Oklahoma druggist arrested for killing holdup man

Started by deonchan, May 29, 2009, 04:52:41 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

deonchan

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/29/national/a122643D74.DTL

QuoteConfronted by two holdup men, pharmacist Jerome Ersland pulled a gun, shot one of them in the head and chased the other away. Then, in a scene recorded by the drugstore's security camera, he went behind the counter, got another gun, and pumped five more bullets into the wounded teenager as he lay on the floor.

QuoteUnder Oklahoma's "Make My Day Law" — passed in the late 1980s and named for one of Clint Eastwood's most famous movie lines — people can use deadly force when they feel threatened by an intruder inside their homes. In 2006, Oklahoma's "Stand Your Ground Law" extended that to anywhere a citizen has the right to be, such as a car or office.

"It's a 'Make-My-Day' case," Box said. "This guy came in, your money or your life. Mr. Ersland said, `You're not taking my life.'" The gunman "forfeited his life."

Box said that another person might have reacted differently, but he asked: "When do you turn off that adrenaline switch? When do you think you're safe? I think that's going to be the ultimate issue."

If convicted, Ersland could be sentenced to life in prison with or without parole, or receive the death penalty.


What do you guys think?

I think Atta boy. Though I wouldn't go for 1st degree premed maybe manslaughter but as far as I am concerned It's a make my day case



"he shouldn't have shot my baby like that"... your baby shouldn't have been ROBBING someone.



I see no issue here.
Calvin...

Rovers
Suits
Musicfest
Ops Div

Dagger-6

QuoteDistrict Attorney David Prater said Ersland was justified in shooting 16-year-old Antwun Parker once in the head, but not in firing the additional shots into his belly. The prosecutor said the teenager was unconscious, unarmed, lying on his back and posing no threat when Ersland fired what the medical examiner said were the fatal shots.

If he were a police officer or trained, he would be held more accountable for the excessive force.

I would like to give the man leeway.  He's a pharmacist in a tough situation.

But justice is blind and all that jazz, which means he should have stopped once the man was down for the count.

He'll probably have to take some sort of hit.  Definitely not murder in the first degree though.

Steve.Young

I would say...probably manslaughter at the worse.
Director of Marketing
Staff Moderator - Fanime Forums.

Please PM me with any questions, comments, or concerns.

Steve[AT]Fanime[DOT]Com

Liquid

#3
Quote from: trooper715 on May 30, 2009, 01:13:03 AM
If he were a police officer or trained, he would be held more accountable for the excessive force.

He served in the Gulf War. If I were him, I'd claim post traumatic stress\war flash back.

But seriously, if someone put you in that life threatening situation...you'd probably want to make sure they were dead so they would not come back to get you with more friends. Second, the situation alone probably prompted the multiple shots due to being in that position. Thirdly, the store had been robbed before and that will make dang sure nobody else tries to rob that place again.
Tyler R. - Fanime Staff
2009 & 2010 Rovers - Suits
2011 Rovers - Graveyard Base
2012 Rovers - Second & Head of Suits
2013 Con Ops - Assistant Trouble Shooter

PyronIkari

It then becomes a question of who is he to judge the man he killed, and whether or not the crime fit the punishment.

Personally, the pharmacist should be tried for murder, because he chose to murder a man.

The kid was shot in the head, chances are he was already dead, going to die, or be extremely handicapped for the rest of the life... Saying this was adrenaline is utter bull shit. He went behind the counter to get another gun and shot him how many times?

Trooper: it's impossible to be 1st degree, unless he some how planned the robber to come into his store only to kill him. 2nd maybe 3rd.

See, the first shot, fully justified, the next 5 were not. It's murder, plain and simple. The law only protects to the point where you feel immediate danger. The man was no longer in immediate danger when the kid was shot in the head and the other guy had left.

Liquid

#5
Quote from: PyronIkari on June 01, 2009, 03:40:49 PM
The kid was shot in the head, chances are he was already dead, going to die, or be extremely handicapped for the rest of the life... Saying this was adrenaline is utter bull shit. He went behind the counter to get another gun and shot him how many times?

True. I believe the article did state that the kid was technically still alive after the first head shot and that they determined that the body shots are what were the fatal blows, but they did not state if the headshot would have been fatal if the other shots had not had killed him first.

Thinking about it....if all the shots were concurrent then that is one thing, but going back behind a counter and getting another gun to finish it off when the guy is already unconscience would in fact be murder. I never said I agreed with what the man did and I don't think I would ever be the type to be able to do that, but I can surely see where he would be coming from and what his excuses could be.

Also, none of us really know how we would react to a similar situation unless it were to happen to us. I can think about it and say I would have just given the guy the money.....but maybe I would have actually just snapped and just starting shooting the hell out of the person threatening my life.

We forget the guy served in the Gulf War. My dad served in Vietnam. He's not really all there in the head sometimes, you know? If he had a gun ready and someone pointed a gun at him...I can easily see him snapping and making absolutely sure the guy was dead. Now, this doesn't mean he's greenlit for murder, but I can understand why it would happen if it did happen. I don't agree with it, but I can understand it.
Tyler R. - Fanime Staff
2009 & 2010 Rovers - Suits
2011 Rovers - Graveyard Base
2012 Rovers - Second & Head of Suits
2013 Con Ops - Assistant Trouble Shooter

Runewitt

i think that in any self-defensive situation, any force, deadly or otherise, used after the intruder/robber/ instigator has been incapacitated is escessive and deemed criminal.

if the robber was already wounded, and unable to continue the holdup/attack, there should be no legal reason to continue firing. to stop and reload, or grab another weapon is excessive use of force and, had they survived, i think they would have had a right to press charges, and as they didnt, i think the family should be able to press charges for homocide. i am not condoning their attempted robbery, but i belive that this "stand your ground" law is BS.
Brevity is the soul of Wit.
Confusion is the soul of Runewitt.

Dagger-6

What about the "Make My Day" law?

Anyways, I'm with the District Attorney on this one:
QuoteDistrict Attorney David Prater said Ersland was justified in shooting 16-year-old Antwun Parker once in the head, but not in firing the additional shots into his belly.

As Mikey pointed out, there's no way it will hold up to a first degree charge.

So the toss up is between 2nd degree (an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion") or voluntary manslaughter ( an intentional killing in which the offender had no prior intent to kill, such as a killing that occurs in the "heat of passion." The circumstances leading to the killing must be the kind that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed).  Thank you findlaw.com!  Either one can be argued, since it takes some intention to go and grab a second gun, but an armed robbery is certainly unique circumstance.  It'll be up to how good the lawyers are I suppose.

Good 'ol PTSD.

Though if the robber's survived, I think they should just be thankful they're alive.  They can go take a flying leap off a cliff for all I care.  Nuts to them pressing charges.  Leave that to the state.  The robbers can go rot in a prison cell.