OKC Pharmacist Ruling

[Bruno2]

I know the topic has been hashed over thoroughly of Rather erslund was guilty or not. However, I raised some more questions recently with myself regarding outcomes.

There were 5 people besides Erslund involved the situation. There were 3 kids trying to rob the pharmacy and 2 adult males outside driving the get away car. In OK we have laws that enable all participants in a crime to be charged with 1st degree murder should someone die as a result of the criminal action. everybody surviving the incident were charged and convicted of murder due to the death of the teen. The trials for all of the perps involved happened before Erslund's trial was ruled on. Since Erslund was the person who theoreitcally caused the death of the teen by shooting again after the initial burst (which brought conviction to him) it seems to me like this may have left the door wide open for the life sentences and convictions of the other participants to be overturned. I am not saying they are going walk free b/c they still have the armed robbery charges they were convicted of to serve sentences on. However, the death of the teen lies upon Erslund for his criminal actions and not the people involved in the robbery.

So in theory the life sentences for the murder charges against the participants shouldnt be able to stand.

This is just a hypothesis and I would like to hear any arguments based on law that would contradict it.

 

[F-111 John]

Hypothetically speaking, if three guys rob a store then begin arguing over the split of the loot and perp A shoots Perp B, I believe Perp C is still on the hook for a death during the commission of a felony.

 

[Elkins45]

I know the topic has been hashed over thoroughly of Rather erslund was guilty or not. However, I raised some more questions recently with myself regarding outcomes.

There were 5 people besides Erslund involved the situation. There were 3 kids trying to rob the pharmacy and 2 adult males outside driving the get away car. In OK we have laws that enable all participants in a crime to be charged with 1st degree murder should someone die as a result of the criminal action. everybody surviving the incident were charged and convicted of murder due to the death of the teen. The trials for all of the perps involved happened before Erslund's trial was ruled on. Since Erslund was the person who theoreitcally caused the death of the teen by shooting again after the initial burst (which brought conviction to him) it seems to me like this may have left the door wide open for the life sentences and convictions of the other participants to be overturned. I am not saying they are going walk free b/c they still have the armed robbery charges they were convicted of to serve sentences on. However, the death of the teen lies upon Erslund for his criminal actions and not the people involved in the robbery.

So in theory the life sentences for the murder charges against the participants shouldnt be able to stand.

This is just a hypothesis and I would like to hear any arguments based on law that would contradict it.

The robbers set in motion the series of events which led to the pharmacist shooting one of them. If they had not entered his place of business for the purpose of robbing it, the pharmacist would never have been given reason nor opportunity to shoot the dead guy. Ergo, they are all guilty because their actions precipitated the final fatal outcome.

 

[dprice3844444]

they were guilty as co-conspirators in the armed robbery which added a homocide to their actions, as sombody died during the incident.the pharmacist was well within his rights to shoot the armed suspect robbing the store.the thing that got him busted was his Coup de grâce he was witnessed administering to the perp.even without witnesses,autopsy would have determined same outcome.

 

[Bighouse Doc]

Any one participating in a crime is guilty of murder if anyone dies as the result. That stands even if the cops kill them!

It's that simple!

-Doc

 

[alsaqr]

Oklahoma prosecutors often charge perps with murder when their criminal act results in the death an accomplice. Last year an OK prosecutor charged a copper thief with murder when his fellow copper thief was with was electrocuted while stealing wire from a power substation. The prosecutor later dropped the murder charges; plea deal, i think.

 

[Bruno2]

Right , I hear what you guys are saying, but , theoretically the pharmacist committed murder not a self defense shooting that resulted in a death. He went rogue and then stood over the body emptying a different gun into the perp. The pharmamcist was charged and convicted of murder upon the evidence presented.

What you guys are responding with is like saying if a disgruntled store clerk pulled out a gun and shot a kid dead b/c him and his buddy were shoplifting then the surviving shoplifter gets charged with murder. The store clerk didnt have to murder anybody b/c his store was being the subject of petty theft. He went rogue and committed murder just like the pharmamcist did. The pharmacist went over the line(according to the prosecutor) and committed murder. If what the prosecutor was saying is correct then the kid that was shot would have survived the initial wounds, but , Erslund went over the top by excessively shooting the kid after the fact. What the perps did did not result in someone dying. What criminal act Erslund committed caused the death. So in theory the surviving perps didnt cause the death of the kid Erslund did so I cant see how they are getting away with the murder 1 convictions . Seems to me like this should be easy to appeal and win then overturn the convictions.

 

[Davek1977]

Theres no basis for the convictions not to stand based on the fact the pharmacist himself being convicted. While he did in fact technically kill the thief, the theif...and his partners..willingly committed a felony in which one of them was shot and killed. though the pharmacist fired the fatal shot, he would not have been in a position to do so if they hadn't originally decided to commit the robbery. The robbery was the central event leading to the shots being fired and the man being killed. The fact that a man was shot and killed in the process of the robbery does nothing to exclude the man's partners from a murder conviction. There's absolutely no law stating two or more separate individuals cannot be convicted of the same crime. There is no basis for the cases to be overturned simply because the pharmacist fired the fatal shot. You keep referring to "in theory". The law doesn't cfre about your theory. The law is black and white, and says that if someone is injured or killed during the commission of a felony, all parties to that felony share responsibility under the law. It doesn't matter if the pharmacist "theoretically" caused the death, because, LEGALLY every member of the group is responsible for being privy to the original felony robbery. Legally, theres no basis to argue that the other robbers weren't responsible as well, as the law clearly states that they ARE responsible, not "responsible unless someone else shoots one of them and gets convicted of murder". There is no exception for what happned in this case, and the law was correctly applied

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Bruno2: So in theory the surviving perps didnt cause the death of the kid Erslund did so I cant see how they are getting away with the murder 1 convictions . Seems to me like this should be easy to appeal and win then overturn the convictions.

I do not know what was intended by "in theory", and what "it seems" to someone who is not familiar with the law is not going to weigh very heavily.

It is crystal clear to me that the fact that the perps initiated the crime of robbery and the fact that someone was killed during the commission of that crime clearly combine to make them guilty of felony murder.

Here's one web definition:

The Felony Murder Rule states that any death which occurs during the commission or attempt to commit certain felonies, which include arson, rape or other sexual offenses, burglary, robbery or kidnapping, is first-degree murder and all participants in the felony can be held equally culpable, including those who did no harm, had no weapon, and did not intend to hurt anyone. Intent does not have to be proved for anything but the underlying felony.

 

[Kush]

That's pretty messed up that Oklahoma has a law like that yet if you drive while drunk and kill someone it can be considered a misdemeanor negligent homicide which is punishable by up to 1 year in prison. Also the possible penalties for 1st degree murder in Oklahoma are life with or without parole or the death penalty.

 

[alsaqr]

There are lots of accomplices to murder serving life sentences in McAlester prison.

Kush, you are right about drunk drivers in OK. Despite a lot of windy political rhetoric, the OK legislature will not write laws cracking down on drunk drivers who kill people.

BTW: It's against the law for newspapers to publish the names of drunk drivers in OK.

 

[Bruno2]

Also the possible penalties for 1st degree murder in Oklahoma are life with or without parole or the death penalty.

I dont really see anything wrong with the guidelines for sentencing. I have issues with states that dont carry capital punishment for murder 1 or would let someone walk after serving 10 yrs for murder 1. Murder 2 and 3 are different stories. Murder 1 in Ok requires premeditation and that in itself IMO commands a tough sentence requirement.

The Felony Murder Rule states that any death which occurs during the commission or attempt to commit certain felonies, which include arson, rape or other sexual offenses, burglary, robbery or kidnapping, is first-degree murder and all participants in the felony can be held equally culpable, including those who did no harm, had no weapon, and did not intend to hurt anyone. Intent does not have to be proved for anything but the underlying felony.

That pretty much explains it , but , it is still a little cloudy on this particular incident.

It is crystal clear to me that the fact that the perps initiated the crime of robbery and the fact that someone was killed during the commission of that crime clearly combine to make them guilty of felony murder.

It would certainly be crystal clear if the perps had shot and killed someone, or the pharmamcist had stopped shooting before he went berzerk and the kid died, perhaps even if someone working in the pharmacy or even another pharmacist dropped dead from a heart attack due to the excitement.

There is another incident very similiar to this one that occurred in OK and I cant remember but, the sentencing didnt go down like this at all and it was much more henious. I agree at the time the perps were tried and convicted nobody knew that Erslund was going to be found guilty of murder. So as far as everyone was concerned at that point in time the death was a by product of the robbery and not a seperate crime committed by another party.

 

[Bruno2]

Alright here was the story I was referring to:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=12&articleid=20100302_12_0_ROLAND577146

ROLAND — A 1-year-old Fort Smith girl who was shot while riding in a getaway car following a robbery in Oklahoma has died, authorities said Tuesday.

Sequoyah County Sheriff Ron Lockhart told the Southwest Times Record that Elaine Keene died Monday at Arkansas Children's Hospital in Little Rock after being shot in the head Saturday outside a home near Roland.

Devin Jeremiah, who lives at the rural Sequoyah residence, fired the shot that struck Keene in the back of the head after he was robbed by a man and a male teen, according to Lockhart.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=12&articleid=20100302_12_0_ROLAND577146

Turns out the way it all shook out according to the updates I just read all people involved got charged with murder 1. At first they were discussing a murder 2 charge and possibly not charging the mom, but , now they are trying for 4 seperate 1st degree murder charges.

I thought this case would support my arguement. However, it just backed up what everybody has been saying.

 

[Davek1977]

I thought this case would support my arguement. However, it just backed up what everybody has been saying.

LOL, I've had that happen too. "just wait, I have proof right he......ummm......uhhhh......nevermind, nothing to see here"! LOL

 

[Bighouse Doc]

This whole issue is long time, settled law in Oklahoma. There is no grey area or theories dealing with it.

Commit a crime as a group, someone dies during it, All get Murder-1!

It's that simple.

-Doc

 

[suemarkp]

And it isn't just Oklahoma, I think most states have this type of law. You could be sitting in the parking lot getting ready to go rob a store and have a partner die of a heart attack. The other accomplices could then be charged with felony murder.

There are many cases where it seems unfair, as some of the accomplices could feel coerced or think they're just the get away driver or lookout so they aren't really doing much wrong. Can be a nasty outcome for a bad lapse in judgement.