I guess we’ll see what the jury says about that, if it even goes to court.
I didn’t defend anything recently, other than to say that the criminal who meant nothing but harm in that situation is a bigger threat no matter what shape he is in, figuratively speaking perhaps, than the pharmacist. Ersland, if they had picked any other shop to rob, would have more likely than not never killed another person in his life. That is unless someone has credible evidence of his homicidal tendencies prior to this event. I’m all ears…
His actions are debatable for sure (10+ pages here alone) but are nowhere near black and white murder. I find it hard to believe that there are so many here who, in any other situation, would reserve some doubt, especially given the fact that the video is NOT clear what shape the robber was in when he got shot the second time. After all, the only thing we base the unconscious claim on is the report of the ME. I provided a cite pages ago where a woman was shot with the same caliber weapon, through and through, and made herself a cup of tea while waiting for the police to arrive. It’s not that cut and dry.
Similar supposition and theories get shot down instantly in every 9/11 or Kennedy thread, but for some reason, perhaps because the act of self defense is so heinous to so many here, that element of doubt goes out the window and minds are shut. I can find plenty of “experts” that say that the planes couldn’t be flown into the buildings by amateurs or that the steel in the WTC was cut with thermite and they will be summarily be shot down in short order.
In this case for some reason however, the ME in OKC is given the benefit of the doubt as though he was Dr Quincy or something.
No, I meant that Ersland might’ve made the perp on the floor, who may have been stirring, think that he wasn’t even concerned with him. When actually Ersland was full aware of what was going on.
I think maybe the naysayers might be assuming something that could be swaying their opinion. Could it be that some of you think that when someone gets shot in the head they are automatically incapacitated? There could be a hundred ways to get shot in the head and many of them could leave a person in full control of his body.
A Medical Examiner is not an “expert”. He is an expert. No quotation marks. It’s his professional job to examine the corpse and tell us what, in his considered, expert, trained and experienced opinion happened. It’s what he is paid to do.
That’s why so many of us lend credence to his words.
No, it’s because the best information we have, and the most expert person involved, says that he was unconscious. Unconscious people are, pretty much by definition, incapacitated.
Well, if I thought a couple more Neanderthals might be storming into the cave I might finish him off to better the odds. The thing is, if I don’t, it could be the end of me. I’d rather err on my side than his.
See my previous link to start with. Similar caliber gun, drastically different result = reasonable doubt to the ME’s opinion.
Second, with that in mind, I can imagine a possibility where Parker flinched or more, enough for Ersland to consider him a new threat, even after he had already dropped him with a headshot.
Third, the video is not conclusive as to the status of Parker other than he was down.
Fourth, nothing in Ersland’s past has been brought forward to indicate any latent homicidal tendencies.
That’s what I have so far. All that plus the nagging thought that if Parker wouldn’t have decided to commit armed robbery, he’d be alive right now. He made a bad decision and it cost him his life.
Yes, I’m serious. Plus, I, along with quite a few others here, are displaying far more logic on this issue than you are. Your posts are, essentially, gainsaying/naysaying. If this thread gets moved to the Pit or if someone decides to Pit you regarding your posts in this thread, I’ll be happy to explain it further to you in that forum.
That’s… OK, not the Pit. Moderation called for : that is a misguided opinion to hold, sir.
Yup. Until he murdered someone, there was no indication he was a murderer. That’s always a problem with these guys ! They oughta be shot in the crib, I tell ya.
This event is the matter under discussion. Ersland fired multiple bullets on a public street at a person running away and fired five more bullets into an injured person with no apparent concern for ricochets. That makes him far more dangerous to the public in this case.
If his lawyers come up with a defense of temporary insanity, I am not going to go calling for his head or defaming the lawyers and if I were the prosecutor, I would probably go with a charge of Second Degree Murder, (or whatever Oklahoma uses for “not premeditated”), but the claims that he was justified for the killing because Parker “was a threat” are clearly belied by the fact that he walked past Parker, leaving his back to the kid, while he dug out his other gun and that he made no effort to secure or examine the kid for weapons before he shot him. If Parker was such a threat, (or if Ersland perceived Parker to be a threat), Ersland demonstrated a complete indifference to that threat in the videos.
So, since the camera didn’t show it, there is no way possible that Parker may have awoke from his unconscious state? How about a nervous system reaction that caused him to flinch in a way that seemed threatening? All I’m saying is that there are plenty of alternatives out there.
For the record, I too am troubled by the shots fired in the street. Negligent discharge of a firearm seems warranted.
Yet I figured it was obvious enough to anyone else but you that your number 1 argument was so powerfully stupid I could make fun of it with impunity. History will judge me.
But for your benefit : essentially, you dig up one story about somebody shot in the head who didn’t lose consciousness, and from it derive that people shot in the head are unlikely to lose consciousness. Converse fallacy of accident : you derive the rule from the exception.
Neverminding the conclusions of a doctor, trained in examining wounds, and expert (to the extent of human knowledge of the brain) in telling the consequences of this or that head trauma, who actually examined the kid’s wounds. In person, and in the flesh. But hey, he’s just an “expert”, what the hell does he know that you don’t ?
I said it is possible, not that it was unlikely, and provided proof with a credible cite. The .380 is well known for being underpowered for self defense.
That is not what the video shows. The video shows Ersland leaning down to put the pistol in Parker’s abdomen. If Parker was suddenly jerking around in a suspicious manner, then Ersland’s natural reaction would be to shoot from his standing position at Parker on the floor–one does not lean in to a threatening situation. If Parker did not jerk until Ersland was crouched over him, then it would seem that Ersland would have been firing as he jerked back from Parker’s “threatening” motion. Neither happened.