View Full Version : Phamacist Army records can be subpoenaed
This story has been a very hotly debated issue around these parts recently...and it just got hotter! (Especially given the Leftist controlled local papers in Oklahoma!)
The powers that be have assumed a victory in dragging this Brave man's Army records into the mix??? Just cannot believe that this is legal, not to mention...IRRELEVANT!!!:mad:
FIRST UP (Background):
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=12&articleid=20090530_298_0_OKLAHO234119&archive=yes
Pharmacy shooting controversy continues
By TIM TALLEY Associated Press Writer
Published: 5/30/2009 8:49 AM
Last Modified: 5/30/2009 8:53 AM
OKLAHOMA CITY — Confronted 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.
Now Ersland has been charged with first-degree murder in a case that has stirred a furious debate over vigilante justice and self-defense and turned the pharmacist into something of a folk hero.
Ersland, 57, is free on $100,000 bail, courtesy of an anonymous donor. He has won praise from the pharmacy's owner, received an outpouring of cards, letters and checks from supporters, and become the darling of conservative talk radio.
"His adrenaline was going. You're just thinking of survival," said John Paul Hernandez, 60, a retired Defense Department employee who grew up in the neighborhood. "All it was is defending your employee, business and livelihood. If I was in that position and that was me, I probably would have done the same thing."
District 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.
Anthony Douglas, president of the Oklahoma chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, called it an "execution-style murder" and praised the district attorney for bringing charges. Ersland is white; the two suspects were black.
Parker's parents also expressed relief that Ersland faces a criminal charge.
"He didn't have to shoot my baby like that," Parker's mother, Cleta Jennings, told TV station KOCO.
But many of those who have seen the video of the May 19 robbery attempt at Reliable Discount Pharmacy have concluded the teenager in the ski mask got what he deserved.
Mark Shannon, who runs a conservative talk show on Oklahoma City's KTOK, said callers have jammed his lines this week in support of Ersland, a former Air Force lieutenant colonel who wears a back brace on the job and told reporters he is a disabled veteran of the Gulf War.
"There is no gray area," Shannon said. One caller "said he should have put all the shots in the head."
Don Spencer, a 49-year-old National Rifle Association member who lives in the small town of Meridian, 40 miles north of Oklahoma City, said the pharmacist did the right thing: "You shoot more than enough to make sure the threat has been removed."
Barbara Bergman, past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and a professor at the University of New Mexico School of Law, likened the public reaction to that of the case of Bernard Goetz, the New Yorker who shot four teenagers he said were trying to rob him when they asked for $5 on a subway in 1984.
Goetz was cleared of attempted murder and assault but convicted of illegal gun possession and served 8½ months in jail.
Bergman said those who claim they used deadly force in self-defense have to show they were "in reasonable fear of serious bodily injury."
The pharmacy is in a crime-ridden section of south Oklahoma City and had been robbed before.
The video shows two men bursting in, one of them pointing a gun at Ersland and two women working with the druggist behind the counter. Ersland fires a pistol, driving the gunman from the store and hitting Parker in the head as he puts on a ski mask.
Ersland chases the second man outside, then goes back inside, walks behind the counter with his back to Parker, gets a second handgun and opens fire.
Irven Box, Ersland's attorney, noted the outpouring of support for the pharmacist, including $2,000 in donations, and said: "I feel very good 12 people would not determine he committed murder in the first degree."
Under 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.
Jevontia Ingram, the 14-year-old boy accused of wielding the gun in the robbery, was arrested Thursday. The district attorney on Friday filed a first-degree murder charge against him, as well as against a man accused of being the getaway driver, and another man suspected of helping talk the teens into the crime.
The charges accuse all three of sharing responsibility for Parker's shooting death.
NEXT DEVELOPMENT:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090530_12_A13_OKLAHO939900&archive=yes
Slain robber's alleged accomplices charged
By NOLAN CLAY AND BRYAN DEAN NewsOK.com
Published: 5/30/2009 2:26 AM
Last Modified: 5/30/2009 4:28 AM
OKLAHOMA CITY — Three robbery suspects were charged Friday with first-degree murder in connection with the fatal drugstore shooting of their alleged accomplice.
Police report that the youngest, a 14-year-old boy, confessed his involvement in the heist.
The three are charged with murder even though a pharmacist fired the fatal shots that killed Antwun "Speedy" Parker, 16, on May 19 at the Reliable Discount Pharmacy in south Oklahoma City.
They will be prosecuted separately from the pharmacist, Jerome Jay Ersland, 57, who is accused in a first- degree murder charge of going too far when he shot Parker multiple times, Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said.
The charge against Jevontia Ingram, 14, whose first name court records spell Jevontai; Emanuel Dewayne Mitchell, 31; and Anthony Devale Morrison, 43, is the latest twist in the case. All are from Oklahoma City.
AND FINALLY:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=12&articleid=20090619_298_0_OKLAHO707697&archive=yes
Phamacist Army records can be subpoenaed
By The Associated Press
Published: 6/19/2009 11:05 AM
Last Modified: 6/19/2009 11:46 AM
OKLAHOMA CITY — For the second time in just more than a week an Oklahoma County district judge has ruled prosecutors can subpoena the Army records of a pharmacist charged with murder.
Jerome Ersland is charged with first-degree murder in the May 19 shooting death of 16-year-old Antwun Parker as Parker and another teen tried to rob the pharmacy.
Defense attorney Irven Box asked Judge Tammy Bass-LeSure to reverse her ruling of June 10 allowing Ersland's Army medical records to be subpoenaed. But Bass said Thursday that the records belong to the government — not to Ersland.
Prosecutors say Ersland was justified in shooting Parker once but that he went too far when he got a second gun and shot the teenager five more times as he lay on the floor.
He saved us all a lot of incarceration funds and probably further feloneous activity.
He saved us all a lot of incarceration funds and probably further feloneous activity.
Indeed Sir!
South OKC is a hotbed for thugs of all sorts...indeed, can only hope this man is vindicated!
Holly:munchin
greenberetTFS
06-20-2009, 16:06
This countries Justice system is becoming an upside down,a$$ backward,makes no sense,PC acceptance making country that I'm wondering how long this $h*t will go on before we just give up..............:mad:
Big Teddy :munchin
This countries Justice system is becoming an upside down,a$$ backward,makes no sense,PC acceptance making country that I'm wondering how long this $h*t will go on before we just give up..............:mad:
Big Teddy :munchin
TFS,
What I can honestly report is that there are a majority of folks here that support the actions of this man...thank goodness! These are "up-standing, law-abiding, gun-carrying Americans."
Holly
In a legal sense as soon as the guy is no longer a threat he can no longer pump bullets into him. It goes from self defense to murder. I am sure the guy still felt threatened by the kid and that is what he has to articulate to the jury.
And you know, this is one of the hottest issues..."a Kid"????
Well, this 16 year old committed a felony, so there should be no, zero, zilch, sympathy for him, as the Pharmacist was protecting himself, two female co-workers, and the business, IMHO!
Something seems to have gone wrong...and I can only speculate that IT has an agenda against this man....:rolleyes:
Holly
I used to work in Law enforcement so I know EXACTLY what you mean. There was a "kid" locally a couple of yers ago that backed three probation officers out of his house at knoife point. They pepper sprayed him three times without effect.
B.O.,
Here is a great link, given to me by a QP here:
http://www.foxlabs.net/Products.html
Thank you for your service in law enforcement sir. Please give this link to any and all LEO's that need additional "non-lethal" firepower. For as it is touted,"It IS the nastiest stuff available!"
Can only hope that good judgement will prevail in this situation...and this true American if found not guilty! :munchin
Holly
Remington Raidr
06-20-2009, 20:54
The attorney may be able to show that the shooter wasn't thinking clearly, but going behind the counter, getting another firearm, and repeatedly shooting a proned-out GSW is murder. Maybe he can dodge first degree, but that is murder. I want anyone, bad guy, cop, citizen to think twice about taking a life. Hopefully, the defense will be able to show that the asshole was already dead from the headshot, and Mr. Pharmacist was just wasting ammo. Then you might get a straight not-guilty verdict. Otherwise, pack you toothbrush and momma now owns the pharmacy.
As to his medical records, I find it curious that the defense would fight it. Mental state is gonna be big at trial, and if you think your medical records can't be subpoenaed, military or not, think again.
"Jevontia". That says it all - little thug needed shooting.
Please explain to me what his subjective mental state had to do with an objective threat?
He could have thought he was Napolean - if the little punk was a threat, he got what he deserved.
This case is going to be very interesting. having watched the tape - I think the guy is screwed. but...I don't know if I saw the whole tape; how it played out; what the context was; and what the tape didn't show. Since I wasn't there on the ground with this guy and it wasn't ME that the little goblin was shooting at, I'm supporting the victim (the Pharmacist).
Defender968
06-22-2009, 16:57
The attorney may be able to show that the shooter wasn't thinking clearly, but going behind the counter, getting another firearm, and repeatedly shooting a proned-out GSW is murder. Maybe he can dodge first degree, but that is murder. I want anyone, bad guy, cop, citizen to think twice about taking a life. Hopefully, the defense will be able to show that the asshole was already dead from the headshot, and Mr. Pharmacist was just wasting ammo. Then you might get a straight not-guilty verdict. Otherwise, pack you toothbrush and momma now owns the pharmacy.
As to his medical records, I find it curious that the defense would fight it. Mental state is gonna be big at trial, and if you think your medical records can't be subpoenaed, military or not, think again.
Respectfully Remington you have the ability to Monday morning quarter back this guy just as well as you can any marine, soldier, or police officer down range or on the street, you have that ability because many men have gone out and put their lives on the line to defended your way of life. You want people to think twice before taking a life, that’s a great theory when you’re sitting at home on the couch, but when there are deadly weapons involved a split second may be all that stands between the lives of the innocent and death, and it’s not always that simple even for the professionals. This guy wasn’t a LEO or a soldier, just a guy trying to protect himself. Many LEO’s and Soldiers have had to and will continue to have to make split second life and death decisions. Unless you were there you don't know what happened so you can't say "that is murder". Further even if you've been behind the sights in a two way shooting range I would suggest you reserve judgment until all facts are in, and unless you're on the jury you will likely never have them all.
Now as I said we have no way of knowing what movements that perp made, he could have reached into his pants waist band after the pharmacist went for the second gun. The video doesn't show what the perp is doing, the media simply were reporting that he was "unconscious." Let me ask you this have you ever watched a man with a head wound die? I have many times unfortunately and often they move around, often even after a fatal head wound they gasp for air and flail a bit, I can't tell you the medical reason why but I've seen it up close in person. I know this from personal experience on the job, but this pharmacist would have no way of knowing those kinds of things, he may very well have thought the guy was dead initially when he walked past, then seen the guy start moving, thought he was a threat and unloaded until the guy stopped moving. I can think of several other plausible scenarios where this wasn't a bad shoot, and in the end the only one who really knows is the guy who squeezed the trigger. Realize that it all happened in a matter of less than a minute and this regular Joe had to go from every day pharmacist to gunfighter and maybe with no training at all. The jury will try to discern the truth and they may find him guilty, but this kind of thing is far from a slam dunk.
Also realize the media is already putting spin on this, and who knows what is going on with the prosecutor, I've seen cases get pushed that shouldn't have been, because of other details outside of what happened. In this instance the perps/"victims" age and race could easily be a factor. If his family made enough noise about him being a “kid” and threw the race card you can bet there are lawyers that would pursue a week case just to pass the buck and not get labeled a racist.
Lastly, my thought is this, that kid came in with his buddy, a gun, a mask, and a plan to do harm no matter how you slice it, he knew the risk, he rolled the dice, and he lost. I don’t feel sorry for him, I feel sorry for the pharmacist who had to make the call, because regardless of the outcome of the court case he’ll have to live with that decision for the rest of his life. Me personally, I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Everybody spins - if you don't belive that - go back and read the last 20 posts on this shooting. Spinning way to the right - obvioulsy.
Why - because Einstein or Yogi Berra said it (its all relitive).
Lets look obectively here. This is your kid - your stupid kid that should know better. You have warned him to stay away from those guys - they're just trouble.
Your kid is not black - he is not brown, he is white. He goes into that same pharmacy with his three idiot friends - same results (probably not), but lets assume they are the same.
Your kid has a surviable headwound - going to get well one day, one day while he is serving time in prison for armed robery. But someday he'll come home. Is it ok for the Phrmacist to shoot him 5 more times (remember he's your kid).
Ok - one more thing - I am not an Al Gore loving Card Carrying member of the ACLU, but...
...if he's my kid - that pharmacist is dead.
Defender968
06-22-2009, 20:07
Everybody spins - if you don't belive that - go back and read the last 20 posts on this shooting. Spinning way to the right - obvioulsy.
Respectfully Mitch IMO spin is making it seem one way on purpose, I am not making judgments on right or wrong, that is for a jury to decide. What I said is that I can come up with of plenty of plausible reasons to shoot the perp even after he is lying on the ground, because I know a proned out suspect does not necessarily mean the suspect is no longer a threat.
Lets look obectively here. This is your kid - your stupid kid that should know better. You have warned him to stay away from those guys - they're just trouble.
Again respectfully I would argue this isn't about the kid, it's about what the pharmacist thought at the time, and he is the only one who knows what was going through his mind at the time. It is possible that he is a cold blooded killer, I'm not ruling it out, but again that's not up for me to decide that is up to the jury. I know I have told my wife if there is an intruder in the house and she fires a shot, to keep firing until the perp isn't moving, and I sleep just fine with that, because at the end of the day if it's between my wife or myself and some punk who came into my house or my store wearing a mask sporting a gun toting friend, he and his friend have made their choice and I've already made mine, I'm going to live to be judged, they may not, it's entirely up to them.
Your kid is not black - he is not brown, he is white. He goes into that same pharmacy with his three idiot friends - same results (probably not), but lets assume they are the same.
I don't really care what color he is, again what I said is people can and will play the race card, if he was white they'd just play the "oh my Johnny was a good BOY he was only 16 years old he never hurt a fly" card, even though there is a video of Johnny with a mask on backed by a guy with a gun.
Your kid has a surviable headwond - going to get well one day, one day while he is serving time in prison for armed robery. But someday he'll come home. Is it ok for the Phrmacist to shoot him 5 more times (remember he's your kid).
Mitch I would like to say that if the Pharmacist felt threatened I'd have to be ok with it, but I don't have kids so it's a stretch for me, but let me relate something from my past that I feel might have a bearing here. I had a dog when I was a kid, my first one in fact, got him in middle school, he was great to me we were the best of pals, but something snapped in him when I was in high school (he was Aussy Sheppard Lab mix) and he tried to attack my sister, he got a hell of a beating from me for that, and I hoped that was the end of it, then he succeeded in attacking my mother a couple of months later when I wasn’t home, bit her hand up pretty good, she needed quite a few stitches to sow her up. Well I took him to the vet myself and put him down, I did it myself because I felt responsible as I had raised him, I felt horrible about having to do it, I loved that dog, I sat in the room as the vet injected him, but I did it anyway because it needed to be done.
Is it the same with a human, no of course not, but if I raised a human predator, I hope I'd have the wisdom to see it from the other guys shoes if this same type of thing happened, and if I believed the other guy was in fear for his life and again I think that is entirely possible here, I'd like to think I could accept that. Remember the perps mom or dad always thinks Johnny is a good boy just in with the wrong crowd, but his victim, his victim doesn't know that, he only knows what he sees at the time, and what he sees IMO is Johnny as a predator there to take his life.
Just my .02
Well its certainly not first degree murder that’s just rubbish.
Hindsight is 20/20 though; from here its easy to say ‘maybe the last five shots were a bit much’.
Who really knows what he was thinking at that time.
This sort of stuff does seem to happen a lot though, especially when in uniform and in the past, most seem to come down on the side of defender.
What it comes down to is, yes the guy probably should not have shot the guy an extra five times. But that kid chose to be there, no one apparently forced him, it was HIS decision.
All the other guy did was react to the life threatening aggression displayed against him. As such it should be judged that whatever decision he made, he did so because he was forced into a situation he had not chosen, and his reaction is allowed to be wrong.
In the end he started it, the other guy finished it and he had no business being put in that position where he should have to make decisions like that in civilian life. Within reason (you can go too far) I think you should be allowed to do what you like.
Respectfully Mitch IMO ...
I had a dog .....when I was in high school (he was Aussy Sheppard Lab mix) and he tried to attack my sister, he got a hell of a beating from me for that...
Just my .02
Love the point and counter point - much better than having us all sitting here in the choir and singing the same hymn. :)
That being said - counter point:
Not having a kid, but having a dog certainly qualifies for the sake of argument.
So - giving Fido a hell of a beating was justified - but - after beating him (please no dog loving comments here), but if you had come back two minutes after the beating, once he was down and out and going nowhere, if you had come back then, put on your Jump Boots and proceeded to kick the hell out of him until he was near dead. You would have been arrested - rightfully so.
You're point about race not being relevant here is correct - it shouldn't be, but actually, it probably was, and definitely will be.
The issue here is actually just one of common sense – unless this man pleads insanity – any rational person would know better, especially anyone trained and experienced in areas that include use of weapons and conduct permitted under the UCMJ – your average soldier would know what was right and what was wrong – he would also know what he could expect to get away with, if he was so inclined.
He should be rightfully be charged with – probably - voluntary manslaughter – nothing worse – he should be given the benefit of doubt that he was acting on a sudden impulse, brought on by the heat of the moment, notwithstanding that he went back and coolly retrieved a different gun and shot five more rounds out of it (that is a stretch – to not consider murder).
Will he get convicted – I doubt it. Should he get convicted – I think so. Should he go to jail – if it were my kid – absolutely? But me, the “quite observer” – probation, would be ok.
(Especially given the Leftist controlled local papers in Oklahoma!)
FWIW, according to a survey, results available here (http://infochimps.org/static/gallery/politics/endorsements_map/endorsements_map.html), The Norman Transcript (circulation 12,921) and the Muskogee Daily Phoenix (14,816) endorsed the Democratic candidates in the last two presidential elections.
Conversely, The Oklahoman (201,771), Tulsa World (112,968), Enid News and Eagle (17,323), Examiner Enterprise (18,400) all supported Senator McCain in last fall's election. Moreover, the larger of the two papers (in terms of circulation) have supported the GOP candidate for each of the last five presidential elections.
HTH.
Defender968
06-23-2009, 05:49
So - giving Fido a hell of a beating was justified - but - after beating him (please no dog loving comments here), but if you had come back two minutes after the beating, once he was down and out and going nowhere, if you had come back then, put on your Jump Boots and proceeded to kick the hell out of him until he was near dead. You would have been arrested - rightfully so.
Mitch the problem here is that in that case I was acting rationally when I disciplined my dog for his behavior, I was upset, but not in fear of my life. I think you would agree with me that when you look down the barrel of a gun for the first time or when the first round comes in your direction, especially if it's not expected your adrenaline goes through the roof, and that's even for someone who is trained to run towards the gunfire. I don't think anyone would argue that this guy went into survival mode as soon as he saw the first thug with a gun.
Now with that being said you and I probably would have acted differently, at the point the second guy was out of the store I would have been sweeping the store back peddling while moving my eyes methodically between the down perp and the door always trying to keep the other in my peripheral when focused on the primary. Now if the down perp moved his hands in any way in which I felt threatened, i.e. towards any pocket or his waist line I'd have put another couple of rounds in him, but I've received allot of training in this area both in my civilian LE career and my military career, again this guy was just some average Joe, he's probably not received that kind of training, nor does he probably have that mindset.
You're point about race not being relevant here is correct - it shouldn't be, but actually, it probably was, and definitely will be.
Are you saying it's an issue for the pharmacist or for the DA? Because I may agree with the DA because I bet the family made it so, but for the pharmacist, unless we have more info I don't think that leap can be made.
The issue here is actually just one of common sense – unless this man pleads insanity – any rational person would know better, especially anyone trained and experienced in areas that include use of weapons and conduct permitted under the UCMJ – your average soldier would know what was right and what was wrong – he would also know what he could expect to get away with, if he was so inclined..
I would not argue common sense would say not to shoot a perp who is down and not a threat for a trained individual which this guy was not. You and I would be qualified to make that determination, but this guy is an average Joe, and we can't see what's going on with the perp when the pharmacist puts the last 5 rounds in him like I said before. The pharmacist may have just decided to end the guys life, but let’s keep in mind the guy is a pharmacist, someone who generally helps people for a living. Think about it this way, if you had never seen a guy with a head wound, your blood pressure is through the roof because you just shot a perp and chased another who was armed with a gun out of your store. You realize your primary gun is empty jammed or otherwise down when you get to the front door, so you with your tunnel vision head directly back to get another weapon because you're thinking the second bad guy may come back, once you have another weapon you walk back over to the guy you just shot in the head (who you probably think is already dead) and he moves, in that case don't you think maybe it would be reasonable for the average Joe with no training to be in fear? I do, if this were simply an execution why not just put one more round in-between the perps eyes, that guarantees he isn't getting up, to me five rounds in the torso sounds more like a oh shit he's moving, quick point and pull until the gun goes click. When you talk to trained LEO's who get into their first gun fight, they often cannot tell you how many rounds they fired, and they have been trained to count and to fire discriminating shots. So the fact that this guy fired his second gun empty would indicate to me that he wasn’t just trying to kill the guy, but instead was in fear for his life. If it were just a cold blooded calculated move again I’d put one in the center of the perps skull and then focus my attention back on the door as I’d still have at least 4 more rounds to defend myself with.
Again just my .02
MOO here:
The kid got what he deserved - first round
The pharmacist screwed up by wilfully coming back, getting another gun and then murdering the kid
I don't understand how the DA can charge the other punks for the kid's murder vice attempted armed robbery since they didn't shoot the kid
If it was my kid - I'd say he got what he deserved for being stupid and doing something against my personal family values
The pharmacist should be tried for murder
Such is life.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
FWIW, according to a survey, results available here (http://infochimps.org/static/gallery/politics/endorsements_map/endorsements_map.html), The Norman Transcript (circulation 12,921) and the Muskogee Daily Phoenix (14,816) endorsed the Democratic candidates in the last two presidential elections.
Conversely, The Oklahoman (201,771), Tulsa World (112,968), Enid News and Eagle (17,323), Examiner Enterprise (18,400) all supported Senator McCain in last fall's election. Moreover, the larger of the two papers (in terms of circulation) have supported the GOP candidate for each of the last five presidential elections.
HTH.
PM sent.
Holly
The Reaper
06-23-2009, 07:27
MOO here:
I don't understand how the DA can charge the other punks for the kid's murder vice attempted armed robbery since they didn't shoot the kid
Such is life.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Richard:
Not a lawyer, but IIRC, most states have "accessory" type laws that allow people committing a felony to be charged with murder if anyone involved in the crime kills anyone else.
In NC, for example, if four guys rob a bank run over and kill a pedestrian while fleeing the scene of the crime, they can all be charged with murder.
It would appear that in this case, the authorities have chosen to charge the second perp under that sort of statute.
IMHO, they initially look to pile on every charge possible, then use the lesser charges to plea bargain, or in case something goes wrong with the prosecution of the primary charge.
I have to say that I agree, the perp got what he deserved with the first round. Too bad the pharmacist wasn't fast enough to kill them both with his first two rounds. No one made them come into his store and threaten him with lethal force, and he was justified in defending himself.
I also believe that the pharmacist made a mistake in retrieving another weapon and firing the last five rounds into the downed robber, UNLESS the perp continued to present a threat, which is unclear at this point. At the same time, no one forced the criminals to rob the pharmacy, and I would have a hard time convicting, were I to sit on his jury. Parents will always claim that their kids were good and were not responsible for their actions. The pharmacist's parents are probably saying the same thing about him, if they are still living.
I agree that race will be made a part of this case (if the minority parties get their way), despite the likelihood that the pharmacist would have done the same had two white tweakers come in and attempted to rob him. Maybe he should countersue the felons for robbing him because he is white. Since the parents' (liberal use of that word) felonious offspring is potentially a source of revenue now via the lawsuit lottery, and is a chance to exact revenge on the pharmacist who killed their little punk, they are going to declare their budding young felon a saint, and go after the pharmacist to the best of their abilities.
I do not think his military records are relevant, unless they can show that he has a history of excessive use of force. OTOH, he may be able to try and use them for a PTSD claim.
Being tried and being convicted are two different things. Having said that, the pharmacist is likely going to be bankrupted by the defensive costs of the criminal and civil trials, be deprived of his liberty for some period, and maybe his right to own firearms. That is why I tell people that there are few winners in a lethal force engagement. Use lethal force when warranted and stop once the threat is neutralized. Then lawyer up and pray for the best.
Just my .02, YMMV.
TR
The kid got what he deserved - first round YES HE DID
The pharmacist screwed up by willfully coming back, getting another gun and then murdering the kid YES HE DID
I don't understand how the DA can charge the other punks for the kid's murder vice attempted armed robbery since they didn't shoot the kid TR IS Spot on That he is an accessory in most states
If it was my kid - I'd say he got what he deserved for being stupid and doing something against my personal family values MY FEELINGS EXACTLY But I am a tough Love Father
The pharmacist should be tried for murder
Sorry for the Pharmacist but I feel he may do time as he screwed up by getting the other gun and unloading it on Video........ SA...... should have remembered there was a tape or at least done some acting to show fear........ Race is always going to be played unfortunatly......
But the wild card is still the Jury.... He could go to trial and get off. Hope he has a GOOD Lawyer........
Dozer523
06-23-2009, 12:28
I'm with Mitch.
OKLAHOMA CITY — Confronted 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.
Looks like murder, Sounds like murder. That's why we have trials by jury to see if it really is.
Just seems like a witch hunt now..:munchin
And since I have been reading the OKC and Tulsa newspapers everyday since God was a boy...I can tell that this is now going to be spun somehow to favor gun-control... :rolleyes:
In the future, this will not be about the simple fact of thugs attempting to take possesion of that which was not theirs. This entire episode will be about how racism played a part in this poor kids demise, and how the pharmacist should pay. Disgusting, IMVHO.
Holly
Remington Raidr
06-23-2009, 15:42
as Lee Marvin as Maj. Reisman remarked "you only made one mistake . . ."
as Lee Marvin as Maj. Reisman remarked "you only made one mistake . . ."
(Am not the smartest tool in the shed...RR..so can I ask, ???):o
Holly
The Reaper
06-23-2009, 17:48
(Am not the smartest tool in the shed...RR..so can I ask, ???):o
Holly
Google not available?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061578/
TR
(Am not the smartest tool in the shed...RR..so can I ask, ???):o
Holly
"you forgot about the 'eye in the sky,' 'Big Brother,' 'the all seeing, all knowing, Carnac,' 'the Red Light Cam,' 'Jimmy Stewart and his binoculars,"
... I probably would have acted differently, at the point the second guy was out of the store I would have been sweeping the store back peddling while moving my eyes methodically between the down perp and the door always trying to keep the other in my peripheral when focused on the primary. Now if the down perp moved his hands in any way in which I felt threatened, i.e. towards any pocket or his waist line...
That pharmacist didn't do much back peddeling!
Guys
I watched the video about a dozen times now – and several things are quite obvious - mainly, after shooting the kid - he no longer felt threatend by him.
Here is what you see on the vedio:
The Pharmacist and two assistants are standing behind the counter when the first boy comes in brandishing a gun.
Immediately, the two ladies take off for the back room and are never seen again.
Boy number two comes in, can’t tell if he has a gun or not. Because he is too busy messing with his headgear – trying to pull down his mask I suppose.
The pharmacist apparently (you can’t see it) retrieves his gun and then steps two his right behind some displays –
This causes Gun Boy to move left and right, trying to locate the Pharmacist – all the while, boy number 2 dances behind number one – he still tugs on his mask and is for the most part a nonparticipant.
Eventually someone shoots – probably the pharmacist – quickly Gun boy gets off a loose round and immediately runs out the door. Boy number two finally has his mask under control and, just long enough to take one in the head. He goes down.
Pharmacist moves to his right and around outer side of counter, gun in hand and heads to the door. Just as he approaches the door – he glances at the boy on the floor, and then goes outside.
Gun boy hit the door running to his right, down the side walk - while getaway driver is standing in the street behind open trunk of his Blue Buick.
Pharmacist – after apparently deciding that floor boy is not going anywhere, and is not going to be bothering the two girls in the back. Opens the door and chases after gun boy; probably firing all his rounds at him.
A few seconds later, pharmacist comes back – does not hesitate or stop to take a peek inside, instead, he just throws the door open to the pharmacy and walks in with an empty gun. He was not concerned about the boy on the floor.
He walks in; reaching in his right pocket for a key – probably to a gun box – takes another short glance at the boy on the floor as he passes right next to him. Does not stop, does not reach down to him, does not do anything – but walk on past him – not concerned about turning his back to him as he walks past (he knew the boy was down).
He walks to the end of the counter and is out of sight for about 10 full seconds. That is a long time. Long enough to open the box, get the gun, check that it is loaded, then turn and walk back toward the boy.
Three seconds later, he walks up to the boy and shoots 5 rounds into him all in less than 2 seconds.
He turns - walks back the end of the counter, puts away his gun. Then walks back up to the front of the counter and calls 911.
Guys – that looked like a murder to me. – No fear – very calculated. Very stupid too, but three times, he had a chance to look at the boy to see if he posed a threat. Twice, he turned his back on him – (no threat). The last time – after obtaining another gun. He shot him 5 times.
That is a murder.
Utah Bob
06-24-2009, 06:36
I think he's toast.
Defender968
06-24-2009, 07:45
That pharmacist didn't do much back peddeling!
Guys
I watched the video about a dozen times now – and several things are quite obvious - mainly, after shooting the kid - he no longer felt threatend by him.
Here is what you see on the vedio:
The Pharmacist and two assistants are standing behind the counter when the first boy comes in brandishing a gun.
Immediately, the two ladies take off for the back room and are never seen again.
Boy number two comes in, can’t tell if he has a gun or not. Because he is too busy messing with his headgear – trying to pull down his mask I suppose.
The pharmacist apparently (you can’t see it) retrieves his gun and then steps two his right behind some displays –
This causes Gun Boy to move left and right, trying to locate the Pharmacist – all the while, boy number 2 dances behind number one – he still tugs on his mask and is for the most part a nonparticipant.
Eventually someone shoots – probably the pharmacist – quickly Gun boy gets off a loose round and immediately runs out the door. Boy number two finally has his mask under control and, just long enough to take one in the head. He goes down.
Pharmacist moves to his right and around outer side of counter, gun in hand and heads to the door. Just as he approaches the door – he glances at the boy on the floor, and then goes outside.
Gun boy hit the door running to his right, down the side walk - while getaway driver is standing in the street behind open trunk of his Blue Buick.
Pharmacist – after apparently deciding that floor boy is not going anywhere, and is not going to be bothering the two girls in the back. Opens the door and chases after gun boy; probably firing all his rounds at him.
A few seconds later, pharmacist comes back – does not hesitate or stop to take a peek inside, instead, he just throws the door open to the pharmacy and walks in with an empty gun. He was not concerned about the boy on the floor.
He walks in; reaching in his right pocket for a key – probably to a gun box – takes another short glance at the boy on the floor as he passes right next to him. Does not stop, does not reach down to him, does not do anything – but walk on past him – not concerned about turning his back to him as he walks past (he knew the boy was down).
He walks to the end of the counter and is out of sight for about 10 full seconds. That is a long time. Long enough to open the box, get the gun, check that it is loaded, then turn and walk back toward the boy.
Three seconds later, he walks up to the boy and shoots 5 rounds into him all in less than 2 seconds.
He turns - walks back the end of the counter, puts away his gun. Then walks back up to the front of the counter and calls 911.
Guys – that looked like a murder to me. – No fear – very calculated. Very stupid too, but three times, he had a chance to look at the boy to see if he posed a threat. Twice, he turned his back on him – (no threat). The last time – after obtaining another gun. He shot him 5 times.
That is a murder.
Can you post the link to the full video, all I could find was it embedded in the news as a clip, I'd be interested to see it.
As for his behavior above, a good lawyer will simply argue that when the pharmacist came back in the door with his empty gun he thought the perp was dead or incapacitated, when he walked back in and kept looking at the perp he was still concerned for his safety and was also concerned about the other guy, so he retrieved the second gun. As he walked back over to the perp for whatever reason, were I the lawyer I would argue my client was going to administer aid, or at least check to see if he was still alive, at which time the perp made a furtive movement, and his client was in fear for his life and fired. As for the observed calm behavior, he’ll simply argue he was in shock from the engagements.
As for charging the other teens with the murder I’m all for it, they caused the situation, they should pay the price, if I were on their jury they’d likely be locked up indefinitely, they certainly bear as much of the responsibility for the outcome as the pharmacist IMO.
But in the end as TR said there is no winner here only losers.
uboat509
06-24-2009, 08:21
Can you post the link to the full video, all I could find was it embedded in the news as a clip, I'd be interested to see it.
As for his behavior above, a good lawyer will simply argue that when the pharmacist came back in the door with his empty gun he thought the perp was dead or incapacitated, when he walked back in and kept looking at the perp he was still concerned for his safety and was also concerned about the other guy, so he retrieved the second gun. As he walked back over to the perp for whatever reason, were I the lawyer I would argue my client was going to administer aid, or at least check to see if he was still alive, at which time the perp made a furtive movement, and his client was in fear for his life and fired. As for the observed calm behavior, he’ll simply argue he was in shock from the engagements.
As for charging the other teens with the murder I’m all for it, they caused the situation, they should pay the price, if I were on their jury they’d likely be locked up indefinitely, they certainly bear as much of the responsibility for the outcome as the pharmacist IMO.
But in the end as TR said there is no winner here only losers.
That seems like a HUGE stretch Defender. I suspect two things that have not come out yet will be critical to this case. 1) I still have not heard whether on not the kid had a gun. If the kid did not have a gun it will certainly undermine the pharmacist's self defense case. 2) An autopsy should be able to determine just how incapacitated the kid was likely to be. If it turns out that the head wound was catastrophic then it is going to be VERY hard to establish that the pharmacist acted in fear of his life, especially given the time elapsed.
SFC W
Both sides will be throughing everything up against the wall - see what sticks.
The good thing for the pharmacist is the perp is out of sight on the floor.
The fight, I'll bet, will revolve around "Did the pharmacist think the perp was dead during the first part" & "Could the perp have been moving at the time he was shot the second time?"
Unarmed? Not an issue. The pharmacist didn't pat him down. Cops look at plenty of "unarmed" folks, pat them down and find a weapon.
It will depend on a jury and reasonable doubt. I think that case can be made.
Look for the defense to be rounding up all the X-rays of people walking into the emergency room with spikes, screw drivers, etc stuck in their heads.
Defender968
06-24-2009, 09:10
Both sides will be throughing everything up against the wall - see what sticks.
The good thing for the pharmacist is the perp is out of sight on the floor.
The fight, I'll bet, will revolve around "Did the pharmacist think the perp was dead during the first part" & "Could the perp have been moving at the time he was shot the second time?"
Unarmed? Not an issue. The pharmacist didn't pat him down. Cops look at plenty of "unarmed" folks, pat them down and find a weapon.
It will depend on a jury and reasonable doubt. I think that case can be made.
Look for the defense to be rounding up all the X-rays of people walking into the emergency room with spikes, screw drivers, etc stuck in their heads.
Absolutely couldn't agree more.
Can you post the link to the full video, all I could find was it embedded in the news as a clip, I'd be interested to see it.
.
This one is complete and unedited – but you have to watch about 3 minutes comment – then you have to go down and “select” the actual video.
http://newsok.com/druggist-jerome-ersland-released-after-supporter-arranges-bail/article/3373432
This one has some scenes of the back room area (I had not seen this originally), but it is edited and not continuous like the first one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHshsgpsxFg&feature=related
Both of these are embedded with some news – but you get the point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI2JGi-t91E&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBBlEhmWNQ&feature=related
13 seconds is a long time - and what is he reaching for in his pocket - a drawer key? A drawer that held his second gun? Inthis first sceane - he is practically standing right on the kid - but he is not looking down at him, he is reaching into his pocket? in the next 13 seconds he continues walking to his second gun, spends some time retrieving it - and then takes a quick and deliberate walk right back to this spot, bends down and empty's the guy,
Count it off:
12424
One-Thousand 1
One-Thousand 2
One-Thousand 3
One-Thousand 4
One-Thousand 5
One-Thousand 6
One-Thousand 7
One-Thousand 8
One-Thousand 9
One-Thousand 10
One-Thousand 11
One-Thousand 12
One-Thousand 13
12425
BangBangBangBangBang
He's dead now!
Thousand, 1 Thousand, 1 Thousand, 1 Thousand, 1 Thousand
Oklahoma City druggist Jerome Ersland's record in doubt
http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-druggist-jerome-erslands-record-in-doubt/article/3388041
"There’s no way to prove it,” Ersland said. "And I found out if you can’t prove it, you can’t say it. ... I know now that I have to be able to prove everything on paper. ... I can tell you one thing, though. That is: I do have dreams, bad nightmares, about that, every night. ... That’s every night. They’re just horrible dreams, about six specific soldiers being dead ... lying beside one another and they haven’t been body bagged yet and I knew all of them. And then I always dream about body parts of Iraqis, of people.
"I can’t ever get rid of that, and so I’m treated with a sleeping medication and anti-depressants to try to get me past that.”
Maybe Gardner can give him some pointers on how to "say without saying".
Remington Raidr
07-26-2009, 16:53
Respectfully Remington you have the ability to Monday morning quarter back this guy just as well as you can any marine, soldier, or police officer down range or on the street, you have that ability because many men have gone out and put their lives on the line to defended your way of life. You want people to think twice before taking a life, that’s a great theory when you’re sitting at home on the couch, but when there are deadly weapons involved a split second may be all that stands between the lives of the innocent and death, and it’s not always that simple even for the professionals. This guy wasn’t a LEO or a soldier, just a guy trying to protect himself. Many LEO’s and Soldiers have had to and will continue to have to make split second life and death decisions. Unless you were there you don't know what happened so you can't say "that is murder". Further even if you've been behind the sights in a two way shooting range I would suggest you reserve judgment until all facts are in, and unless you're on the jury you will likely never have them all.
Wow. Missed this when it was posted. I find this anything but respectful. You call into question everyone one you listed by equating the need for split-second judgment of soldiers (Marine, btw) and LEO's with the deliberate calculated shooting of someone shot, laying on the floor. I will be the first to agree that the GSW made have made some "furtive movement", but, as subsequent posters have broken it down, it sure looks like a deliberate emptying of a weapon into the person on the floor. I was not reading from a report or some news story, we all watched the videos. If the kid wasn't dead, that was murder. Revlon doesn't make enough lipstick to pretty it up. And finally, in response to your pendantic tone, if you think juries know ALL THE FACTS when they deliberate, you need to get a little more familiar with the U.S. legal system.:rolleyes:
Story is here (http://newsok.com/druggist-jerome-erslands-story-varies/article/3389847).
Supporting documents are here (http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/y31pharmletter0001.pdf) and there (http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/y31erslandinterview.doc).
Druggist Jerome Ersland's story varies
Man faces first-degree murder charge in May shooting at drugstore
BY NOLAN CLAY
Published: August 2, 2009
Modified: August 3, 2009 at 6:07 pm
A pharmacist’s explanation of what happened May 19, when he fatally shot a masked robber, keeps changing.
Jerome Jay Ersland has given three versions so far, The Oklahoman found in a review of his statements to news reporters and to law enforcement. The latest came in a letter last month to the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation.
"I was under so much stress,” he told The Oklahoman in a July interview. "It had just been so rough ... that I couldn’t remember exactly what had happened until later. And, then, it gradually comes back to you over the days and weeks.”
The shooting sparked a national debate in May when Ersland was charged with first-degree murder. Prosecutors allege he went too far, shooting the unarmed robber five more times after knocking the robber unconscious with a shot to the head.
Ersland, 57, of Chickasha denies wrongdoing. He has been described as a hero by some for his actions at the Reliable Discount Pharmacy in south Oklahoma City. Killed was Antwun "Speedy” Parker, 16, of Oklahoma City.
Ersland insists the injured robber was awake and still had a gun after being hit in the head. He said he shot Parker again to protect himself and two female employees. He has said he thought Parker had already shot him in the wrist.
But he has given different accounts of what Parker did after being shot in the head and of when he shot Parker the second time.
First account
A police report shows he told a detective May 19 that he shot Parker again before chasing a second robber out of the store. "Ersland said he ran by the one he shot ... and that he ... was ‘still up there and wanting to hit me,’” according to the police detective’s report on the interview. "Ersland ... said, ‘I unloaded on him’ and he ... went down. He then chased the other subject ... out of the store.”
"He just kept staying up,” he is quoted as telling the police detective about why he shot Parker again. The detective said the pharmacist referred to Parker as "the guy I nailed.”
Second account
Ersland’s account changed after prosecutors publicly released a security surveillance video that shows the pharmacist shot Parker again after chasing away the other robber.
Ersland said in a nationally televised interview on Fox News that he shot "the guy laying down” again after coming back in the store. "I went up to him and he seemed to be just dazed,” Ersland told Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly on June 1. "And he started talking to me and he started turning to the right. ... I’m crippled. And I knew ... when he got up, if he was just dazed, that he could kill me. ... I thought I was going to get killed in the next few seconds. ... I still think he had a gun.”
Latest account
In the July 8 letter to the OSBI, Ersland wrote that he shot Parker again after Parker cursed him and tried to get up by grabbing a bookcase. He wrote that he had just run back into the pharmacy after trading shots with the other robber outside. He wrote that a guy in a green car said, "He’s getting up!”
"As the robber in the corner began to climb up the bookcase with his right hand, he yelled, ‘---- you,’ and slipped on the floor, so I saw my chance to end the threat and went for the back-up gun and shot him just as he slid down on the slippery surface,” he wrote to the OSBI. "I was experiencing a tremendous amount of adrenaline.”
Prosecutors say they have a medical opinion and crime-scene evidence that will prove Parker never regained consciousness after the head shot.
The state’s chief medical examiner has said Parker suffered a brain injury from the head shot but would have survived. The five final shots were to the chest and abdomen. The video does not show Parker after he was knocked down.
Early in the case, prosecutors and police pointed out that the video contradicts what Ersland at first said to police officers and news reporters. Most significantly, officials contend, the video and physical evidence prove that there was no shoot-out inside the store, that the pharmacist was the only one who fired. Officials also say the video shows that only one robber had a gun, that Parker was unarmed. The video shows Parker putting on and adjusting his mask when he gets shot the first time. Ersland told police both robbers were shooting at him inside the store. He said they were armed with cheap black imported revolvers.
The video also contradicts Ersland’s claim to police and to a KFOR-4 television reporter that he had a gun in each hand as he fired at the robbers. In May, Ersland told KFOR-4, "They were shooting at me from both sides so I shot at them from both sides as well. I don’t see any problem with telling the truth.”
The video shows Ersland never held the two guns at the same time.
Ersland acknowledged in the interview with The Oklahoman that some things he told police the night of the shooting were wrong, but he said it was not intentional. He said stress and adrenaline "made my memory cloudy for a while.” He said, "That night, I did give some inaccurate information but, at the time, I thought it was the truth.”
Prosecutors have identified a teenager and two men with prison records as accomplices in the robbery. The three, Jevontia Ingram, 14, Emanuel D. Mitchell, 31, and Anthony D. Morrison, 43, also are charged with first-degree murder.
Story is here (http://newsok.com/druggist-jerome-erslands-story-varies/article/3389847).
Supporting documents are here (http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/y31pharmletter0001.pdf) and there (http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/y31erslandinterview.doc).
What does NOT vary is the FACT that this little scum-bag walked into the store with the intent to take possesion of that which was not his. BY FORCE!
Guess we should all just roll on over, and accept that we will be held at fault if we defend our own property. A sad day indeed for American business owners.
Can only hope that the jurors might hear what happens to folks in other countries, who are caught stealing!:munchin
JMHO.
Holly
Guess we should all just roll on over, and accept that we will be held at fault if we defend our own property. A sad day indeed for American business owners.
Echoes--
Based upon the OP which you provided, the conclusion you're drawing is not the one offered by the district attorney's office.
District 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.
Echoes--
Based upon the OP which you provided, the conclusion you're drawing is not the one offered by the district attorney's office.
Sigaba,
Was not there during the event, so am arm-chair quarterbacking at best. However, if it was my shop, and this little scum-bag came at me with a gun, and all I had in the world, wanting to end my life, and take it...well, could only imagine that my actions would be the same...
And I guess I would not appologize for it, as my own life is very valuable! Though these punks are given the benefit of the doubt, (i.e, they were only trying to scare etc:rolleyes:...)
They had a gun, and were prepared to use it.
Holly
The Reaper
08-07-2009, 15:08
Disregarding the issues of the follow-up shooting, this should be a solid example of why, in the aftermath of any shooting, you should lawyer up before making any statements.
TR
Disregarding the issues of the follow-up shooting, this should be a solid example of why, in the aftermath of any shooting, you should not lie when making any statements. ;)
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Shooting people is inherently an inhuman thing to do – however, there are professions where shooting people, with the intent to kill them, go hand in hand with the job.
Three come to mind – Soldiers, Law Enforcement Officers, and of course, criminals. Both soldiers and Police Officers are taught to aim at center of mass – intent is obviously to kill; to hesitate for a split second or to be inaccurate could cost lives – the intent of such combat is to defend the nation or the nation’s society from those that would do it harm.
Criminals however typically shoot and kill unarmed, defenseless people for selfish reason – they kill them in order to more easily steal or rob from them, or because they want to silence them, and finally, just because they hate them.
One more thing - not disregarding any the issues in this case, criminals tend to need lawyers and they need to keep their mouths shut because – they typically lie and tell multiple versions of stories when caught.
This pharmacist became a criminal that day – he crossed the line.
GUILTY: Ersland found guilty in pharmacy shooting trial
http://www.kfor.com/news/local/kfor-guilty-ersland-found-guilty-in-pharmacy-shooting-trial-20110526,0,4928477.story
OKLAHOMA CITY -- A jury has found Jerome Ersland guilty of first-degree murder after he shot and killed Antwan Parker who was attempting to rob Ersland's southside pharmacy. They are suggesting life in prison.
Personally I would have to agree with the verdict. Yea the kid was a piece of shit but the law is the law and the kid was no longer a threat lying there unconscious. In my opinion it was indeed an execution.
If the guy had only stopped after the first shot he'd be in the clear but he took it too far.
Personally I would have to agree with the verdict. Yea the kid was a piece of shit but the law is the law and the kid was no longer a threat lying there unconscious. In my opinion it was indeed an execution.
If the guy had only stopped after the first shot he'd be in the clear but he took it too far.
As much as I would like to say that Erslund protected himself and the others in the store, I have to agree with you. There is more than enough precedent throughout the U.S. stating once the threat has been eliminated, any force used afterward is excessive, the most relevant, IMO, being Tennessee vs. Garner.
Ersland gets life; judge rejects request to suspend all of prison sentence
Source is here (http://newsok.com/ersland-gets-life-judge-rejects-request-to-suspend-all-of-prison-sentence/article/3584664). (Video as well.)A judge Monday ordered a pharmacist convicted of murder to serve all of his life prison term.
Afterward, pharmacist Jerome Jay Ersland told reporters. “It's injustice of a monumental proportion.”
Oklahoma County District Judge Ray C. Elliott rejected a defense request to give Ersland only probation.
The decision means Ersland, 59, likely will die in prison unless he wins an appeal, the law is changed or Gov. Mary Fallin grants clemency. Under current law, Ersland will have to serve 38 years before he is even eligible for parole.
A jury in May chose the life term as punishment after convicting Ersland of first-degree murder. The judge could have suspended all or part of the sentence but did not.
The pharmacist was convicted of murder for fatally shooting an unarmed robber inside the Reliable Discount Pharmacy in south Oklahoma City two years ago.
Prosecutors said the robber, Antwun “Speedy” Parker, 16, was unconscious from a shot to the head when Ersland got a second gun and shot him five more times. Prosecutors at trial called it an execution. Ersland has said he was defending himself and two co-workers. He has claimed the robber was getting back up.
A second robber, Jevontai Ingram, then 14, fled when Ersland began shooting. Ingram did have a gun.
Also Monday, another judge sentenced the two men who persuaded the two teenagers to do the holdup. Both were convicted of first-degree murder in Parker's death.
Anthony D. Morrison was sentenced to life in prison plus 30 years for his role. Emanuel D. Mitchell was sentenced to life in prison plus 45 years for his role.
District Judge Kenneth Watson refused to show any leniency to the two men. He said Morrison had sent two kids in to do the robbery “rather than step up and be a man and do it yourself.”
Mitchell Monday continued to deny involvement in the robbery, even though he was caught near a stolen getaway car a few blocks from the pharmacy. “There is no way I should be forced to live with this wrongful conviction,” he told Watson.
The verdict at Ersland's trial renewed a public debate over his actions. More than 17,000 signed petitions given to the governor's office last week. The petitions called the outcome an outrage.
Few supporters, though, showed up Monday for the sentencing. Most of the courtroom was filled with college students and news reporters.
Ersland was chained at his waist, hands and feet. He wore a back brace and black and white jail clothes. He did not make a statement at his sentencing. “I have nothing to say. Thank you,” he told the judge.
His son, Jeff Ersland, told reporters afterward, “I'm just trying to stay optimistic moving forward and hope for the best.”
The pharmacist's defense attorneys plan to appeal. Lead attorney, Irven Box, said they will ask the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals for a new trial because of limitations the judge put on testimony. He said the jurors should have been allowed to hear from a Chelsea pharmacist who was robbed and from a Nichols Hills police officer who fatally shot a burglar.
Box said the trial would have a different outcome if the jurors had heard more testimony.
Ersland gets life; judge rejects request to suspend all of prison sentence
Source is here (http://newsok.com/ersland-gets-life-judge-rejects-request-to-suspend-all-of-prison-sentence/article/3584664). (Video as well.)
Also Monday, another judge sentenced the two men who persuaded the two teenagers to do the holdup. Both were convicted of first-degree murder in Parker's death.
Anthony D. Morrison was sentenced to life in prison plus 30 years for his role. Emanuel D. Mitchell was sentenced to life in prison plus 45 years for his role.
District Judge Kenneth Watson refused to show any leniency to the two men. He said Morrison had sent two kids in to do the robbery “rather than step up and be a man and do it yourself.”
Good to see the judge slammed the instigators as well.