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
i’m sure the jury probably were shown more evidence than us.
if he had just empty the gun first on the perp, he would’ve walk.
I'm 100% supportive of anyone who defends themselves against a legitimate threat, but this guy lied and the jury doesn't have to believe a single thing he says after it has been established that he lied and lied and lied. They are free to discard all of his testimony.
There is a moral here, actually a few.
One is to know the laws regarding self defense and follow them.
Another is to keep your mouth shut if you ever have to defend yourself and immediately ask to speak to your lawyer. Even if you did the right things. Especially if you did the right things. You have everything to lose and nothing to gain by discussing your actions with the police since you don't yet know what they think of your actions or how they will proceed.
And the third, of course, is not to tell big whopping lies. Particularly not to law enforcement. Tell the truth or say nothing (nothing being the preferred way).