Armed Citizen: Oklahoma Pharmacist Defends Employees from Robbers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sixer, Had these thugs come in and opened fire on the pharmacist, likely he would not have been charged at all even with him finishing off the thug. Had shots been fired at him, they wouldn't have been so fast to question it as an execution... It also would have helped if the downed thug had had a firearm too...
Brent
 
Doctors do not generally perform major spinal surgery on people who do not need it, nor on people whose physical exams and xrays do not support the diagnosis.
Click to expand...

Having read up on this topic, I think that you have a greater confidence in physical exams and X-rays than physicians do. Patients with seemingly identical X-rays can report radically different symptoms. One might report "Oh, I have some lower back pain sometimes but it's really nothing" and the other might report "OMG, I can't live with this back pain." Back pain can be incredibly subjective. Many of us have bulged discs and don't know it, but our X-rays coupled with reports of pain could easily justify surgery. It's not at all like a broken arm.
 
I need to digest this new info, I feel a real long winded rant rumbling around:cool:

Wildthetrckistomakesureisaywhatineedtoandonlyoffend20%insteadofeveryoneAlaska ™
 
Keep in mind, he did just have a back surgery 6 weeks before the shooting. Doctors do not generally perform major spinal surgery on people who do not need it, nor on people whose physical exams and xrays do not support the diagnosis.
Click to expand...
Actually, back surgery is one of the most abused forms of medical treatment. Back pain and trauma is something that you often cannot prove or disprove by x-ray or exam. Therefore it is very commonly used by pill seekers and frauds. The surgery is common and often done multiple times on patients that never showed any physical signs of trauma simply because they demand it and have insurance.

It is often so hard for healthy minded people to fathom that someone would go to such extremes for drugs or attention, but never try and figure out an addict. :)
 
His actions started out with a good shoot, totally defending himself and others. However after that 5 seconds was over he has done nothing to help himself and a lot to hurt his case. He talked to the police and even talked to the media. To top it off he lied to both. Now his history is coming out and as Pax said you better believe that this will be brought out in his trial as state of mind when the shooting happened.

Two things can be learned from this, first don't talk but if you do don't lie. When you find yourself in a hole quit digging. This fellow is calling in contractors to help him dig.
 
my .02 from having just watched the video again...

store owner appears to have justification (two masked robbers / one pointing weapon) for the first shot.

as for the remaining shots, the trial will sort through that.

just from watching it, I think the owner allowed some anger to take over
and thus he fired off 5 more to downed BG.

A lesson here that if ever one shoots to protect life/others, there is a chance that anger and rage could set up shop in one's head if a BG is down but not totally out.

Obviously Mr Ersland decided to make sure the BG was out of commission before he called police. I believe he let emotion get the best of him.

Who are we to say we aren't succeptible to that.

was it pre planned in his head? I don't know. I think the video shows more of
a "you won't rob me or anyone else again ever" type mentality.

Mr Ersland will be asked every which way from Sunday what he was thinking and why he did what he did. And the jury will decide as to his guilt or innocence.
 
Mr Ersland will be asked every which way from Sunday what he was thinking and why he did what he did. And the jury will decide as to his guilt or innocence.
Click to expand...

Given the outright lies he has already told the media, and police, unless the defense attorney is a complete moron I doubt the defendant will take the stand in his own defense.

The last thing the defense counsel will want is for this man to be questioned on direct.

Then again, if the media feeding frenzy continues, and more damning facts come to light, he might not have a choice. Either way, I hope the trial is televised, this will be quite entertaining. (in a disturbing sort of way)
 
Last edited:
A psychologist who treated his son said the boy’s mother reported Ersland "displayed paranoid behavior, abused drugs and displayed other inappropriate behavior,” records show.
Click to expand...

And that statement above could easily have been describing Ersland having a couple of Bug Out Bags packed, and taking pain pills for his back pain, and maybe he stuck his tongue out and said 'Nyaaahh Nyaaah Nyaaaahhhh!' when his exwife was taking him to court.

Theres a lot of information just released there, but I think much of it is just to sensationalize and twitterpate everyone. "Ooooo noooo he is a nutjob, he owned a lot of guns and had interest in collectible Marlins! And Civil War weapons! That proves he was racist and only wanted to kill those poor black boys!"

Hester reported Ersland "repeats himself quite often and insists on volunteering information about himself, particularly regarding his injury, that neither Jeremy nor I have solicited. Mr. (Ersland) appears fully engaged in conversation when he is talking or when/if he is the subject of conversation but ... seems distracted ... when either Jeremy or I are speaking.
Click to expand...
So he doesn't know how to interact with his child? Big deal, millions of parents out there struggle with the same problem. And what child would give an honest answer, when asked 'which parent do you want to be around?' You know his mother was pushing her bias against Ersland and the child only wanted to please his mom.

Nothing is proven with all this 'new information'. I hope most of it is deemed 'inadmissable'. The trial should focus on what Ersland did that is caught on camera. Not on anything previously.
 
Sixer, Had these thugs come in and opened fire on the pharmacist, likely he would not have been charged at all even with him finishing off the thug. Had shots been fired at him, they wouldn't have been so fast to question it as an execution... It also would have helped if the downed thug had had a firearm too...
Click to expand...

Wait I'm confused. I thought that is exactly what the thugs did....

Also, the accusations of paranoid behavior (if true) would support the notion that I put forth earlier of this being an event that the shooter has planned out thoroughly in his head many times.
Click to expand...

Read through this very forum and you'll find endless examples of people planning or rehearsing what to do in this type of situation. Nothing wrong with that.
 
Wait I'm confused. I thought that is exactly what the thugs did....
Click to expand...

The thugs never fired a shot. Specifically, the dead guy was not armed in any way.

Read through this very forum and you'll find endless examples of people planning or rehearsing what to do in this type of situation. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...

Rehearsing the legal and moral action is one thing, rehearsing an execution is quite another.
 
That is what the pharmacist claimed but there is absolutely no evidence the only one with a gun fired. He didn't need to warrant lethal force against them but he ran off and the other wasn't armed with a firearm and was down when shot 5 more times. Had the one with a gun poked a hole in the wall the DA may not have been forced to review the video so hard to decide it was 1st degree murder charge material. Not to mention the pharmacist is caught redhanded in several blatant lies that cannot be attributed to just a little factual error due to stress...

Brent
 
Nothing is proven with all this 'new information'. I hope most of it is deemed 'inadmissable'. The trial should focus on what Ersland did that is caught on camera. Not on anything previously.
Click to expand...
And if this is handled by a jury of FAIR HONEST LAW ABIDING PEERS... It will likely end in a 1st degree murder or 1st degree manslaughter guilty verdict as he clearly stands over an unarmed, downed adolescent thug and "FILLS 'EM FULL O' LEAD..."
Brent
 
Nothing is proven with all this 'new information'. I hope most of it is deemed 'inadmissable'. The trial should focus on what Ersland did that is caught on camera. Not on anything previously.
Click to expand...

In a perfect world this might be true but, it has no basis in reality. The defendants state of mind will come into play here, his behaviors both past, and present are going to be dissected, some of the hearsay stuff from the Ex, and such will be inadmissible but, there will be plenty of other fodder that will be. What is on the tape will be but a part of the picture the prosecutor will paint for the jury. As if the tape weren't bad enough.
 
Read through this very forum and you'll find endless examples of people planning or rehearsing what to do in this type of situation. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...
Rehearsing the legal and moral action is one thing, rehearsing an execution is quite another.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is a huge difference between practicing tactics and rehearsing an execution. If you include "finishing off" your assailant in your tactical plan, you deserve to rot in jail.
 
If many of you were asked to do a profile of the type of person who would act in the manner we have seen from Ersland from the very beginning, especially in the reports he gave to investigators and to media, how he was a hero, how he was saving someone else, how he stood up so bravely in overwhelming fire, how "crippled" he was...and then of course watching the video and just how accurate he was describing the actual events... It really doesn't surprise me in the revelations coming from the Oklahoman in this latter report. It will certainly play a part, and both the defense and the prosecution will use it in court.

The sad part for me, is that while I will fight to the death for the rights of the Constitution, especially the 2nd amendment, this case sadly proves not everyone should have deadly weapons in their control.
 
And another point I can make...
How would the general populace perceive this if it were a big burly biker guy at a bar he tended that did the same exact moves? Or a middle eastern or oriental shop keep of a small convenience store?
I know as prejudice as it may sound... I would give the pharmacist a few bonus points as it would seem he is in a "profession"...
Brent
 
my .02 from having just watched the video again...

store owner appears to have justification (two masked robbers / one pointing weapon) for the first shot.
Click to expand...

The DA said as much in announcing the charges. The first shot by Ersland is not at issue in any way and will not be an issue in the trial.
 
And if this is handled by a jury of FAIR HONEST LAW ABIDING PEERS... It will likely end in a 1st degree murder or 1st degree manslaughter guilty verdict as he clearly stands over an unarmed, downed adolescent thug and "FILLS 'EM FULL O' LEAD..."
Click to expand...

I think if we polled the members of TFL who have watched the video and who have watched or read his interviews, most would find him guilty of some crime. The trial is going to be over the degree of culpability, not whether it was self-defense.
 
The last thing the defense counsel will want is for this man to be questioned on direct.
Click to expand...

Small correction: Defense counsel would be happy for his client to testify on direct provided there was no cross-examination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top