d.a. files murder charges against robbery victim

[lawson 6]

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacist...masthead_topten

 

too bad this guy has to spend money on a lawyer. no way he gets convicted.

[broberts001 0]

IMHO, he killed the robber in cold blood (after the initial shot with the Judge). There are 2 videos and if you watch both. After he chases the other robber off, it looks like he just walks up and kills him after getting the next handgun. The 2nd video is 180 degees out from the other video ... search around for it.

 

-Bryan

Edited June 5, 2009 by broberts001

[lawson 6]

i've seen the video & there is no doubt that he didnt have to finish the guy off. i just think when someone goes into a business waving a gun & demanding money, he gives up some of his civil rights. you have to expect people might not react calmly after being held up. this guy went to work, defended himself & his property against a scumbag, prevented this piece of crap from ever victimizing anyone again, & now HE is facing jail time.

[elvis christ 451]

Gotta neutralize the threat. The first shot to the head was just a graze and I imagine the guy was still moving around.

[shades_of_grey 1,092]

The problem is that you can't see the little punk after he falls from the first, (most likely grazing), shot. He's out of the camera's field of view at that point, so you can't tell whether he was moving around/getting up/retrieving a weapon etc. All you can see is Mr. Ersland walk up and empty his pistol, which does "look bad" since his target's not visible.

[mstranglr 9]

I think the Pharmacist is going to get convicted of at least manslaughter. You need to see the tapes before commenting. In my CCW refresher class last week, we spent an hour watching the video and discussing this case. He acted appropriately initially, then got caught up in the moment and made a SERIOUS mistake.

 

Condensed review of tape;

2 bad guys enter pharmacy to rob it. Bad guy #1 gets shot in the head by the pharmacist and is on the ground. Pharmacist chases bad guy #2 outside, re-enters the store 18 seconds later, steps over the head shot bad guy on the ground, goes behind the counter, patiently grabs another gun from a locked drawer, walks up to head shot guy on the ground, stands over him, leans down and put 5 shots into the guys chest. Then dials 911. Pharmacist then gives a statement to the press and police that totally contradicts everything you see on the tape.

 

Moral of the story;

1) .380 pistols suck.

2) shoot em dead immediately, call police, keep your f'ing mouth shut!

[clifton 354]

Self defense 101.... ... just because the guy was out, doesn't mean he was not a threat with intent.. and a gun.. if there was movement that's enough of a threat to me... IMO

[broberts001 0]

According to the DA, the robber was unconscious when he was shot 5 times in the abdomen with the 2nd weapon. If so, he was no threat ... which is what the DA seem to be basing their case on. If the defense can create doubt to that fact, he may be able to claim self defense.

 

I can understand the pharmacist frustration. I believe he had been robbed before at that same time – which is why he has the weapons close. I am sure he was frustrated and *maybe* personally handled the *problem* by finishing him off. Oh and apparently he made conflicting statements to the Media - which the tape disputs. He may be screwed. he should have kept his mouth shut.

 

-Bryan

Edited June 5, 2009 by broberts001

[csspecs 1,987]

Yep if your going to defend yourself be sure that you stay on the moral high ground.

 

Fire sufficient rounds to stop the threat before moving. Because once your standing over someone, even if they are trying to raise their firearm to fire again, it will look very bad if you shoot them.

[BuffetDestroyer 969]

The initial self defense was obviously justified. Going back to finish him off was wrong under the law.

 

Had he held the robber at gunpoint until the police arrived, he could have kept the threat neutralized by removing the robber's weapon. If the robber tried to make a break for him after he was disarmed (to tackle or the like), then he would have been again justified in shooting since he is disabled and was again in harms way.

 

The video shows him execute the robber after leaving him be for many seconds. Although we can't see the robber, he had his back to him several times, so it seems unlikely that the robber was a real threat.

 

Justice to the robber was served in my opinion. But the law doesn't always bring people to justice and according to the law, the pharmacist was in the wrong.

[yakdung 2,926]

The DA in this case is liberal Democrat David Prater. That should give you a hint. I have said this before and I will say it again. Be courteous and cordial when the police arrive, but when the questions start, respectfully decline to answer. Only speak to a lawyer BEFORE you are questioned. The officers arriving on the scene are wired for sound and anything you say will be used against you in court and will become fodder for the late night news. Reasoning is because you are under stress and you will not be thinking clearly. When calling 911 never ever hold a conversation with the operator. Only supply the needed and necessary information and then place the phone down and DO NOT hang up. Again, this information will be used against you in court. I'm certain that police officers that are on this board will disagree, but that is expected.

 

 

Yakdung

[DogMan 2,343]

Nope, No justification for going back and finishing him off. I'm all for doing everything you need to do to defend yourself but just because someone is a scumbag doesn't give anyone else a license to commit cold blooded murder. I think he should be convicted with perhaps some weight given to the circumstances when he is sentenced.

[SOPMOD 254]

Go and post NO! in that poll,the Judge is a gun grabbing hooker and made a stink about "what kind" of guns Ersland owned and tried to threaten him to disclose the make and model of each one after he had already sold them to his attorney in lieu of his defense expenses.

[gunman1 1,753]

This guy and his lawyer did an interview on fox news two days ago. The guy said that there was a woman and her daughter in the store and after he returned from chasing the other zombie, there was a bunch of screeming in the store. He said the guy on the floor was moving around and talking, and he thought the guy had shot the woman's daughter. He said he wasn't sure whether the guy had access to a gun, and therefore felt compelled to take out the threat. I,m not going to make any snap judgements on this, cause I was not there, and I was not in his shoes. I'm very hesitant to label an otherwise law abiding businessman as a cold blooded murderer based on my view of some tapes alone. I would also hate for someone to do that to one of us, inocent until PROVEN guilty by a jury of my peirs, I would hope.

 

And I agree, don't say jack shit to the cops, and put the phone down after making the 911 call.

[DogMan 2,343]

It is this man's behavior after he re-enters the store that is going to get him put away. This was a deliberate execution. He didn't even pay the robber any attention when he came back in the store and then he turned his back on him, too, to go get the other gun. I don't see how it can be argued that the robber was any threat whatsoever. The other stuff about a woman and child being in the store is baloney. Why didn't he stay there and protect them instead of running after a robber that was already gone? This is a good example of what NOT to do.

[WHITE 3 GOLF 2]

Does Oklahoma have the Castle Law? This man had less than a minute to make life changing choices and now theses lawyers are gonna take months to break down the situation and turn shit around on him. Take this thought and really think about it, Dogman, if it were you and you had mere seconds to decide my life and my patrons or some criminal trying to take yours and theirs. Is this guy a Vet? If he is I'm pretty sure the switch was turned on full volume, not ten but fucking eleven.

[A307 0]

So easy to Monday morning quarterback. None of us were there and video doesn't show everything. I saw the interview with him on Fox, he incidently is disabled and had a brace on from spinal surgery, said he thought the guy was a threat and he was protecting the lady and her daughter, how can we say what was running thru his mind after being in a close up gun fight? There are many incidents of well trained guys doing unreasonable looking things when under this kind of stress.

 

I'm just say give the guy a fair chance and don't prejudge him guilty, that's what the anti's do all the time.

[yakdung 2,926]

I believe Oklahoma has the Castle Doctrine.

http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/Deli...sp?CiteID=69782

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine

The idiot DA will do everything to hang this guy because he thinks the climate is right. Reminds me of the Joe Horn case in Pasadena Texas. The problems I see here are sideline commandos passing judgment from a video tape. What if there was no video tape? What if the punk was shot initially with a slug from a shotgun? I would love to be on the jury, but the Voir dire process eliminates guys like me.

 

Yakdung

[DogMan 2,343]

I believe Oklahoma has the Castle Doctrine.

http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/Deli...sp?CiteID=69782

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine

The idiot DA will do everything to hang this guy because he thinks the climate is right. Reminds me of the Joe Horn case in Pasadena Texas. The problems I see here are sideline commandos passing judgment from a video tape. What if there was no video tape? What if the punk was shot initially with a slug from a shotgun? I would love to be on the jury, but the Voir dire process eliminates guys like me.

 

Yakdung

 

So you're going to start name-calling just because you have a different opinion? You can relax, the guy isn't going to get convicted based on anyone's opinion here. Forming opinions based on the video and other statements is what we are all doing, including you. Whats with all the what ifs? If I had two wheels and pedals I'd be a bicycle. It is what it is.

[sidewinderl 43]

It's easy to be the better man when you're not the old disabled guy behind the counter who has had a gun pointed at him.

 

Justified or not, prosecuting this guy sends the wrong message to would-be criminals. Perhaps we need to condone the sort of actions the pharmacist is accused of...the robbers are the ones who need to be thinking twice about what they do, not the ones getting robbed. The only line crossed was by the idiots who tried to rob the store. The guy who got killed was only a victim of his own stupidity. The only shame is that the real victim didn't get the guy who pulled out a gun instead of the one with the bag.

 

As far as the vid footage goes...he did not walk up and simply kill the guy...his pace was obviously hurried after he left the counter, which suggests he felt immediately threatened (who gives a rat's ass that he ignored the guy on the floor when he walked in...a lot can happen in that time).

 

You can clearly see that the pharmacist was standing farther under the camera than the bag guy was when he dropped (assuming that's when he was shot and supposedly rendered unconcious...which appears to be the case, despite the cut footage, since there wasn't time for the pharmacist to shoot the guy on the floor in the 6 seconds it took him to get from the counter to the door). That would indicate the guy on the floor certainly did move, especially when it's clear that the pharmacist was not stepping over anything as he walked away. Maybe we can't see what happens off camera, but the cameras do show a lot.

Edited June 6, 2009 by sidewinderl

[waltham_41 52]

Pharmacy workers were interviewed in I think Tulsa, their store had been robbed previously, and after giving the criminal what he wanted, he viciously beat them with a club like object, seriously injuring them to various degrees before leaving them. The girl they interviewed had had the back of her head bashed in, and said she did not blame the guy at all for shooting the perp and killing him.

 

Of course the cracked skull she got after giving their robber what he wanted, as us sheeples are supposed to do, may have had something to do with her attitude.

[mstranglr 9]

It's easy to be the better man when you're not the old disabled guy behind the counter who has had a gun pointed at him.

 

Justified or not, prosecuting this guy sends the wrong message to would-be criminals. Perhaps we need to condone the sort of actions the pharmacist is accused of...the robbers are the ones who need to be thinking twice about what they do, not the ones getting robbed. The only line crossed was by the idiots who tried to rob the store. The guy who got killed was only a victim of his own stupidity. The only shame is that the real victim didn't get the guy who pulled out a gun instead of the one with the bag.

 

As far as the vid footage goes...he did not walk up and simply kill the guy...his pace was obviously hurried after he left the counter, which suggests he felt immediately threatened (who gives a rat's ass that he ignored the guy on the floor when he walked in...a lot can happen in that time).

 

You can clearly see that the pharmacist was standing farther under the camera than the bag guy was when he dropped (assuming that's when he was shot and supposedly rendered unconcious...which appears to be the case, despite the cut footage, since there wasn't time for the pharmacist to shoot the guy on the floor in the 6 seconds it took him to get from the counter to the door). That would indicate the guy on the floor certainly did move, especially when it's clear that the pharmacist was not stepping over anything as he walked away. Maybe we can't see what happens off camera, but the cameras do show a lot.

 

So the pharmacist walks back in the store, steps over the downed bad guy (instead of walking around him and entering the counter from the other side). He walks right up to the downed bad guy, and you can clearly see the way he bends over with shooting arm extended, that he is right over the victim and firing at almost point blank range (report confirms this also). Then he tells the press and police (on tape) a completely different story. Based on this, a jury will not believe that the pharmacist considered the bad guy a lethal threat at that point; would a reasonable person slowly walk up and stand over a guy and bend over to unload a mag into his belly if they believed an imminent lethal threat existed? People who are licensed to carry have a great responsibility and are taught subjects such as disparity of force and the difference between shooting to stop a threat vs attempting to kill. The fact that he received this training as a condition of his CCW permit will not let him claim ignorance of the law, and when his CCW instructor is subpoenaed onto the stand, he will confirm that the pharmacist did not handle the latter half of that incident well. Claiming it was a "heat of the moment thing" or that you thought a condition existed that did not could bring a manslaughter conviction. This case is not a slam dunk for the good guy by any means, not in any state.

 

I'm not saying that the scumbag little thug did not get what he deserved, HE DID, and the world is a better place today without him. This is an old school guy that administered old school justice. Unfortunately its a "new school" judicial system, with anti-gun commie prosecutors and welfare recipient juries. I hope this old warrior the best.

[clifton 354]

Does Oklahoma have the Castle Law? This man had less than a minute to make life changing choices and now theses lawyers are gonna take months to break down the situation and turn shit around on him. Take this thought and really think about it, Dogman, if it were you and you had mere seconds to decide my life and my patrons or some criminal trying to take yours and theirs. Is this guy a Vet? If he is I'm pretty sure the switch was turned on full volume, not ten but fucking eleven.

 

 

+11... once you turn it on.. with the robbery, no one said he needs to act totally rational... maybe PTSD kicked in, ..

[gunman1 1,753]

Does Oklahoma have the Castle Law? This man had less than a minute to make life changing choices and now theses lawyers are gonna take months to break down the situation and turn shit around on him. Take this thought and really think about it, Dogman, if it were you and you had mere seconds to decide my life and my patrons or some criminal trying to take yours and theirs. Is this guy a Vet? If he is I'm pretty sure the switch was turned on full volume, not ten but fucking eleven.

 

 

+11... once you turn it on.. with the robbery, no one said he needs to act totally rational... maybe PTSD kicked in, ..

My older brother had words with a guy in a bar in eastern Montana one night. The pulls a knife cuts him while he has his back turned, opened him up like a can of tuna. My brother freeked out, took the knife off the guy, knocked him to the floor, and stabbed him in the chest five times before a bunch of people pulled him off the guy.

 

My brother spent four years in prison and the other guy went free after a loooong recoverey. Now that's fucken justice

 

My brother always said his only regret was that the fucker didn't die, Jim was 82nd airborne during Nam., Jim died on Dec. 22, 2008 riding his fatboy through the hills around Cody Wyoming, GRHS.

[Wotan1105 7]

I agree, he could of put 5, 10, 20, 100 bullets in that piece of garbage and I wouldn't care. There is a reason you don't go around pulling guns on people, this is the reason. You threaten somebodies life, you deserve what you get if that person turns out to call your bluff. Hope this guy gets a decent jury that isn't all libtards (most likely)

Edited June 6, 2009 by Wotan1105

[A307 0]

Was just thinking..wonder if they are going to charge the other perp with murder too? In most states if you are involved in a armed robbery and anyone gets killed you get charged too. That would be an interesting situation for those who will pull out the race card.

[DogMan 2,343]

You guys are just letting emotion carry you away on this. It might make you feel better to talk about what a scumbag the robber is and come up with every flimsy excuse in the world for the store owner but if you are going to be a gunfighter in the modern world you BETTER realize that its ALL about self defense and once you take it beyond that and decide to be the Judge, Jury, and Executioner you have just become another criminal. People like this give gun owners a bad name. It makes us look like we can't make responsible decisions in stressful situations. Now go ahead and talk some more about what a scumbag the robber was and how he deserved it. Yes Yes Yes. We all agree. Thats not the point here. I agree he had a right to take as many deadly shots as he felt he needed to in the beginning. Blowing both their fucking heads off would have been perfectly justified. Once one guy is down and the other runs away its over. There are no "split-second" decisions being made, there is nothing "turned on" unless the guy is completely psycotic. Keep thinkng like you do and if you end up in the same situation and do the same thing you will be looking at charges, too.

[Motopilot1 37]

now if he had been shooting a 45. auto this wouldnt be an issue. or maybe a 44. mag

[paprotective 362]

Rule number 1: turn off the tape before you END SOMEONE...

 

Then the evidence is YOUR SIDED...

 

Kidding but had to say it.

 

He'll get convicted of something and SUED by someone...

[TR Young 175]

IMHO, the pharmacist neutralized the threat with the initial head shot. He could have held the perp at gunpoint until the police arrived, however he took it upon himself to take a life. That will probably get him convicted.

 

On the other hand, the deceased will NEVER put someone else's life in jeopardy again, will he?