busy since the verdict. Here are a few questions for you all to consider in a civil, non-angry like way plzkthx:

1- The court of public opinion seems to be very negative toward the outcome of this case. Did the Oklahoma County District Attorney (David Prater, right?) commit political suicide by pursuing this case and seeking a first-degree murder conviction?

2- Was there any possibility of getting Ersland for a lesser charge, such as second-degree murder or manslaughter?

3- Without the surveillance video tape, is there no case against Ersland? Were there any other key pieces of evidence that really seemed to convince the jury to say "guilty" after four hours?

4- On what grounds will the defense appeal? Is there any chance of a successful appeal?

5- And once again, in tune with the thread's original subject, will there by any grounds for a civil suit now, seeing how Ersland's assets are likely gone and his life is likely over?

6- I noticed in testimony that there were a lot of sustained objections regarding previous robberies at this location. Why were those deemed irrelevant to this case by the judge?

Just hypothetical here:

- What if the one who was killed pointed the gun instead of the one who ran?
- What if the first bullet killed the robber?
- What if the robbers were adults?
- What if Ersland really had been shot or attacked at all during the robbery?

Would any of those factors made the outcome of this verdict any different?


it's SUPER easy to sit here on the internet and champion the guy that had been robbed 3 times in the past (or however many) and to make the dead kid the bad guy

it's much less easy to carry that same opinion when you bear the responsibility of actually sitting on a jury - listening to the ACTUAL facts and making a mature responsible decision based solely on the evidence

this thread is full of emotion

you asked too many other questions -so thats all i'm answering

[Midtowner]

Uh, I think that's what he said there sporto.

You might want to recheck. He said lawyers want smart people on juries, I was saying that mostly, no, we don't.

[okie52]

Wow, this thread's been busy since the verdict. Here are a few questions for you all to consider in a civil, non-angry like way plzkthx:

1- The court of public opinion seems to be very negative toward the outcome of this case. Did the Oklahoma County District Attorney (David Prater, right?) commit political suicide by pursuing this case and seeking a first-degree murder conviction?



I asked this question yesterday. I am not sure if Prater won a battle and will lose the war. There are some DA's OKC has had in the past that probably wouldn't have prosecuted (Macy and Harris come to mind) this case.

Of course they wouldn't have had videos back then, either.

[Jammin']

I think the penalty was a bit harsh but definitely think the man deserved to do time.

[StoopTroup]

it's SUPER easy to sit here on the internet and champion the guy that had been robbed 3 times in the past (or however many) and to make the dead kid the bad guy



The dead kid was a good guy? Did you know him from some sort of Big brother after school program?

[jk the sooner fan]

The dead kid was a good guy? Did you know him from some sort of Big brother after school program?

is that what i said? or just what you wanted to read?

[Memtig14]

I'd have given him a medal.

[okie52]

I don't.

I was stunned that he got convicted...more stunned they chose murder 1.

I was surprised Prater didn't have a lesser charge (besides manslaughter).

I am not sure how well Prater will fare from all of this.

[soonerhubs]

I'm not going to read all of this long thread to see if this was asked, but does this guilty verdict pretty much mean that the mother won't be getting much money from this lawsuit?

[StoopTroup]

It sounds like to me that anyone that doesn't fight back and ends up being slaughtered in the back of the store because Dead men can't testify...that their Families should be able to sue the parent's, Grand parents, brothers, sisters and really anyone with a close DNA match to the murderer from now on?


I figure what's going to really happen is that eventually you won't have a drug store in that area and folks around there that thought it was cool to use the drug store as an ATM/place to pick-up a few things for Friday and Saturday Nights....They will need to find a Walgreen's near a nicer part of town to rob from now on....

[Fraggle145]

You might want to recheck. He said lawyers want smart people on juries, I was saying that mostly, no, we don't.

No I just suck at teh grammarz.


Everyone knows that lawyers try to get smart people, and people that can think for themselves off juries.

See comma in the wrong place and not needed. I meant that lawyers go for people that cant think for themselves and that arent as smart.

[StoopTroup]

is that what i said? or just what you wanted to read?

I just asked as you seem to have an opinion that he was a good kid. What was his GPA and was he on the fast track for a Free Ride to Harvard and possibly the next POTUS?

[jk the sooner fan]

I just asked as you seem to have an opinion that he was a good kid. What was his GPA and was he on the fast track for a Free Ride to Harvard and possibly the next POTUS?

:rolleyes:

what i "said" was that he's been demonized in this thread and deserved to be killed for his one known transgression (done at the hands of career criminals)...while giving Ersland a free pass for his

you can read into it what you want and make arguments all you like

[Jammin']

It sounds like to me that anyone that doesn't fight back and ends up being slaughtered in the back of the store because Dead men can't testify...that their Families should be able to sue the parent's, Grand parents, brothers, sisters and really anyone with a close DNA match to the murderer from now on?


I figure what's going to really happen is that eventually you won't have a drug store in that area and folks around there that thought it was cool to use the drug store as an ATM/place to pick-up a few things for Friday and Saturday Nights....They will need to find a Walgreen's near a nicer part of town to rob from now on....

The economy is in the ****ter. If a guy can make any money by having a
drug store there, one will be there until they can't find anyone to work it. Who's with me on developing some "drive-up only" drug stores in such areas?

[Condescending Sooner]

I was stunned that he got convicted...more stunned they chose murder 1.

I was surprised Prater didn't have a lesser charge (besides manslaughter).

I am not sure how well Prater will fare from all of this.

The jurors were told they could opt between murder 1 and manslaughter. the jurors chose the punishment, not Prater.

[Midtowner]

No I just suck at teh grammarz.

See comma in the wrong place and not needed. I meant that lawyers go for people that cant think for themselves and that arent as smart.

You suck at teh grammarz, I suck at teh reading comp. That makes us even.

[Memtig14]

I was stunned that he got convicted...more stunned they chose murder 1.

I was surprised Prater didn't have a lesser charge (besides manslaughter).

I am not sure how well Prater will fare from all of this.

I am going to donate money to whomever is running against him.

[Memtig14]

I figure what's going to really happen is that eventually you won't have a drug store in that area and folks around there that thought it was cool to use the drug store as an ATM/place to pick-up a few things for Friday and Saturday Nights....They will need to find a Walgreen's near a nicer part of town to rob from now on....

That is the same reason there was not a grocery store in north tulsa....stores kept getting robbed.

then the people of north tulsa complained that they didn't have a store and insinuated it was racism.

I don't get it.


This country has gone to hell.

[Midtowner]

For what it's worth, the district attorney's office has run markedly better under Prater's watch. There is lots more professionalism, no questionable special favors for special people, whether you are a sitting judge hearing criminal cases or a regular average Joe, Prater doesn't care.

It's great to have a D.A. that isn't subject to the whims of politics. This is so much better than Lane, who was a nice guy in person, but went on a few too many political witch hunts.

[Pricetag]

I watched the news reports on the verdict....never once saw the jurors pictured. I wonder if that was by design/security?
Why do you want to see them so badly? Since the verdict, you first said that they should be ashamed, then you wondered if they'd be making public statements, then you called them "puzzy," and now you're wondering again if you'll be able to see them.

Do you need faces for your disdain? Are you so puzzled by the verdict that you don't believe that they are actual good old fellow Okies? What gives?

[StoopTroup]

That is the same reason there was not a grocery store in north tulsa....stores kept getting robbed.

then the people of north tulsa complained that they didn't have a store and insinuated it was racism.

I don't get it.


This country has gone to hell.

Yup.

[The Profit]

I am going to donate money to whomever is running against him.




You can send the money to Bobbi Burbridge Lane. She will make sure her son gets it. Hopefully, he will be able to keep it from his wife.

[StoopTroup]

That is the same reason there was not a grocery store in north tulsa....stores kept getting robbed.

then the people of north tulsa complained that they didn't have a store and insinuated it was racism.

I don't get it.


This country has gone to hell.

This is how the man hold people down. He gets the DA to give a person a judgement that won't be paid because the pharmacist is in jail and then the store closes because the dude that was there was the only Pharmacist crazy enough to work there and then a City Counselor asks for 100 Million Dollars 5-10 years from now to help with Urban Renewal.....

The funny thing is....the City Counselor owns all the burned out houses and businesses and retires very wealthy.

That's not going to hell....that's just smart business. :D

[OhU1]

You can send the money to Bobbi Burbridge Lane. She will make sure her son gets it. Hopefully, he will be able to keep it from his wife.

Hearing this ladies' name or seeing it in print is like finger nails on the chalkboard of my brain.

[The Profit]

Hearing this ladies name or seeing it in print is like fingers on the chalkboard of my brain.




When you hear her name, can you hear "Climb Every Mountain" playing in the background?

[StoopTroup]

I'm starting to understand just what a criminal this pharmacist is....

I am thinking based on all of this that Osama Bin Laden's Wife should file suit on Seal Team 6 for unnecessarily murdering her beloved husband and the father of her children. I'd include Obama in the suit but clearly he had nothing to do with it...

[badger]

That is the same reason there was not a grocery store in north tulsa....stores kept getting robbed.

then the people of north tulsa complained that they didn't have a store and insinuated it was racism.

I don't get it.


This country has gone to hell.

For the record, they have a good local businessman who owns the store now (yes, there were tax incentives involved) who seems be getting a good handle on how to run a business in that area. He said he saw the potential for a good business there, because he saw so many people walking by the empty store with empty grocery bags to the nearest store a mile away.

And while I'm sure the robbery reports kept an Albertson's successor out of that store for awhile, Albertson's moved out of the entire state, not just out of north Tulsa.

[Okla-homey]

I'm not going to read all of this long thread to see if this was asked, but does this guilty verdict pretty much mean that the mother won't be getting much money from this lawsuit?

Precisely the opposite if the guy has anything left after paying his criminal defense team. See, the murder conviction will be introduced in the civil case as indisputable (as in "bulletproof") evidence of wrongful killing. IOW, she gets to skip all the "prove he did it" jazz and go right to "how much does he have left to pay me?" part.

[Okla-homey]

For the record, they have a good local businessman who owns the store now (yes, there were tax incentives involved) who seems be getting a good handle on how to run a business in that area. He said he saw the potential for a good business there, because he saw so many people walking by the empty store with empty grocery bags to the nearest store a mile away.

And while I'm sure the robbery reports kept an Albertson's successor out of that store for awhile, Albertson's moved out of the entire state, not just out of north Tulsa.

I recommend he install a drive-up window with bulletproof glass and one of those steel drawers like at the bank. They walk or drive up, present their prescription and he delivers it with the drawer. Anything less is asking for trouble.

[yermom]

Precisely the opposite if the guy has anything left after paying his criminal defense team. See, the murder conviction will be introduced in the civil case as indisputable (as in "bulletproof") evidence of wrongful killing. IOW, she gets to skip all the "prove he did it" jazz and go right to "how much does he have left to pay me?" part.

i guess she's entitled to the earnings of little Johnny's armed robberies for a lifetime

that's a lot of money she's going to miss out on :(

[olevetonahill]

Personally Im gonna say a Thank God its over ,then a Prayer for the Young man who made the shot. Those who think hes a Happy Guy have never had to make that shot.

Sure Right now hes elated, years to come he will have live with it.
May God Help him


i see what you did there :D

Yea aint he the clever one.:rolleyes:

[Memtig14]

For the record, they have a good local businessman who owns the store now (yes, there were tax incentives involved) who seems be getting a good handle on how to run a business in that area. He said he saw the potential for a good business there, because he saw so many people walking by the empty store with empty grocery bags to the nearest store a mile away.

And while I'm sure the robbery reports kept an Albertson's successor out of that store for awhile, Albertson's moved out of the entire state, not just out of north Tulsa.

Yes, taxpayers paid out over $2 MILLION dollars to get that new store to go in, that now may be closed by your good local businessman because he can't make it there either. (And this store was robbed within weeks of opening)

Albertsons isn't the only one to close and they SOLD their stores to other stores and closed the North Tulsa and one other store because no one would buy them.

[Memtig14]

i guess she's entitled to the earnings of little Johnny's armed robberies for a lifetime

that's a lot of money she's going to miss out on :(

If the reality of this weren't so sad it would be funny.



(OK....kinda funny anyway):)

[87sooner]

law abiding citizen owns store...
2 scumbags walk into store to rob it..
law abiding citizen turns into 1st degree murderer....
these jurors couldn't be more stupid...

[jk the sooner fan]

Yea aint he the clever one.:rolleyes:

i laughed!

[OUMallen]

law abiding citizen owns store...
2 scumbags walk into store to rob it..
law abiding citizen turns into 1st degree murderer....
these jurors couldn't be more stupid...

87, if I remember right, aren't you all religiousy?

[87sooner]

87, if I remember right, aren't you all religiousy?

Jesus Christ is my Savior...

[OUMallen]

This guy shouldn't be punished by the laws of man for killing another human? Shouldn't JE had acted with compassion, like Jesus, and left Antwun "Speedy" Parker alone as he lay there?

I know what Jesus would think. And the jury's finding of guilty comports with that. And He wouldn't think the kids are scumbags.

Your attitude is a hypocritical as your logic is faulty.

[2121Sooner]

Yea aint he the clever one.:rolleyes:

I just like pointing out hypocrisy in all it's glory

[Midtowner]

law abiding citizen owns store...
2 scumbags walk into store to rob it..
one scumbag draws a weapon, the other is attempting to don a pair of pantyhose over his face..
law abiding citizen shoots the second scumbag, the wound grazes his head and knocks him out cold..
other scumbag with gun turns to flee..
law abiding citizen pursues fleeing scumbag..
law abiding? citizen fires wild shots at law abiding citizen in a highly populated part of town endangering the lives of many innocent people..
citizen returns to shop..
citizen ambles over to the counter, stepping over second scumbag, turning his back for several seconds..
citizen retrieves his other gun from behind the counter..
citizen ambles over to scumbag..
citizen shoots scumbag five more times in the chest..
citizen scratches himself and puts a bandaid on..
citizen calls 911, telling them that "I am Col. Jerome Ersland and I just killed a man." ..
citizen lies to the detectives about some sort of firefight where he was wounded..
citizen changes his story multiple times..
citizen turns into 1st degree murderer....


fify, and sounds good to me.

[87sooner]

This guy shouldn't be punished by the laws of man for killing another human? Shouldn't JE had acted with compassion, like Jesus, and left Antwun "Speedy" Parker alone as he lay there?

I know what Jesus would think. And the jury's finding of guilty comports with that. And He wouldn't think the kids are scumbags.

Your attitude is a hypocritical as your logic is faulty.

he shot/killed the scumbag in self defense....
if there is a law against shooting a corpse....then punish him for that...

[badger]

After all of the outrage on this, I fully expect some legislation to at least be proposed on this matter so that there is a very clear boundary between self defense and murder --- and the boundary line will likely be extended to where public opinion is setting it, not where the DA's office placed it in pursuing this case.

I could definitely see the law being rewritten to allow an attack to the fullest extent on a group or individuals who attack you first at home or at your place of business for a certain time period after being attacked, so long as you don't harm any innocent bystanders.

However, our legislators just adjourned for the summer, so don't hold your breath on it getting passed anytime this year. The next question will be if anyone in prison could be retroactively freed because of the new law.

[jk the sooner fan]

After all of the outrage on this, I fully expect some legislation to at least be proposed on this matter so that there is a very clear boundary between self defense and murder --- and the boundary line will likely be extended to where public opinion is setting it, not where the DA's office placed it in pursuing this case.

I could definitely see the law being rewritten to allow an attack to the fullest extent on a group or individuals who attack you first at home or at your place of business for a certain time period after being attacked, so long as you don't harm any innocent bystanders.

However, our legislators just adjourned for the summer, so don't hold your breath on it getting passed anytime this year. The next question will be if anyone in prison could be retroactively freed because of the new law.

that very clear boundary already exists

[yermom]

if you look at the law, i don't see it being that murky

if he was in Vietnam or something, that would be a war crime, no?

where he screwed up was the obvious lying and cover up stuff

if he just says that he thought the guy on the ground was reaching for something, there is no way to prove that, is there?

[Okla-homey]

After all of the outrage on this, I fully expect some legislation to at least be proposed on this matter so that there is a very clear boundary between self defense and murder --- and the boundary line will likely be extended to where public opinion is setting it, not where the DA's office placed it in pursuing this case.

I could definitely see the law being rewritten to allow an attack to the fullest extent on a group or individuals who attack you first at home or at your place of business for a certain time period after being attacked, so long as you don't harm any innocent bystanders.

However, our legislators just adjourned for the summer, so don't hold your breath on it getting passed anytime this year. The next question will be if anyone in prison could be retroactively freed because of the new law.

With all due respect Badger, the Oklahoma Self Defense Act is crystal clear on this. The thing to remember is, once you no longer reasonably fear the perp, you can no longer use deadly force in self-defense. And all the heat is in that "reasonably fear" part. See, its not whether you actually feared the guy, but whether a reasonable person in your shoes would fear the guy. In this case, no "reasonable" person could "fear" a 16 y/o lying on the floor headshot. And apparently, that's the way the jury saw it.

[The Profit]

he shot/killed the scumbag in self defense....
if there is a law against shooting a corpse....then punish him for that...




The kid was alive. You have to be dead to be a corpse (see any dictionary)

No, he did not act in self defense. He turned his back to the unconscious kid, which proves that he was not acting in self defense.

Do you not believe in the American judicial system? Ersland had more than a fair trial in front of a jury made up of 12 non-black jurors.

As Christ commands me to do, I forgive Ersland of his sins, but he still has to answer to the law. You know, "render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's."

[C&CDean]

I just like being all dooshy and ****

I just like pointing out dooshiness.

[StoopTroup]

I recommend he install a drive-up window with bulletproof glass and one of those steel drawers like at the bank. They walk or drive up, present their prescription and he delivers it with the drawer. Anything less is asking for trouble.

Yep....

How does the wholesaler deliver his order so he can remain in Business?

Wells Fargo Armored Truck?

[C&CDean]

The whole "he turned his back" deal is becoming tiresome. He had to turn around to get another pistol. Unless he's Linda ****ing Blair, he'd have to turn around. If they convicted him on that steaming pile of "evidence" they're buffoons of the highest order.

[The Profit]

I just like pointing out dooshiness.




Remember, when you point there are 3 fingers pointing back at you (unless you have lost one in an accident or something). If that's the case, I apologize.

[StoopTroup]

As Christ commands me to do, I forgive Ersland of his sins, but he still has to answer to the law. You know, "render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's."

Caesar died quite awhile back....I don't who Ceasar is...

[jk the sooner fan]

how many pistols does one need to quell such a riot (you know, the kind where a kid with no weapon is lying on the floor bleeding)

[OhU1]

law abiding citizen owns store...
2 scumbags walk into store to rob it..
law abiding citizen turns into 1st degree murderer....
these jurors couldn't be more stupid...

This almost sounds like a haiku....

[The Profit]

Caesar died quite awhile back....I don't who Ceasar is...





Yes you do....The pizza guy.

[StoopTroup]

Yes you do....The pizza guy.

He won't come around.....the last time the cheese was stuck to the top of the box and I paid him for the pizza and then went out and wiped it on his windshield of his car...

[okie52]

The jurors were told they could opt between murder 1 and manslaughter. the jurors chose the punishment, not Prater.

But Prater put the charges out there. He never had to prosecute murder one.

[The Profit]

He won't come around.....the last time the cheese was stuck to the top of the box and I paid him for the pizza and then went out and wiped it on his windshield of his car...

:D

[XingTheRubicon]

if you look at the law, i don't see it being that murky

if he was in Vietnam or something, that would be a war crime, no?

where he screwed up was the obvious lying and cover up stuff

if he just says that he thought the guy on the ground was reaching for something, there is no way to prove that, is there?

He's comin' right for us!!

[C&CDean]

how many pistols does one need to quell such a riot (you know, the kind where a kid with no weapon is lying on the floor bleeding)

Yes jk. We know you're a calm, cool customer under fire. You would have handled this situation in the ice-cold manner of a professional something or other...meh.

Or, in English I'm saying you're full of **** when you keep going on and on about how Ersland handled it and how he should have handled it. People don't think clearly in these situations. You should be smart enough to know that.

Like some have mentioned here, when you're the one staring down that barrell, and especially after some caps have been popped, nothing is rational. Anybody who thinks the average citizen is capable of handling these situations "logically/clearly/legally/etc." is a ****ing idiot.

[The Profit]

Yes jk. We know you're a calm, cool customer under fire. You would have handled this situation in the ice-cold manner of a professional something or other...meh.

Or, in English I'm saying you're full of **** when you keep going on and on about how Ersland handled it and how he should have handled it. People don't think clearly in these situations. You should be smart enough to know that.

Like some have mentioned here, when you're the one staring down that barrell, and especially after some caps have been popped, nothing is rational. Anybody who thinks the average citizen is capable of handling these situations "logically/clearly/legally/etc." is a ****ing idiot.





Sounds good and all, but the only caps that had been popped were popped by Ersland.

[okie52]

Why do you want to see them so badly? Since the verdict, you first said that they should be ashamed, then you wondered if they'd be making public statements, then you called them "puzzy," and now you're wondering again if you'll be able to see them.

Do you need faces for your disdain? Are you so puzzled by the verdict that you don't believe that they are actual good old fellow Okies? What gives?

Yeah, I'd like to see the faces of the noble jurors that chose life imprisonment over a lesser charge.

Is that hard to understand?

[The Profit]

Yeah, I'd like to see the faces of the noble jurors that chose life imprisonment over a lesser charge.

Is that hard to understand?




ah hell Okie, they'll feed him good at Mac. He'll be fine.

[jk the sooner fan]

yes, and i know you're a big mean cold hearted bad *** that thinks all kids that screw up deserve to die - because they asked for it

c'mon - you're educated and smarter than that - and you know how to break down the facts......this isnt about how i would have acted, this is about examining the circumstances of a case - that has to be tried before a jury of his peers.....who have to make a decision to either let him walk or strip him of his liberties

i recognize that he was likely acting on adrenaline - i get that - but how do you quantify adrenaline and nerves in a courtroom - how do you demonstrate it? you can grow weary of the "he turned his back" argument all you want - but to do so is to ignore the facts - along with the other facts

if you want to argue that he was afraid for his life, then be prepared to handle the counter arguments

i've seen people react when they were afraid for their life - and they sure as hell werent chasing bad guys out the door and down the street, and then calmly walk back into the store - empty your gun and then go find another - and then try and claim you were scared.....i'll give Ersland the benefit of the doubt on the fact that he was juiced up on adrenaline

this guy had military experience? he had been robbed before? he had more than one gun? no - this was not your little old lady on her front door step - this was a guy who had experienced those feelings before - he reacted out of anger and "had enough" and decided to take matters into his own hands

he's his own worst enemy from the lies he told.....you're telling me that if you TRULY felt your life was in peril - and you've decided to take up self defense in that "fight or flight" moment, that you'd turn your back on your threat?

pure bull****

[87sooner]

The kid was alive. You have to be dead to be a corpse (see any dictionary)

No, he did not act in self defense. He turned his back to the unconscious kid, which proves that he was not acting in self defense.

Do you not believe in the American judicial system? Ersland had more than a fair trial in front of a jury made up of 12 non-black jurors.

As Christ commands me to do, I forgive Ersland of his sins, but he still has to answer to the law. You know, "render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's."

i believe mistakes are made...

you prolly feel safer that ersland is in prison...

[The Profit]

i believe mistakes are made...

you prolly feel safer that ersland is in prison...




Yes. Much.

[jk the sooner fan]

Yes. Much.

ridiculous - he's not a threat unless you threaten him.....

[2121Sooner]

I just like pointing out dooshiness.

This is all you need to see dooshiness
http://coacheshotseat.com/coacheshotseatblog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Mirror.jpg

[yermom]

Profit's side business is knocking over pharmacies

[okie52]

ah hell Okie, they'll feed him good at Mac. He'll be fine.

He'll be there with the ones who robbed his store...how ironic.

Prater's face is out there. So is Box's and Ersland and his family. How about a little TV time for the heroic jurors?

[XingTheRubicon]

Sounds good and all, but the only caps that had been popped were popped by Ersland.

Thank God nobody important got hurt.

[C&CDean]

yes, and i know you're a big mean cold hearted bad *** that thinks all kids that screw up deserve to die - because they asked for it

c'mon - you're educated and smarter than that - and you know how to break down the facts......this isnt about how i would have acted, this is about examining the circumstances of a case - that has to be tried before a jury of his peers.....who have to make a decision to either let him walk or strip him of his liberties

i recognize that he was likely acting on adrenaline - i get that - but how do you quantify adrenaline and nerves in a courtroom - how do you demonstrate it? you can grow weary of the "he turned his back" argument all you want - but to do so is to ignore the facts - along with the other facts

if you want to argue that he was afraid for his life, then be prepared to handle the counter arguments

i've seen people react when they were afraid for their life - and they sure as hell werent chasing bad guys out the door and down the street, and then calmly walk back into the store - empty your gun and then go find another - and then try and claim you were scared.....i'll give Ersland the benefit of the doubt on the fact that he was juiced up on adrenaline

this guy had military experience? he had been robbed before? he had more than one gun? no - this was not your little old lady on her front door step - this was a guy who had experienced those feelings before - he reacted out of anger and "had enough" and decided to take matters into his own hands

he's his own worst enemy from the lies he told.....you're telling me that if you TRULY felt your life was in peril - and you've decided to take up self defense in that "fight or flight" moment, that you'd turn your back on your threat?

pure bull****

You know he was all calm when he walked back in the store huh? You were there in his head huh? Sheez, you watch too much TV.

And I'll go ahead and agree that he was a guy who had had enough and took matters into his own hands. It still ain't anywhere close to being murder 1. Also, being a quasi-psychologist I'd have to say once he chose the "fight" over "flight" he wasn't gonna stop until the threat was completely eliminated. I've already agreed that legally he committed murder. However, it wasn't #1.

[The Profit]

ridiculous - he's not a threat unless you threaten him.....




You can never trust a liar or a thief. The kids were obviously thieves. Ersland was a proven liar. We are probably better off with none of them on the streets.

[C&CDean]

This is all you need to see dooshiness
http://coacheshotseat.com/coacheshotseatblog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Mirror.jpg

You on the other side of that Dallas Cowboy window I'm looking through?

[jk the sooner fan]

You know he was all calm when he walked back in the store huh? You were there in his head huh? Sheez, you watch too much TV.

And I'll go ahead and agree that he was a guy who had had enough and took matters into his own hands. It still ain't anywhere close to being murder 1. Also, being a quasi-psychologist I'd have to say once he chose the "fight" over "flight" he wasn't gonna stop until the threat was completely eliminated. I've already agreed that legally he committed murder. However, it wasn't #1.

i've said before i thought it should have been manslaughter - we can agree on that

and i've even said i dont know what was going on in his head - i can only speculate based on his actions - which is what the jurors did

i dont know what sentencing instructions were given to the jury - it could be that manslaughter wasnt an option

[jk the sooner fan]

You can never trust a liar or a thief. The kids were obviously thieves. Ersland was a proven liar. We are probably better off with none of them on the streets.

i've been lied to plenty in my life but never considered that they were ALL killers

now you're just being uber ridiculous

[C&CDean]

i've said before i thought it should have been manslaughter - we can agree on that

and i've even said i dont know what was going on in his head - i can only speculate based on his actions - which is what the jurors did

i dont know what sentencing instructions were given to the jury - it could be that manslaughter wasnt an option

Cool.

[Ike]

i've said before i thought it should have been manslaughter - we can agree on that

and i've even said i dont know what was going on in his head - i can only speculate based on his actions - which is what the jurors did

i dont know what sentencing instructions were given to the jury - it could be that manslaughter wasnt an option

I think I remember reading that the jury could have opted for Man1.

[StoopTroup]

If i was a Pharmacist....I'd just strap around 10 pounds of plastic explosive around me and if someone came into the store with a gun....

I'd put an end to that **** quick.

[The Profit]

If i was a Pharmacist....I'd just strap around 10 pounds of plastic explosive around me and if someone came into the store with a gun....

I'd put an end to that **** quick.




There ya go.

[The Profit]

i've been lied to plenty in my life but never considered that they were ALL killers

now you're just being uber ridiculous




Look, he isn't going to prison for being a liar. He is going to prison for being a cold blooded murderer (that is what Murder 1 is). Had he not lied about nearly everything other than his name, even though he was a cold blooded murderer, he probably would have been acquitted.

[C&CDean]

Oh ****ing stop with the "cold blooded" hokey crap. Enough already. Ain't you got a school bus to chase or something?

[The Profit]

Oh ****ing stop with the "cold blooded" hokey crap. Enough already. Ain't you got a school bus to chase or something?




Dean, it was cold blooded. He thought about it before he did it. I am sure poor ole Jerome will sleep better behind bars knowing that there are people, who still care about him.

[2121Sooner]

Dean, it was cold blooded. He thought about it before he did it. I am sure poor ole Jerome will sleep better behind bars knowing that there are people, who still care about him.

If he get the Internet in prison let's all send him innernet prayers!

[C&CDean]

Dean, it was cold blooded. He thought about it before he did it. I am sure poor ole Jerome will sleep better behind bars knowing that there are people, who still care about him.

Yes, his heart/respiration rate was perfectly normal. Nothing happened that might make him do something irrational. One minute he was filling a prescription, then he cold bloodedly decided that a little thug was going to die that day. Then, as luck would have it, little thugs came in. So, he calmly and cooly killed the thug after he thought it all out and planned it perfectly. I would have to call it the perfect pre-meditated cold blooded murder in the first degree. Yes. Sir. Ree.:rolleyes:

[The Profit]

Yes, his heart/respiration rate was perfectly normal. Nothing happened that might make him do something irrational. One minute he was filling a prescription, then he cold bloodedly decided that a little thug was going to die that day. Then, as luck would have it, little thugs came in. So, he calmly and cooly killed the thug after he thought it all out and planned it perfectly. I would have to call it the perfect pre-meditated cold blooded murder in the first degree. Yes. Sir. Ree.:rolleyes:




Dean, I believe in the American judicial system. He was found guilty of cold blooded murder (Murder in the 1st degree) so I have to accept that verdict.

[badger]

With all due respect Badger, the Oklahoma Self Defense Act is crystal clear on this. The thing to remember is, once you no longer reasonably fear the perp, you can no longer use deadly force in self-defense. And all the heat is in that "reasonably fear" part. See, its not whether you actually feared the guy, but whether a reasonable person in your shoes would fear the guy. In this case, no "reasonable" person could "fear" a 16 y/o lying on the floor headshot. And apparently, that's the way the jury saw it.

"with all due respect" is a very disrespectful phrase in discussing law, fyi :mad:

And I'm not saying that laws do not already exist on this. I'm saying that an addition law(s) will exist to make was Ersland did legal and within his self defense rights if this is still infuriating people by the time the legislature reconvenes.

With all due respect (see? it sounds disrespectful just reading that, doesn't it?) our legislature once proposed the watermelon as the state veggie, so anything is possible, even if laws already exist. If this thing still makes voters mad, our lawmakers will take action and as a one-sided legislative body, it will likely not meet much meaningful opposition.

[yermom]

Yes, his heart/respiration rate was perfectly normal. Nothing happened that might make him do something irrational. One minute he was filling a prescription, then he cold bloodedly decided that a little thug was going to die that day. Then, as luck would have it, little thugs came in. So, he calmly and cooly killed the thug after he thought it all out and planned it perfectly. I would have to call it the perfect pre-meditated cold blooded murder in the first degree. Yes. Sir. Ree.:rolleyes:

yeah, i can't quite figure the 1st degree stuff either

all the cover up kinda stuff was afterward, wasn't it?

[Crimsontothecore]

So if the first shot had killed the thug and it was the only shot fired, would Ersland be free today? Wasn't his intention to kill the armed robber regardless of whether it was accomplished with the first shot or the subsequent shots?

[StoopTroup]

Mmmmmmm.....watermelon

[2121Sooner]

The man was in his rights to shoot the kid the first time in self defense.

It is not his right to execute the little thug once he was down on the ground. And you want to have additional laws to make that legal?

WADR

[Crimsontothecore]

The man was in his rights to shoot the kid the first time in self defense.

It is not his right to execute the little thug once he was down on the ground. And you want to have additional laws to make that legal?

The whole scenario was self defense from start to finish. Any intelligent person can see that. If he would have stopped after one shot and the thug lived, your level of reasoning would have had Ersland charged with shooting with intent to kill. Ridiculous.

I just love the way so many of you here pretend to know exactly when Ersland should have resumed calm and reasonable thinking and know when HIS perception of threat should have ended.

[2121Sooner]

You're just mad cause he got in trouble for killing a black kid. Racists.

And if he would have been a better shot the first time none of this would be an issue. It's his own fault. Proper planning prevents poor performance.

[jk the sooner fan]

The whole scenario was self defense from start to finish. Any intelligent person can see that. If he would have stopped after one shot and the thug lived, your level of reasoning would have had Ersland charged with shooting with intent to kill. Ridiculous.

I just love the way so many of you here pretend to know exactly when Ersland should have resumed calm and reasonable thinking and know when HIS perception of threat should have ended.

are you saying a motionless person laying on the floor with one gunshot wound - and no weapon ....is a reasonable threat?

[OutlandTrophy]

are you saying a motionless person laying on the floor with one gunshot wound - and no weapon ....is a reasonable threat?

if it's me or Chuck Norris then yes, we are both still deadly in that situation

[Mongo]

you people need to STFU and post funny chit. It's Friday on a holiday weekend.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

yeah, i can't quite figure the 1st degree stuff either

all the cover up kinda stuff was afterward, wasn't it?


Many years ago, I ran across a stat problem comparing the parole violation rates of convicted premediated murderers vs. impulsive murderers.

I was discussing this with a Soc prof who told me of a case where a guy is playing pool in a bar. His opponent starts flirting with the guy's wife. It so infuriated the guy, he ran upstairs (he had a room above the bar) got a gun and returned to shoot his opponent. Killed him.

The prof explained that while such behavior might strike one as extremely impulsive, the fact that he ran upstairs to get the gun and returned made it, legally, a premediated murder.

It's the same thing in this case. The pharmacist left to get the gun and returned. That makes it premediated.

[badger]

And you want to have additional laws to make that legal?

I'm not saying I want them. I'm saying that if public anger is still high by the time the legislature reconvenes, look for some bills to get discussed on the issue to make what Ersland did self defense in a legal sense.


you people need to STFU and post funny chit. It's Friday on a holiday weekend.

agree. i'm taking leave from South Oval. happy memorial day weekend everyone! :)

[2121Sooner]

you people need to STFU and post funny chit. It's Friday on a holiday weekend.

Yeah lets all go have a beer or some shots. But let's be careful with how many shots we have cause if this story has taught us anything it's that 1 shot is ok......it's the next 5 that get you in trouble.

[Mongo]

Yeah lets all go have a beer or some shots. But let's be careful with how many shots we have cause if this story has taught us anything it's that 1 shot is ok......it's the next 5 that get you in trouble.

http://knowyourmeme.com/i/681/original/what-you-did-there-i-see-it.thumbnail.jpg

[Pricetag]

Yeah, I'd like to see the faces of the noble jurors that chose life imprisonment over a lesser charge.

Is that hard to understand?
I understand that you want to see them--I just don't understand what it does for you. It seems to me like this didn't turn out the way you wanted it to, so now you're scrambling for ways in which the good guys still win. You want to hate on the jurors, and now you're hoping that it kills Prater's career.

Does anyone actually think that the prosecution was able to select 12 jurors who were dead set to convict this guy--of murder one, no less--from the outset? My guess is that there was more than one mind changed during that trial based upon what they saw in the court room.

[Crimsontothecore]

are you saying a motionless person laying on the floor with one gunshot wound - and no weapon ....is a reasonable threat?

And again, you're assuming someone who was robbed at gunpoint seconds earlier should be reasoning calmly.

[okie52]

I understand that you want to see them--I just don't understand what it does for you. It seems to me like this didn't turn out the way you wanted it to, so now you're scrambling for ways in which the good guys still win. You want to hate on the jurors, and now you're hoping that it kills Prater's career.

Does anyone actually think that the prosecution was actually able to select 12 jurors who were dead set to convict this guy--of murder one, no less--from the outset? My guess is that there was more than one mind changed during that trial based upon what they saw in the court room.

Haha. I have no illusions about personally changing the outcome. I would like to put faces with those responsible for the verdict just like I would for those that support or oppose an issue that I find interesting or important. Maybe I know one of them. For some reason you feel these noble jurors deserve anonymity yet just about everyone else involved in the trial has been seen on TV.

Prater had other options that he chose to ignore. Whether it will hurt his career is debatable. But he is responsible for his actions and some people won't agree with them. That isn't too hard to understand, is it?

[StoopTroup]

I just wish they only made rubber bullets.

[Midtowner]

Yes, his heart/respiration rate was perfectly normal. Nothing happened that might make him do something irrational. One minute he was filling a prescription, then he cold bloodedly decided that a little thug was going to die that day. Then, as luck would have it, little thugs came in. So, he calmly and cooly killed the thug after he thought it all out and planned it perfectly. I would have to call it the perfect pre-meditated cold blooded murder in the first degree. Yes. Sir. Ree.:rolleyes:

If he had in his mind the goal of walking across the store to get the gun which he was going to use to kill the victim, then yeah, that's premeditation.

It doesn't take a long time to premeditate murder. Basically, if in your mind you say "this is what I want to do," and then you do it, then you have that whole malice aforethought thing.

[olevetonahill]

i laughed!

And that does not surprise me one bit.

[StoopTroup]

When I leave the house....I duck tape my guns to my hands. When they say I premeditated it....I go....Exactly how did I do that? I didn't duck tape those guns to my hands....I woke up that way. They were just there

[jk the sooner fan]

And that does not surprise me one bit.

nor does it surprise me when you laugh at my expense! ;)

[olevetonahill]

nor does it surprise me when you laugh at my expense! ;)

Dont think I ever have, May be wrong tho, see I have never thot you were the least bit humorous ;)

[Sooner24]

I have every sympathy for a normal victim. There was nothing normal about this piece of .... He lied about his military service. He lied about both kids being armed (he murdered the unarmed one). He lied about being shot (actually cut himself to make it look like he was nicked by a slug). He lied about hurting his back during the encounter. He lied about someone pulling a shotgun on him in the parking lot. He lied about the unconscious kid trying to get up (video shows the opposite).

Now, to answer your question. The kid with the gun deserved to be shot. Hell, even the dead kid deserved to be shot for placing himself in that situation. But, after being shot in the head and being totally defenseless, no, the kid did not deserve to be murdered. At that time, he was 100 percent defenseless. He was unconscious, unarmed and under control.

I hope some day you are put in the same situation. If anything he should sue the worthless POS mother for the crappy job she did.

[StoopTroup]

I've sold my guns today and I signed up to Barber School.

http://s3.hubimg.com/u/592286_f520.jpg

My Wife says I ought to be a Pirate.

[jk the sooner fan]

Dont think I ever have, May be wrong tho, see I have never thot you were the least bit humorous ;)

at my expense = laugh AT me - not with me

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Oklahoma needs a castle doctrine law like Texas.

Oklahoma county needs to fire the DA in the next election.

[87sooner]

Oklahoma needs a castle doctrine law like Texas.

Oklahoma county needs to fire the DA in the next election.

i would go one step further with a "you start it i finish it" law....

[Sooner_Tuf]

..

Which I think is still pretty likely assuming he can afford one of the half dozen or so decent attorneys we have in this state.

[picasso]

Tough call here. It's hard to say what any of us would do in that situation.

I've got kids of my own now and I would probably make sure any people in my home or business who threatened my life with a deadly weapon were pretty dead before I turned my back on them.

[Memtig14]

Ersland was a proven liar. We are probably better off with none of them on the streets.

Life in prison for lying.

wow

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Tough call here. It's hard to say what any of us would do in that situation.

I've got kids of my own now and I would probably make sure any people in my home or business who threatened my life with a deadly weapon were pretty dead before I turned my back on them.

Big difference - your's and my house doesn't have survelliance cameras...

[Blue]

Dean, I believe in the American judicial system. He was found guilty of cold blooded murder (Murder in the 1st degree) so I have to accept that verdict.

Lawyers are so far up their own *** they don't even realize how stupid they sound.

[Memtig14]

Lawyers are so far up their own *** they don't even realize how stupid they sound.

Well said!!!


:D

[Spray]

Lawyers are so far up their own *** they don't even realize how stupid they sound.

I will remember you said this...

[StoopTroup]

So....if you become a Lawyer....you are a Proctologist too?

It that a perk?

[CrimsonKel]

Dopies are robbing pharmacies in record numbers evidently. Bank robbers are giving up bank robbery because the pharmacies are a better score according to this article.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/06/03/drugstore.robberies/

[texaspokieokie]

Dopies are robbing pharmacies in record numbers evidently. Bank robbers are giving up bank robbery because the pharmacies are a better score according to this article.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/06/03/drugstore.robberies/

if you rob a bank, you have to go elsewhere to buy drugs. if it's a drugstore, you kill both birds with one stone.

[Memtig14]

So....if you become a Lawyer....you are a Proctologist too?

It that a perk?

It is "double dipping".