Armed Citizen: Oklahoma Pharmacist Defends Employees from Robbers
- Thread starter Blue Steel
- Start date
- Status
Playboypenguin
Moderator
Actually, if I had to make a professional statement of opinion I would be very likely to think he did exactly that. I would be of an opinion that someone capable of such an act went to work each day thinking "If anyone breaks in here I am going to kill them and this is how I will do it..."
Someone that does what this man did is not a good guy and does not deserve much benefit of the doubt. I supported him fully at the beginning of this thread, but his actions changed all that.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
Not exactly...it is educated theory. That will play a big part in the trial. Experts and specialists will be asked to attest to his likely state of mind based on his action. His actions and reactions are indicative of a man that has thought this through very thoroughly.
Tucker 1371
New member
Only four months to go and I wholeheartedly believe that, but I also believe that's a statement that applies more to all of life in general than one specific event.
I do believe there is a point that can be reached for a subject as narrow as this at which all discussion is merely previous points being rehashed over and over.
If anyone has anything new, please, let him speak it but I don't think anything productive is going to come of this thread for at least another few days. We need more information, quotes from the DA, etc.
Relevant Information that We Know:
1) There was a robbery on the Reliable pharmacy commited by 2 people, Ersland fired, Parker received 1 wound to the head and five to the abdomen and according to the coroner died of the subsequent 5 shots.
2) The five shots were .380 from a Kel-Tec, the 1st from a Taurus Judge (.410 or .45?)
3) Ersland turned his back on Parker twice.
4) Ersland is seen on camera firing in a downward direction in the area that Parker fell.
5) Ersland made a statement to the police that contained some false iformation. In this statement he said Parker was trying to get up, prompting him to shoot Parker 5 more times.
6) The Pharmacy had been attacked before.
7edit)The coroner also stated that Parker would have recovered from the initial shot to the head.
Common Opinions:
1) Ersland acted in self defense
2) Ersland commited murder
3) Ersland is technically guilty under the law but should not be convicted because he was still acting in self defense and Parker was not murdered but suffered the consequences of his actions.
4) Awaiting more evidence to form an opinion.
Possible Outcomes:
1) Ersland is found innocent/hung jury
2) Ersland is convicted and goes to jail for a very long time
3) Plea bargain (not sure if his attorney is considering that though) and Ersland still goes to jail for a while but maybe not quite so long.
Things We Need to Know for Intelligent Debate to Continue:
1) Was Parker in fact trying to get up
2) What, if anything, did the other two Pharmacy workers see
3) Possible changes in the court proceedings
I'm sure there's probably a point or two that I missed so if need be repost with aforementioned point(s) added in the appropriate category.
Last edited:
Playboypenguin
Moderator
I am betting it was .410 shot that he fired into the perps head/face. Just based on the speed he fired the shot and circumstantial evidence. Anyone else agree or disagree?
Tucker 1371
New member
I am also inclined to believe it was .410, .45 ACP fragmenting on impact just seems unlikely to me. The again, there have been stranger occurences regarding wounds (bullets and otherwise) to the head.
Assuming it was .410 this then begs the question: What .410 load was he using? Slug? Buck? It is really inconsequential to the outcome of this case as it was both legally justified according to the DA and not the fatal shot nor would it have been fatal according to the coroner.
Assuming it was .410 this then begs the question: What .410 load was he using? Slug? Buck? It is really inconsequential to the outcome of this case as it was both legally justified according to the DA and not the fatal shot nor would it have been fatal according to the coroner.
Last edited:
Playboypenguin
Moderator
I am betting it was buck shot. It makes sense to me that he would use the Judge as a sort of "mini shotgun" to optimize his chances of a hit on his first shot.
I think this might possibly be one of the most germane comments on this topic thus far. ^^
I have no formal training in mental health related fields, but if the defendants calculated, and indifferent responses are as obvious to me, they are certainly (with expert testimony) going to be a glaringly obvious albatross for the defense. Points to Mens rea.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
I am going to have to look that up, but I feel like I might have just been insulted.
Question for surg res
I am a veterinarian, so I know just enough neurology to know how much I don't know. Question: How likely is it that a gunshot wound to the head could cause enough neurologic damage to render a patient comatose and immobile for the period of time we see on the tape, and still expect (1)survival, or (2) a full recovery as, if I recall correctly, was said by the DA.
I am a veterinarian, so I know just enough neurology to know how much I don't know. Question: How likely is it that a gunshot wound to the head could cause enough neurologic damage to render a patient comatose and immobile for the period of time we see on the tape, and still expect (1)survival, or (2) a full recovery as, if I recall correctly, was said by the DA.
Shadi Khalil
New member
I've been wondering the same thing.
Wild, did you/do you practice law?
Respectfully, I realize the question was directed at another member but, we are talking about the guy being immobile for ( by the tape clock) 3 minutes, or less, from time of impact until the final shots were fired. I have seen folks punched by a fist stay out longer than that. But I digress, the good Doctor can speak on this much better than I.
Lost Sheep
New member
Anyone have answers to these?
Thanks for the excellent summary.
Questions to ask:
Some reports specifically state there was no gun recovered from Parker, or anywhere on the scene except the two used by Ersland. Is it possible the other perpetrator took it with him? The only other conclusions is that Parker was not armed or someone took the gun away (which would require some sort of conspiracy, I think, and is pretty far-fetched).
There has been a suggestion that Ersland's arm wound was cause by a ricochet of his own first shot. Is the wound consistent with that interpretation? Is there a slug embedded in a wall somewhere behind where Ersland was standing or an empty casing from the perpetrator's gun? That is, what physical evidence is there that either robber actually fired a shot, and is it conclusive? (The arm wound is strong evidence, but not conclusive without the actual slug or examination of the wound.)
Did Ersland shoot Parker (the second time, the 5 shots to the body) before or after he returned to the pharmacy from chasing the other perpetrator? The investigating detective's report strongly suggests "after".
Was it a good idea to kill the only person who could name the other robber?
Another question not particularly probitive from a legal aspect, but interesting nonetheless:
Ersland used the 45/.410 Taurus Judge first? Then he chose the lesser .380 ACP to put the next 5 rounds into Parker. Ballistically that does not make sense to me, unless perhaps the Taurus did have shotshells in it, or Ersland completely emptied it. How many bullets did the 380 have? Did Ersland empty it?
I have seen the video. I have read the D.A.'s charging document. I have read a couple of the newspaper accounts. I have not seen or heard the other videos (my computer does not do sound at the moment).
Please label your submissions as known fact (with source) or supposition/speculation/hypothesis. Not that the latter is worthless. But we need to keep things properly identified.
Lost Sheep
GSUeagle1089,GSUeagle1089 said:
Thanks for the excellent summary.
Questions to ask:
Some reports specifically state there was no gun recovered from Parker, or anywhere on the scene except the two used by Ersland. Is it possible the other perpetrator took it with him? The only other conclusions is that Parker was not armed or someone took the gun away (which would require some sort of conspiracy, I think, and is pretty far-fetched).
There has been a suggestion that Ersland's arm wound was cause by a ricochet of his own first shot. Is the wound consistent with that interpretation? Is there a slug embedded in a wall somewhere behind where Ersland was standing or an empty casing from the perpetrator's gun? That is, what physical evidence is there that either robber actually fired a shot, and is it conclusive? (The arm wound is strong evidence, but not conclusive without the actual slug or examination of the wound.)
Did Ersland shoot Parker (the second time, the 5 shots to the body) before or after he returned to the pharmacy from chasing the other perpetrator? The investigating detective's report strongly suggests "after".
Was it a good idea to kill the only person who could name the other robber?
Another question not particularly probitive from a legal aspect, but interesting nonetheless:
Ersland used the 45/.410 Taurus Judge first? Then he chose the lesser .380 ACP to put the next 5 rounds into Parker. Ballistically that does not make sense to me, unless perhaps the Taurus did have shotshells in it, or Ersland completely emptied it. How many bullets did the 380 have? Did Ersland empty it?
I have seen the video. I have read the D.A.'s charging document. I have read a couple of the newspaper accounts. I have not seen or heard the other videos (my computer does not do sound at the moment).
Please label your submissions as known fact (with source) or supposition/speculation/hypothesis. Not that the latter is worthless. But we need to keep things properly identified.
Lost Sheep
Last edited:
Playboypenguin
Moderator
I have routinely seen instances of persons loosing consciousness for longer periods from minor wounds or concussive impacts.
Technically, the logical conclusion is that your opinion is that IS is the standard of proof - at least the standard you are applying in this case. I don't want to debate the legal consequences of this tragic event, but it struck me that someone with apparent experience and knowledge would offer such a statement.
- Status