Gut shots claimed Oklahoma City pharmacy robber (Mr. Ersland- OK)

newsok ^ | 7/21/2009 | Staff

[Red in Blue PA]

The robber killed by a pharmacist in May died from gunshots to his body, not the shot to his head, the state chief medical examiner confirmed in the autopsy report.

Antwun Rayshaun Parker, 16, of Oklahoma City was knocked out after being shot in the head and would have survived that injury, Dr. Collie Trant told The Oklahoman.

Pharmacist Jerome Jay Ersland is charged with first-degree murder in a case that sparked a national debate. Prosecutors allege he went too far because he shot the robber five more times after knocking the robber unconscious with the shot to the head. Ersland said he acted in self-defense. He said in a nationally televised interview that he thought the robber was getting up.

The autopsy report released Tuesday describes the first wound as a "non-fatal gunshot entrance/graze wound to head.”

Trant explained the first shot involved a three-pellet shell.

Parker was shot five other times — to the chest and abdomen, the autopsy report shows.

[Gorzaloon]

The druggist then came back in, went to the counter, switched guns, walked to where the punk was lying, stood over him and shot him multiple times.

Uh Oh. Yup, that's an execution. The guy is going down. "Sufficient force to stop the attack", and all.

[Hacklehead]

“The druggist then re-enters the store bypassing the area where the first perp was shot. The druggist then goes into a locked drawer and removes a .380, walks toward the first guy and fires five shots.”

Someones going away for a long long time. This could have been avoided if he had read “In the Gravest Extreme”. Now there will probably be a chapter on this guy in the revised version.

[OB1kNOb]

Man I’d love to have one of those 410/45 babies. I just can’t seem to make myself pay the price. Maybe someday.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Thanks.

[CholeraJoe]

I love my Judge. Going from a .45 Colt/.410 to a .380 unless the Judge was empty is the act of someone who is inexperienced or really rattled.

[School of Rational Thought]

Not up to speed on this case, but if the head shot failed to stop the threat, weren’t the followup shots consistent with shooting until threat is stopped?

[TXnMA]

I have never seen such a string of dumb@$$ comments! Look at the store surveillance videos before you show your (group) ignorance.

After the druggist plonked the (unarmed) punk on the head with his .380, he

1. went outside, came back in,

2. stepped over the punk on the floor,

3. did not check the downed punk for armament,

4. turned his back on him and walked away,

5. Put his .410 "Judge" revolver away,

6. walked back over to the punk,

7. at least a full minute after the first shot -- emptied his .380 into the punk's body.

That was not "imminent danger self defense".

[Verginius Rufus]

One of the robbers was pointing a gun at him as he entered the store. I don't see how they can accuse the store owner of "first degree" murder--he didn't premeditate having someone come into his store and threaten his life.

If the robber had been white, I don't think they would be accusing the store owner of first-degree murder. The authorities are probably afraid of the reaction in the black community if they don't go after the store owner. Maybe their reasoning is that maybe he'll be convicted on a lesser charge but that will be enough to avoid civil disturbances.

[wtc911]

The head shot did stop the threat, this is clear in the video and confirmed by the Coroner's report.

The druggist had the time to very deliberately (based on his movements on the video) walk past the downed thug, switch weapons, come back to stand over him and put multiple rounds into him.

In any state in this country that is homicide.

[CholeraJoe]

If the robber had been white, I don't think they would be accusing the store owner of first-degree murder.

The premeditation occurred when the owner walked back into the store, switched weapons and plugged the robber 5 times. It doesn't matter what color the robber was. That's premeditated murder. It doesn't have to be carefully planned for weeks in advance.

[beltfed308]

That was not "imminent danger self defense".

I would agree. It doesn't look good for the pharmacist.

[Red in Blue PA]

So you have had a gun pointed at you????

[Red in Blue PA]

THERE IS NO VIDEO OF THE PERP ON THE GROUND.

So how does anyone know what the perp was doing?

Charging this poor guy with ANYTHING is insane!

[Shooter 2.5]

Glad you like your Judge. It would be nice if it did what hollywood claims it does but I do think it’s a great firearm against carjackers.

I still wonder why the druggist changed to the .380 Auto.

[Red in Blue PA]

If he points a gun at people and is downed, who is to say he doesn’t have another weapon under his jacket????

ALL CRIMINALS DO NOT CARRY JUST ONE WEAPON!

[Red in Blue PA]

Not up to speed on this case, but if the head shot failed to stop the threat, weren’t the followup shots consistent with shooting until threat is stopped?

Common sense would say absolutely!

[Shooter 2.5]

However, the perp made a movement while on the ground.

The bad guy was out of camera range so that statement isn't true according to the coroner. The coroner stated the bad guy was unconscious and no longer a threat after the first shot.

[Hacklehead]

“ALL CRIMINALS DO NOT CARRY JUST ONE WEAPON!”

True, I’m not saying you should drop your guard. But if he is down, not trying to get up, apparently unarmed, and you can see his hands, Stop Shooting but keep him covered. What’s the alternative, keep shooting him until your gun is empty? Not only will that look bad to a DA and a jury, its bad tactics. What if his friend comes back or he has a partner? LEGALLY, you must stop shooting when a reasonable man would consider that he ceases to be a threat. Standing over and pumping bullets into a prone man with no visible weapon will not pass that test. Even if the jury finds you not quilty, the legal bills will bankrupt you.

[Just another Joe]

In any state in this country that is homicide.

The question isn't was it homicide.
The question is was it "justifiable" homicide?

Not having been present at the time of the homicide I can't say, but, better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.

[Red in Blue PA]

you must stop shooting when a reasonable man would consider that he ceases to be a threat.

An unreasonable standard if your life was just threatened by multiple armed thugs.