Posted on 05/26/2011 3:05:28 PM PDT by FourPeas
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...
(Excerpt) Read more at kfor.com ...
Uh, no. The kid was still putting on his hood when he was shot with a Judge. That was fine....it was retrieving a second weapon an unloading it into the prone kid that warrants a murder charge. Watch the videos.
Could you expand on what you said a bit? None of that is in the article, and I don’t recall any of that when the incident happened, but I don’t live in the area, so may have missed much of the development in the story.
Thank you very much.
The guy is a disabled veteran and was also protecting a couple of women that worked at the pharmacy with him. I don't think you can judge him by what is just on the surveillance video.
Like he was involved in a robbery where someone died ~ just his bad luck to try to tag a nut case.
I'll be honest muawiyah, I don't remember if they apprehended the runner or not....I think they did. It's been years since I discussed this on FR.
Yes, it is outrageous. Sadly, he has an awful lawyer that went out of his way to alienate the judge—and probably most of the jury pool. I hope he appeals. If nothing else, he should claim that he had an incompetent lawyer.
Phony war hero, but not a murderer (as the term was intended). Bear in mind that some here consider self defense murder, even here on this conservative site.
The video shows nothing. You cannot see the person on the floor, who could very well have looked as though he was reaching for a weapon. Dead bodies twitch. You are a dupe of the media-driven campaign to make self-defense illegal. They tell you can “see” it happening, but really, all you can see is Erslund, not the perp. In any event, if someone comes into a store waving a gun, they should not expect hugs and kumbayahs.
I understand the adrenaline. I even understand the sentiment. But you can't walk up and pump 5 shots into an unarmed person lying on the ground, even if he just took part in an armed robbery, if you want to keep walking the streets as a free person.
Not unless you're a cop, anyway. And maybe not even then.
From another article that tells a lot more about the perps:
He was in the ninth grade at SeeWorth Academy, a charter school, his mother said.
“We was trying to get his grades up,” she said. “A lot of times SeeWorth would frustrate him because they had so many rules.”
Jennings said her son still would get scared of the dark. “At 16, he didn't sleep with the lights off. Antwun still sucked his thumb,” she said.
She said the boy did not see much of his father. “He never tried to be any type of a role model or father figure,” she said.
And THAT, my friends, is about the bottom line.
They did. Runner was 14. He pled guilty to first-degree murder for his role in the death of his buddy.
The video in post 12 shows what happened even though it is from the first week or so of the event, and evidently is what the jury verified with the physical evidence and the autopsy. At 2 minutes 50 seconds the robbery tape is shown.
All these links are old, pre trial stuff, but it is where I learned what we were dealing with.
This link is his wild description of the fake “shoot out” a non existent physical fight, his bandaged bullet wound, his war injuries etc.
http://newsok.com/pharmacist-is-glad-he-defended-store/article/3371710
This link is about him fighting the release of his military records.
http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-druggist-appeals-records-ruling/article/3376800
This link is about his mental issues.
http://newsok.com/mental-state-may-play-into-pharmacists-case/article/3375757
Oh please. You can tell just by looking at someone whether or not they have a gun? Just because this one wasn’t waving one, remember the other one was, and it was smart to assume this one had one too. They threatened the pharmacist and the other staff with their lives. They had no right to keep their own.
so I say, too bad punk.
now the pharmacist did the ONE THING you should NEVER DO if you shoot someone. Talk to the cops other than to say " my weapon is on the ground, I was afraid for my life, I no longer want to say anything without a LAWYER" then just shut your mouth and say NOTHING. Don't explain, don't say you shot or killed or did anything. Just over and over I'm waiting for my lawyer.
The police are not your friends and the quicker you realize that the better for you. They are there to take notes, photos, gather evidence, increase their budgets, go home safely to collect their pensions and that's it.
The 16 year old came in with the older one (if he was older) so he was, so to speak "armed" with his guard.
A number of posts have targeted that point ~ that the 16 year old didn't actually have a gun on him ~ as if it really meant anything. Turns out it does in some States. Massachusetts would be concerned if 10 armed men went after you and you shot and killed their 11th gang member who didn't happen to have a gun. There are others and Oklahoma may be one.
Even states with the Castle Doctrine laws might mess with you if you shot an unarmed person in the back, or did what this particular pharmacist did.
There are other states that view a crime like this in the greater context of a "robbery underway" and don't set any time limits ~ particularly with one of the perps still armed and roaming around somewhere ~ and the pharmacist having no idea where.
That takes care of the problem of him getting the second firearm.
I suspect what we have here is a jury acting in regard to some peculiarities of Oklahoma law ~ not what the pharmacist did. Every action he took makes sense one way or the other ~ particularly with the other perp still on the loose and maybe coming back for his little buddy.
I see an appeal.
The only background that really matters is that if Antwun "Speedy" Parker hadn't been robbing pharmacies, he'd still be alive today.
Anyhow, click on keyword ersland for several articles that have been posted regarding this event over the past two years.
I have no problem with “speedy” Parker being dead. He chose to trade his life for whatever cash was in that pharmacy that day. The accomplices face murder charges as well. If Earsland is now responsible for his murder, how can they be? Logic would say because they were engaged in a crime when it happened. This verdict means he died from a separate crime. It detaches from logic to say he died as a result of anything other than consequences of actions he set in motion by going in to rob the place.
That seems bizarre. I thought Murder 1 required malice aforethought. Even if the jury found Erslund lacked justification to shoot, how can they find malice aforethought when poor little Antwan (who was just getting his life turned around) showed up unexpectedly at Erslund's place to rob him?
Which means what? Is he out when he’s 21 or 22?
Watch the video in post 12, you cannot do that.
Which means what? Is he out when he’s 21 or 22?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.