UPDATED/Oklahoma City pharmacist / first degree murder / VID

[HGWC]

Here a relevant bit from the Texas Penal code:

Penal code Sec. 2.03. DEFENSE. (a) A defense to prosecution for an offense in this code is so labeled by the phrase: "It is a defense to prosecution . . . ."

(b) The prosecuting attorney is not required to negate the existence of a defense in the accusation charging commission of the offense.

(c) The issue of the existence of a defense is not submitted to the jury unless evidence is admitted supporting the defense.

(d) If the issue of the existence of a defense is submitted to the jury, the court shall charge that a reasonable doubt on the issue requires that the defendant be acquitted.

(e) A ground of defense in a penal law that is not plainly labeled in accordance with this chapter has the procedural and evidentiary consequences of a defense.

The prosecution doesn't have to present evidence that the murder wasn't committed in self defense (b). The defense has the burden to present evidence of self defense (c), and that evidence has to show that his life was in immediate danger (not several minutes earlier when the thugs were shooting at him). The case for self defense has to overcome the compelling evidence shown in the video, and it has to produce a reasonable doubt that he might have actually had to do it to save his life. When you look at that video, does it look to you like the pharmacist was about to die? When I look a the video, all I see after he comes back on the store is that he appears to be on a single-minded mission to re-arm himself and finish this kid off. That's what he did, and I don't see even a moment of hesitation or any effort to do anything else. That's just murder in my book.

[HGWC]

We can debate wheather he was right or wrong all day, and its good to do so in case we are ever faced with a similar situation. I agree that it does look like he used excessice force. But, we weren't there so really don't know what happened just from watching a video. If I was on the jury I think he'd be a free man. If you choose to committ armed robbery then you are responsible for the consequences. This guy was only reacting to a bad situation that he did not cause. Lets not forget who the real criminals are here.

Lying on the floor after being shot in the head is not a crime. What was happening the immediate instant before he pulled the trigger is all that matters with respect to the charge of 1st degree murder he's now facing. He wasn't being robbed any more. There's no one waving a gun at him any more. There's no one shooting at him any more. There's a 16 year old kid that's been shot in the head, and in the instant before he started pulling the trigger, he's got to be doing something substantially more than trying to get up to make a case for self defense. This guy is going to realize that murder is a real crime too.

[gemini]

We can debate wheather he was right or wrong all day, and its good to do so in case we are ever faced with a similar situation. I agree that it does look like he used excessice force. But, we weren't there so really don't know what happened just from watching a video. If I was on the jury I think he'd be a free man. If you choose to committ armed robbery then you are responsible for the consequences. This guy was only reacting to a bad situation that he did not cause. Lets not forget who the real criminals are here.

Lying on the floor after being shot in the head is not a crime. What was happening the immediate instant before he pulled the trigger is all that matters with respect to the charge of 1st degree murder he's now facing. He wasn't being robbed any more. There's no one waving a gun at him any more. There's no one shooting at him any more. There's a 16 year old kid that's been shot in the head, and in the instant before he started pulling the trigger, he's got to be doing something substantially more than trying to get up to make a case for self defense. This guy is going to realize that murder is a real crime too.

Lying on the floor after being shot in the head was a direct result of his attempt at armed robbery. There's no one waving a gun at the Pharmacist? How do you know that? The kid had on a back pack, very possible to have a weapon in the pack. Not everyone who is shot in the head dies immediately, and some survive. When the robber was shot it appeared to me he went backward into a sitting position, not face down. How would you have known it was a "16 year old kid" and what difference would that make? I don't mean to sound indifferent, but I guarantee you, even at 16, the kid knew the difference between right and wrong. He made the decision to try to commit a felony. Before the Pharmacist is convicted in the kangaroo court of CHL Forum....lets at least wait until ALL the evidence comes to light. All the camera angles have been reviewed. A rough time line : 10 seconds after the 2 bad guys enter the store, BG #1 gets shot and BG #2 runs, pharmacist gives chase and returns 15 seconds later, pharmacist rearms and re-shoots BG #1 OUT OF VIEW OF THE CAMERA. The Pharmacist was pumped, adrenaline, maybe he was telling BG#1 to not move, maybe the pharmacist thought he saw a weapon and BG#1 moved. Who knows for certain at this point? All of this would not have happened IF the 2 thugs had not decided to case the store, pull a weapon and attempt a robbery. Currently I have doubts, and a criminal trial requires guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, not preponderance of the evidence. I'll wait to pass judgement.

[KD5NRH]

The kid looked unarmed. He was down on the floor. Sure doesn't look like he gave any thought to avoiding having to kill the guy. Doesn't look like his intent was to defend himself.

Doesn't look like the kid wasn't renewing his attack either. Doesn't look like anything meaningful at all; that's what off camera means.

[stroo]

This shoot was good right up to the point he went back to the guy on the floor and shot him 5 times in the stomach. We don't know exactly what happened there but the video doesn't look good and the Pharmacist's credibility may already be shot because his account doesn't match up with the video at all.

[TexasComputerDude]

what if the kid was sitting on the ground and said, "i'm going to find out who you are and where your family live and my crew are gonna kill all of you."

[Carrots]

This shoot was good right up to the point he went back to the guy on the floor and shot him 5 times in the stomach. We don't know exactly what happened there but the video doesn't look good and the Pharmacist's credibility may already be shot because his account doesn't match up with the video at all.

+1. This is why he has been charged.

"Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said Wednesday that 57-year-old Jerome Ersland was justified in shooting Antwun Parker once in the head on May 19. But Prater says Ersland went too far when he shot Parker five more times in the abdomen while Parker lay unconscious on the floor"

"The charge alleges Ersland shot Antwun Parker, 16, 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 the affidavit written by Oklahoma City Police Detective David Jacobson. Parker was shot once in the head and five times in the stomach area. The autopsy found Parker was still alive after the head shot and died from the stomach wounds"

[bryang]

Pharmacist in fatal Oklahoma City shooting released on $100,000 bail


Jerome Ersland sitting inside the courtroom being watched by Oklahoma County sheriff deputies during a bond hearing at the Oklahoma County Courthouse in Oklahoma City Thursday, May 28, 2009. Photo by Paul B. Southerland, The Oklahoman

The pharmacist charged with first-degree murder was released today from the Oklahoma County jail after a supporter came up with the money for his $100,000 bail, his attorney said.

A judge this morning set bail for Jerome Jay Ersland and ordered him to have no access to guns. Attorney Irven Box said a supporter paid the fee necessary for a bondsman to post the $100,000 bail. The attorney said Ersland doesn't know the supporter.

-geo

[Rokyudai]

Wow... complete with a 'HemiZygote' reference....blast from the past.

Not too derail as I too am very interested on how a jury will ultimately rule on this, but, did anyone read the OK News website's report compared to the Fox News? There is an angle on OK's site that I have question or two about.

The judge has set his bail and made a stipulation that while out on bail he cannot come in contact with a gun. Can someone tell me if that is normal? Now this presents several concerns: First, does this 'public decree' (since it has been plastered in the media) deliver a message to the masses unfairly and with prejudice that he is now 'guilty' until proven innocent?

Second,this denies him the ability to defend himself from future or retaliatory attacks (Texas Computer Dude has it right) in the meantime. The defense brought this up, the judge said something to the affect: He needs to get another job (if he thinks he needs a gun at work- these are my words interjected into the judge's likely mindset)... doesn't he own this business and doesn't his wife also work there? Lastly and waaaay tooo early to know.... I may predict that there be some eventual higher court/Supreme Court material here. I'm still out on that.

So, should TWO people have there lives fussed with? I'm sorry, but I think that judge and or DA are either looking for a name or re-election. Manslaughter--that's for the jury to decide. Murder- overkill...this was in no way premeditated in my opinion.


Rok

[HGWC]

That's all true. What if? The prosecutor though is going to play this video. There's no evidence at all that the guy who was killed presented any immediate threat to the pharmacist at any point in the whole sequence. What you guys are suggesting is that all the defense team has to do then is stand up and claim that the prosecution hasn't proven that it wasn't self defense. That isn't a defense to prosecution under Texas law. What if he had a gun, what if he was reaching for a gun, what if he was trying to get up and the pharmacist was afraid he had a gun? I would be afraid to face the jury and that video with just that as proof of self defense.

Rather than play judge and jury to this guy, I think it's more important for us to put ourselves in his shoes right before he pulled the trigger. Did it look to you like he was in any particular danger from this kid? Doesn't look that way to me. I would be really afraid it would look like that to the jury. Looks to me like he had quite a few better choices like not going back into the store in the first place. Like not chasing the first guy with a gun, who apparently didn't actually steal anything. BTW, what happened to the other rounds in his .45 revolver, and why did he trade it for a .380? Like running his mouth to the press telling a story that now doesn't appear to match the video. Seems there's a lot for us to learn about what not to do.

[Rokyudai]

Pharmacist in fatal Oklahoma City shooting released on $100,000 bail


Jerome Ersland sitting inside the courtroom being watched by Oklahoma County sheriff deputies during a bond hearing at the Oklahoma County Courthouse in Oklahoma City Thursday, May 28, 2009. Photo by Paul B. Southerland, The Oklahoman

The pharmacist charged with first-degree murder was released today from the Oklahoma County jail after a supporter came up with the money for his $100,000 bail, his attorney said.

A judge this morning set bail for Jerome Jay Ersland and ordered him to have no access to guns. Attorney Irven Box said a supporter paid the fee necessary for a bondsman to post the $100,000 bail. The attorney said Ersland doesn't know the supporter.

-geo

You know, I realize a photographer can snap 1000's of photos of the same thing and pick the one he/she wants...but that stance of the right bailiff just shows what I mean. This guy defended himself, his wife, his livelihood and his employees. That picture looks like they are watching over Hanibal Lecter or something... where's my throw up smiley!

Rok

[dicion]

where's my throw up smiley!

There ya go.

[Rokyudai]

where's my throw up smiley!

There ya go.

LOL thanks.

[bryang]

You know, I realize a photographer can snap 1000's of photos of the same thing and pick the one he/she wants...but that stance of the right bailiff just shows what I mean. This guy defended himself, his wife, his livelihood and his employees. That picture looks like they are watching over Hanibal Lecter or something... where's my throw up smiley!

Rok

That was what I was thinking, too. It looks like the police have already decided this one. That along with the Judge ruling that he cannot come in contact with a gun while he was out on bail. They have already said that there were demonstrators in front of the store with revenge on their minds...

Looks like a bad situation all the way around. I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens next.

-geo

[dicion]

They have already said that there were demonstrators in front of the store with revenge on their minds...

This whole murder charge thing aside...

Revenge? For someone shooting a gang-banger who participated in an armed robbery?

Revenge, against this pharmacist, who was just doing his job, in his store, who didn't ask for the men to come in and point guns at him?

That is perhaps the dumbest thing I have ever heard.