Pharmacist Who Shot Man Robbing Store Charged With Murder

[Dos Equis]

Not sure what to think about this.  Part of me thinks you shoot till the guy is no longer a threat, and if he's face down, he's no longer a threat.  On the other hand, if you can't be certain that the guy will not get up and harm you or the people you're trying to protect, then unload.  What's the difference between one bullet and six bullets?  Will be interested to see what a jury does with this.

 
Pharmacist Who Shot Man Robbing Store Charged With Murder
Thursday, May 28, 2009 

OKLAHOMA CITY —  An Oklahoma City pharmacist who shot and killed a 16-year-old would-be robber was charged Wednesday with first-degree murder.

Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said in an afternoon news conference that Ersland was justified in shooting Antwun Parker once in the head on May 19. But Prater said Ersland went too far when he shot Parker five more times in the abdomen while Parker lay unconscious on the floor.

Ersland's attorney, Irven Box, said Ersland was protecting himself and two women inside the pharmacy.

"I think he did something in his eyes that protected both himself and two ladies in there," Box said. "He put an end to the threat."

Box said he thinks a jury will exonerate Ersland.

At an afternoon news conference, Prater showed a security video in which two men burst into the pharmacy and one is shot.

Ersland is seen chasing the second man outside before returning, walking past Parker to get a second gun then going back to Parker and opening fire.

The charge alleges Ersland shot Parker while he was incapacitated and lying on his back. Ersland's account of the incident doesn't match the video or the evidence collected at the scene, according to an affidavit written by Oklahoma City Police Detective David Jacobson.

Jacobson said the suspect who ran away from the pharmacy was armed, but no gun was found near Parker.

"Ersland shows no concern for his safety as he walks by Parker, and turns his back to Parker as he walks behind the pharmacy counter," Jacobson said. "Ersland is then seen to put the pistol he is carrying on the counter, and retrieve a second pistol from a drawer."

Ersland used this pistol to shoot Parker on the ground, the detective said.

He said an autopsy determined that Parker had been shot in the head, but was still alive when he was shot in the stomach area and died from those injuries.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,522461,00.html

[tonymctones]

suprised that this hasnt been posted i saw this in the morning but was busy and couldnt post it

Honestly i think this guy does serious jail time, Im not sure how i feel about this...first off i think the little shit deserved what he got but at the same time you cant do that shit man...if he had finished him off the first time he walked by i think it would have been ok but you cant go get another gun or reload and then shoot him...

[240 is Back]

the guy belongs in jail.  He's a stone cold killer. 

The scumbag, once revived by paramedics, would have gotten probably 6-8 years of real prison time.

[tonymctones]

the guy belongs in jail.  He's a stone cold killer. 

The scumbag, once revived by paramedics, would have gotten probably 6-8 years of real prison time.

actually he was 16 probably would have been tried as a juvie and been out by 18...the dumb ass got what he deserved but like i said you cant do that shit, i agree the dude is a killer

[240 is Back]

ahh i didn't catch the age.  yeah, the prick would have been back in that pharmacy 2 years later sticking the place up again. 

The shooter - in retrospect - should have grabbed the second handgun before heading out front and put the shot into bad guy then.  Crime still in progress, we don't know if he wiggled, whatever.   He would have been fine on the charge.  In a battlefield, you'd hit the corpses with a few rounds to make sure nobody with a gun in their hand was playing dead.

This was a truly ignorant shooter.

[tonymctones]

ahh i didn't catch the age.  yeah, the prick would have been back in that pharmacy 2 years later sticking the place up again. 

The shooter - in retrospect - should have grabbed the second handgun before heading out front and put the shot into bad guy then.  Crime still in progress, we don't know if he wiggled, whatever.   He would have been fine on the charge.  In a battlefield, you'd hit the corpses with a few rounds to make sure nobody with a gun in their hand was playing dead.

This was a truly ignorant shooter.

i agree i think he still might have got in trouble but i think he would have been cleared...thats exactly what i thought he should have put 2 or 3 in when he went by the first time...

he was on oreilly tonight and i swear the guy seems a tad slow no joke and he is partially paralyzed or something like that.

[240 is Back]

yeah, I think in survival situations, one would naturally want to put a kill shot into an attacker still holding a weapon.  God knows the attacker would have put a kill shot into the pharmacist if he was wounded.

Once the guy is on the floor 30 seconds and not moving, shit... 5 shots?  That's a cold MFer.


I'll definitely catch OReilly replay at 11...

[tonymctones]

yeah, I think in survival situations, one would naturally want to put a kill shot into an attacker still holding a weapon.  God knows the attacker would have put a kill shot into the pharmacist if he was wounded.

Once the guy is on the floor 30 seconds and not moving, shit... 5 shots?  That's a cold MFer.


I'll definitely catch OReilly replay at 11...

ya, thats what i was thinking too