Oklahoma Jury Convicts Pharmacy Owner
- Thread starter gorak
- Start date
- Status
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBBlEhmWNQ&feature=fvsr
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHshsgpsxFg&feature=fvsr
It doesn't matter that the perp was a creep or a saint, a hardened criminal or a misguided youth. When you are no longer in immanent danger you can not justify continuing to shoot. You certainly can't justify getting a second weapon, walking up to the unarmed perp on the floor and then leaning over to shoot the perp repeatedly. This is murder.
Claims made right after the shooting when contrasted against the store footage and the police investigation make for pretty damning evidence and explain why the jury only deliberated 3.5 hours in a capital murder case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h0Z3kXHwqE&feature=relmfu
All the positive perceptions around the idea of self defense were encouraging, but then the facts come out and this guy did gun owners more harm than the creeps that tried to hold up the pharmacy.
Regardless of how agitated and flooded with adrenaline you are that would explain why you could fire repeatedly in the crisis of defending yourself and not know how many rounds you fired, you can't claim you were subject to a real threat when you're shown on video to not be in danger. You'll simply be guilty of murder and be convicted and probably be financially ruined and spend a considerable time in prison permanently loosing your rights as a citizen. We shoot to defend ourselves agains immanent danger and can not legally act as judge, jury and executioner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHshsgpsxFg&feature=fvsr
It doesn't matter that the perp was a creep or a saint, a hardened criminal or a misguided youth. When you are no longer in immanent danger you can not justify continuing to shoot. You certainly can't justify getting a second weapon, walking up to the unarmed perp on the floor and then leaning over to shoot the perp repeatedly. This is murder.
Claims made right after the shooting when contrasted against the store footage and the police investigation make for pretty damning evidence and explain why the jury only deliberated 3.5 hours in a capital murder case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h0Z3kXHwqE&feature=relmfu
All the positive perceptions around the idea of self defense were encouraging, but then the facts come out and this guy did gun owners more harm than the creeps that tried to hold up the pharmacy.
Regardless of how agitated and flooded with adrenaline you are that would explain why you could fire repeatedly in the crisis of defending yourself and not know how many rounds you fired, you can't claim you were subject to a real threat when you're shown on video to not be in danger. You'll simply be guilty of murder and be convicted and probably be financially ruined and spend a considerable time in prison permanently loosing your rights as a citizen. We shoot to defend ourselves agains immanent danger and can not legally act as judge, jury and executioner.
Last edited:
seriously, someone wanna speak up about why its heroic to shoot a 16 year old who is out cold on the floor five times? True self defense is about stopping the threat. If he was really that afraid of an already shot unconscious 16 year old couldn't the owner have just "held" him at gun point instead of shooting him 5 times.
Danb1215,
No one that knows all the facts can deny the guy should be convicted of murder.
No one that knows all the facts can deny the guy should be convicted of murder.
Last edited:
It was a pretty clear case of unlawful use of deadly force from the start.
First he chases the armed guy after he leaves and empties what I seem to recall is a taurus judge at him, so he likely sends wildly patterning buckshot out into the crowded street.
Okay maybe unlawful, maybe there was some perceived threat or logic to insure the armed accomplice wasn't right outside the door or returning and then once outside he felt threatened after exiting. Hard to say. Nobody was hit, so he would not likely have faced charges anyways.
(Although based on his later actions and display of judgment the firing at the fleeing suspect outside was probably unlawful and unwarranted as well.)
Then the already hit and remaining individual is unconscious on the ground in the store.
He walks by him, hardly paying him any attention, clearly feeling no threat from his direction as he returns.
The additional shots were not during a rapid unfolding of events where there could be any doubt of confusion that the threat was over.
The murderer involved retrieved another gun, returned to the downed unarmed threat that never made any move to do anything that could even be perceived as threatening, and then proceeded to shoot him multiple times.
In fact tactically he even left himself open to any returning accomplices by emptying most or all of his remaining rounds into an unconscious and downed person.
Then his version of events is entirely different from the videotaped events, and never involves retrieving the firearm.
First he chases the armed guy after he leaves and empties what I seem to recall is a taurus judge at him, so he likely sends wildly patterning buckshot out into the crowded street.
Okay maybe unlawful, maybe there was some perceived threat or logic to insure the armed accomplice wasn't right outside the door or returning and then once outside he felt threatened after exiting. Hard to say. Nobody was hit, so he would not likely have faced charges anyways.
(Although based on his later actions and display of judgment the firing at the fleeing suspect outside was probably unlawful and unwarranted as well.)
Then the already hit and remaining individual is unconscious on the ground in the store.
He walks by him, hardly paying him any attention, clearly feeling no threat from his direction as he returns.
The additional shots were not during a rapid unfolding of events where there could be any doubt of confusion that the threat was over.
The murderer involved retrieved another gun, returned to the downed unarmed threat that never made any move to do anything that could even be perceived as threatening, and then proceeded to shoot him multiple times.
In fact tactically he even left himself open to any returning accomplices by emptying most or all of his remaining rounds into an unconscious and downed person.
Then his version of events is entirely different from the videotaped events, and never involves retrieving the firearm.
A similar situation occurred in MD several years ago. A bar patron became angry when "cut off" and said he was going to get a gun and shoot the bartender. When he returned, he looked in the window. The bartender, seeing him and thinking himself in danger, fired through the window and wounded the man. Then, finding that the man was not in fact armed, he dragged the wounded man inside and shot him several more times as he lay on the floor.
The bartender claimed self defense and had he called the police after wounding the man, he would probably never have been doubted, as there were many witnesses to the threat. But dragging a wounded and unconscious man inside and then shooting and killing him as he lay on the floor was not acceptable to anyone as self defense; the bartender was sentenced to life in prison.
Jim
The bartender claimed self defense and had he called the police after wounding the man, he would probably never have been doubted, as there were many witnesses to the threat. But dragging a wounded and unconscious man inside and then shooting and killing him as he lay on the floor was not acceptable to anyone as self defense; the bartender was sentenced to life in prison.
Jim
One other thing I learned though.
There was two older adult planners and get away drivers, 33 and 45 year old males, both convicted of murder in separate trials as a result of the death.
The armed accomplice then 14 with the gun that escaped also pled guilty to murder, he may be out on the street by his 19th birthday.
So 4 people including the pharmacist were convicted of murder as a result of this shooting.
There was two older adult planners and get away drivers, 33 and 45 year old males, both convicted of murder in separate trials as a result of the death.
The armed accomplice then 14 with the gun that escaped also pled guilty to murder, he may be out on the street by his 19th birthday.
So 4 people including the pharmacist were convicted of murder as a result of this shooting.
Last edited:
Owen Sparks
member
- Joined
- May 27, 2007
- Messages
- 4,523
Anyone who has ever hunted dangerous game knows that it is the dead ones that get up and kill you.
martialartsblackbelt
Member
this is a classic case of **** after a shooting. tell the responding police youll comply with the investigation of the guy that tryed to kill you after youve been to the hospital and have your attorney present.
BeerSleeper
Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2010
- Messages
- 688
Owen Sparks said:
Exactly. A criminal with a gun doesn't automatically cease to be a threat when he becomes a criminal with a gunshot wound.
Unfortunately, that's not the way the law is written. According to the law, the only thing bogus here is the 1st degree. The pharmacist didn't plan to be robbed, there's no premeditation here.
alsaqr
Member
Two grown men talked those kids into robbing the pharmacy. Both those men have been tried, convicted and sentenced to life in prison: One of the perps attacked the prosecutor in the courthouse.
http://newsok.com/cousins-found-gui...mit-robbery-in-pharmacy-trial/article/3564082
http://newsok.com/cousins-found-gui...mit-robbery-in-pharmacy-trial/article/3564082
Caliper_Mi
Member
Problem is, the criminal with the gun fled out the door. Never saw a gun on the guy in the light colored shirt.
Agree that 1st degree is wrong here. Doesn't change that the pharmacist was also wrong. Once he re-entered the store the right thing to do is call 911 and wait for Police and Paramedics while keeping a gun aimed at the unconscious criminal (from a safe distance of course)
kentucky bucky
Member
He failed at camera control not gun control. He did society a favor in my book. My Dad was a pharmacist and we lived in fear of punks just like these, so I think he should have gotten a medal. Sorry if this offends.
DenaliPark
member
I could care less as to the gangster's age, while he was murdered, he was only bested at his own game. Tragedy is the poor pharmacist, who also fell to the gangster's same game.
There are many, many sixteen year olds like the one eliminated by the pharmacist that the world would be far better off without, very many!
If you ask me, I think this is miscarriage of justice. I even live in Illinois, one of the most gun-unfriendly states in the US and one of my neighboring towns had something similar to this happen, and the guy did not even get charged! Read about that here http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-01-09/news/0901080598_1_starks-case-2nd-slaying-clerk
It seems like it all comes down to the Jury. I hope this is appealed.
It seems like it all comes down to the Jury. I hope this is appealed.
BeerSleeper
Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2010
- Messages
- 688
I must say, though, I do strongly approve of all the accomplices getting charged and convicted with murder1. At least that much of this went right. It would be nice to see more of that. What a great way to put away more criminals who are responsible for these sorts of violent crimes.
There is very little similarity between these two cases.
In the Oklahoma City case, the shooter, who had left the scene, returned, walked past the victim, who had been shot in the head, without even looking at him. obtained a second firearm, and shot the victim five times at point blank range.
He obviously had no basis at all for claiming self defense; the incident was recorded on video cameras inside and out; and the jury decided unanimously that the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the shooter unlawfully caused the death of the victim with the deliberate intent to do so. That constitutes first degree murder in Oklahoma.
In the Waukegan case, the Grand Jury decided that there was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that, in shooting a person riding on a bicycle after having held up a store with a weapon, the shooter did not have reason to believe that is was necessary for him to fire in self defense. The incident was not recorded by video cameras.
Had video evidence shown clearly that the felon had been escaping, it is likely that Grand Jury would have decided differently.
One should never confuse the weapons laws in a state with the laws involving the use of force. There are some states in which the weapons laws are very restrictive indeed in which the use of force may be lawfully permitted under circumstances in which the use of force would be unlawful in some "gun friendly" states.
I have no way of knowing whether the case may be appealed, but if it is, and if the appellate court does not affirm the trial court's verdict, the most likely result would be another trial. I seriously doubt that the verdict would be any different.
Carl N. Brown
Member
Nolan Clay, "Druggist in OKC is convicted of murder", Tulsa World, 27 May 2011. http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20110527_222_A15_CUTLIN912500
Full story at: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacist-found-guilty-of-murder/article/3571542
There are two surveillance videos from Reliable Discount Pharmacy (inside and outside) that together do not show a clean shoot. One robber enters with gun, followed closely by accomplice apparently unarmed wearing a backpack. Pharmacist shoots and wounds the one robber who falls off camera, the armed robber flees. Pharmacist chases the armed robber outside, returns, goes back behind counter, comes out, shoots the wounded robber (who is off camera) again, goes back to the counter and uses the phone. End of clip.
Since the wounded robber is not visible after he falls off camera, there is no clue as to whether he presented any threatening furtive movements. What we see is what a prosecutor could easily portrary as excessive force motivated by anger or malice. The first shooting appears justifiable and necessary. In fact the armed robber has pled guilty to 1st degree murder for causing the death of his accomplice at the hands of Ersland.
The second shooting though is highly questionable. I would use it as an example of how not to act in a self-defense situation.
But 1st degree murder? To me, 1st implies cold blood, and 45 seconds into an armed robbery response does not seem to be enough to allow the blood to cool down, the adrenaline to stop, and allow calm rational reflection after facing an upraised pistol.
Full story at: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacist-found-guilty-of-murder/article/3571542
There are two surveillance videos from Reliable Discount Pharmacy (inside and outside) that together do not show a clean shoot. One robber enters with gun, followed closely by accomplice apparently unarmed wearing a backpack. Pharmacist shoots and wounds the one robber who falls off camera, the armed robber flees. Pharmacist chases the armed robber outside, returns, goes back behind counter, comes out, shoots the wounded robber (who is off camera) again, goes back to the counter and uses the phone. End of clip.
Since the wounded robber is not visible after he falls off camera, there is no clue as to whether he presented any threatening furtive movements. What we see is what a prosecutor could easily portrary as excessive force motivated by anger or malice. The first shooting appears justifiable and necessary. In fact the armed robber has pled guilty to 1st degree murder for causing the death of his accomplice at the hands of Ersland.
The second shooting though is highly questionable. I would use it as an example of how not to act in a self-defense situation.
But 1st degree murder? To me, 1st implies cold blood, and 45 seconds into an armed robbery response does not seem to be enough to allow the blood to cool down, the adrenaline to stop, and allow calm rational reflection after facing an upraised pistol.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
i think his series of untruths post shooting played a big role
Jim NE
Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2011
- Messages
- 1,888
"FIRST DERGREE" murder??? That's what he was convicted of according to the article. The "kid" just tried to kill him (or help kill him) a minute or two earlier.
And look who got charged with SECOND degree murder!!!!! :
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-02-21/news/28639623_1_zahra-baker-elisa-baker-adam-baker
A culture that takes these two different approaches is screwed up and corrupt, which is why there are so many angry people out there.
longhair75
Member
Good call by the jury! It is one thing to shoot someone holding a gun on you. It is quite another to shoot an unarmed, unconscious person five times. This is cold blooded murder.
Carl N. Brown
Member
cassandrasdaddy #22:
Like being a war vet with kills (not true), second shooting before chasing the armed robber (second shooting after chasing the armed robber outside then returning), uh, I lost interest at two tales he told and changed after being confronted with contradictions. That kind of thing does no good for one's credibility in the eyes of a jury, especially when cases get tried in the court of public opnion before a jury is selected from a polluted pool. Tell too many fibs and they won't believe you if you say sky is blue and water is wet. Sad part is, I believe the two employees are correct when they say he saved their lives that day. That might be his only consolation.
Like being a war vet with kills (not true), second shooting before chasing the armed robber (second shooting after chasing the armed robber outside then returning), uh, I lost interest at two tales he told and changed after being confronted with contradictions. That kind of thing does no good for one's credibility in the eyes of a jury, especially when cases get tried in the court of public opnion before a jury is selected from a polluted pool. Tell too many fibs and they won't believe you if you say sky is blue and water is wet. Sad part is, I believe the two employees are correct when they say he saved their lives that day. That might be his only consolation.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
