Armed Citizen: Oklahoma Pharmacist Defends Employees from Robbers

Status
Not open for further replies.
From a less than sympathetic side, I mean only to say that in this case it is a pure case of laws that are broken... Morally if you kick my dog, and I can "take care of business" I am gonna gun hard for ya...
Legally I know I will likely have to take you to civil court.
My level of ruff behavior was not crimes that involved folks who didn't voluntarily involve them self. I was never a burglar, robber, thief or other such crook that requires preying on innocents. I wasn't even a good 1%er biker as I didn't prey on the uninvolved so I will say I was, at best, a 2%er or 3%er:o...
Brent
 
>But no one is really saying that the perp did not deserve to be shot. They are simply saying he did not deserve to be executed afterwards. If the first shot had killed him I would be "too bad so sad."<

>I would even be okay with him being shot again if he presented a further threat later on. That just does not seem to be the case though.<

I'm with you on all that.

My "Quote" button disappeared for some reason.:confused:
 
About testimony - there are lawyers who will ask you to testify to their theory of the case and wave the money. I've seen it and there have been some rather nasty examples. The laws on expert testimony have been tightened to avoid such things. Licenses have been lost, etc.

All professions have folks without ethics and act for the money. What else is new.
 
Surg Res said:

I think that if the initial injury was non-survivable, the subsequent actions have zero meaning and there would be no case, that is unless there is a law against shooting corpses (whether out of frustration or for target practice). If it was a survivable injury (as many are), this dude is in deep.
Click to expand...

I haven't read all the posts so forgive me if this has already been addressed.

It doesn't matter legally if the robber's injury was survivable or not; it only matters if he was alive and if the subsequent shots shortened his life, even by minutes. If so, then it's a homicide, and if there is no excuse or justification (legally speaking), it's a criminal homicide. Whether it be manslaughter or murder will depend on the facts.
 
I think that if the initial injury was non-survivable, the subsequent actions have zero meaning and there would be no case, that is unless there is a law against shooting corpses (whether out of frustration or for target practice). If it was a survivable injury (as many are), this dude is in deep.
Click to expand...
I cannot imagine any medical professional would be capable of making such a judgement without examining the victim in the first place. I have known of multiple cases in the service were men survived shots to the head and I have seen more than one suicide attempt were someone self inflicted a head wound and survived. Many of those also suffered unconsciousness after the initial injury. In fact, I have personally witnessed people lose consciousness after only thinking they have been shot when in fact they had not.
 
TailGator said:
TailGator

My "Quote" button disappeared for some reason.
Click to expand...

TailGator, I never had a "quote" button. In order to perform the quote function, I type this before and after the quoted passage.

Before:

[_QUOTE=TailGator]

The passage to be blocked out as quoted

[_/QUOTE]

(take out the underscores, "_", immediately after the "["s. I had to put them in to make the commands inoperative.

It works for quoting quotes, too.

Lost Sheep
 
Last edited:
I cannot imagine any medical professional would be capable of making such a judgement without examining the victim in the first place.
Click to expand...

Who made a judgement? I was speaking 'what ifs,' as articulated by the use of the word "IF."

I'll simplify... IF the kid's brains were splattered across the ceiling and on the walls, with the first shot, I wouldn't get too excited about the rest of the story.

IMO, PBP needs a break from this thread...
 
Last edited:
Who made a judgement? I was speaking 'what ifs,' as articulated by the use of the word "IF."
Click to expand...
Sorry, I meant to get the rest of the post as a quote inside a quote and screwed it up. I was saying to the person that responded to you that i doubt any physicians would even be called by the defense that were not involved in the actual investigation because they would not want to make such a statement without examining the body...so even if the perp would have lived or died from his first wound or if he was conscious or not will probably be irrelevant anyway. It will all come down to what the coroner reports and I doubt any medical professional that did not examine the body will contradict their report.
 
I may be wrong but I think a person is still a "person" until "declared" by a physician or Medical examiner...
Brent
 
Moderator Note

At 17 pages, this thread is a miracle of longevity and civility -- congratulations & thank you to all.

As several members alluded to above, a break from the thread may be in order to keep it so. But closing it is a drastic move, therefore I have a request of our members:

Please refrain from posting in this thread for awhile, unless and until there are new developments in the case.

We'll leave it open in expectation that there will be new developments and placing them here should maintain continuity.

Thanks,

pax
 
Last edited:
Pax, stop this line if you think it is weird but - do folks think that Ersland's appearances in the brace make him look more sympathetic or less?

The reason I ask is that oddity in appearance sometimes acts against you.
 
do folks think that Ersland's appearances in the brace make him look more sympathetic or less?
Click to expand...
To be honest, seeing him move the way he did while wearing the brace negatively affected my opinion of the man.

This is mainly because I come from a medical family and married into a medical family and I know SOOO many pharmacists that are drug addicts and wear back braces and other orthopedics to make there pill addictions seem more legitimate. My perspective is a bit skewed because of this personal knowledge.
 
do folks think that Ersland's appearances in the brace make him look more sympathetic or less?
Click to expand...

Excellent question, thought provoking...


The brace alone might garner sympathy from some,
however, the brace, together with his self proclamation as a "cripple" and taken in context with his other statements, may prove to be... pejorative to a jury.

This looks more akin to a "neck brace" in a whiplash suit when taken in context. Since he was wearing it during the alleged murder, and IMO had little
diminished mobility, it may not play well.
 
brace make more sympathetic or less?

I'm not sure the brace matters much.

If it's true that he stood over basically an unarmed and unconscience person and fired 4 or 5 more rounds into him, then he's got some explaining to do and the jury won't care what he's wearing.

Would it matter if he was handicapped to the point that he rode over to the robber in a hoveround scooter and did the same thing?

Probably not.
 
He seemed to get around ok in that brace. I think the execution portion of the video washes out all brace sympathy I may have had earlier on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top