Folk Hero or Murderer?

Great Debates
601

How about the logic of dropping it when he was shot? Does that seem too far fetched for you? Skepticism is a healthy thing but it’s also good to be aware of what you don’t know and, rather than assume things based on sparse details , ask for clarification while refraining from unnecessary judgment.

So it’s best to judge it as far fetched? Granted you have no reason to assume it’s all true but you also have no real reason to assume it’s not. I’ve seen lot’s more unlikely things on true police videos or read about them. That’s what gets me about people calling “bullshit”

I agree it’s off topic and I only told the story to make a related point. Still, considering I just pointed out a very obvious reason you seem to have casually missed while judging it unbelievable you might want to consider there are very real understandable answers to the your other doubts.

Having no reason to embrace or doubt I would refrain from judgment. There’s simply nothing outrageously far fetched about the story with the possible exception of full auto weapons.

Let me pose a question and present a perfectly reasonable answer

Why didn’t the wounded perp escape when he had the chance rather than stay and attack the waitresses. Doesn’t make sense.

Until he was shot he didn’t know anyone but his partner and him had a gun. They were in a building at night that they didn’t know that well so neither was positive which way was out. He couldn’t run because he was shot in the hip so he scooted back the way he had come which led back upstairs. Once there he had no way out because he couldn’t leave by the skylight they had entered through. Wounded, scared and angry he barricades himself in and takes out his frustrations on the girls. There are lots of perfectly reasonable possibilities with a little thought.

Agreed. That’s the part the available evidence isn’t clear about.

Again you assume too much.

Good Lord man, think! The point is that if my friends older brother had pumped five bullets into that mans belly the girls would not have been assaulted. That’s the regret he has to live with.

It may very well come down to whether or not the robber was conscious, depending on how the laws are written in that state.

Or, it may come down to the jury’s impression of Ersland’s state of mind during the event. If based on the evidence available to them (likely more than we have) they believe he still felt threatened, or felt the other employees in the store were threatened while robber was on the ground, or they feel that due to the circumstances, he wasn’t thinking clearly, he’ll like get off, otherwise he’s likely going to prison.

I watched to see if there was any sign of the perp regaining consciousness and trying to get up. The only thing I noticed is that Ersland might be hurrying over to Parker {as much as he can} Maybe that means he just realized Parker is alive and conscious.

602

Yes. I get the point of your story. I got it when I first read it. What I don’t get is why you posted it. I take it that its supposed to be an example of what could have happened if the pharmacist hadn’t shot the robber 5 more times, as in, someone else being hurt after the perp was wounded.

The whole issue here, though, is that a lot of people believe the perp in the pharmacy was fully incapacitated already, after being shot the first time. Whereas, in your story, it should be obvious to anyone that the perp wasn’t incapacitated after the first shot. He was able to rape those girls because he was still mobile. In the pharmacy, the perp was no longer mobile.

Your story isn’t applicable. For it to be applicable, it would need to involve a perp in a similar situation (i.e. on the ground, in mobile, possibly appearing unconscious, and appearing to be much less of a threat), coming to, and hurting someone.

I have to go to work now, so I’ll reply to the rest of your post when I get back.

603

There’s no real cause and effect between being shot and dropping your gun. Yes, it could’ve happened, but given that’s rather important detail to leave out of a story like that, it’s a much bigger assumption to thing that he had dropped the gun.

But let’s say he did drop it. Maybe after being shot he was going to surrender, but then changed his mind just after dropping the gun and instead ran upstairs. OK, he’s unarmed, but he’s still running back to where the other possible victims are. Being a grown man, he still could possibly overpower those girls (since The Older Brother probably didn’t know they were tied up), and seeing as how fully automatic weapons by their self seem a bit much, it wouldn’t unreasonable to think he may have another weapon on him. TOB taking another shot would have been completely understandable.

I have multiple reason to assume it’s not, and they’re all within the text of the story. I didn’t watch this in a true police video, nor did I read it in a reliable publication. I read it on an internet message board, in a post by someone I don’t happen to know. When I read or hear a rather fantastic story from a source I don’t know to be reliable, my default response is skepticism. Otherwise, I’d believe every unlikely story that gets forwarded into my email inbox.

But, if I had posted that story, you should have reason to doubt. And out of all those reasons the automatic weapons was one of the less glaring. And, of course you could come up with possible explanations for each of those issues, that’s why I said it was unlikely, not impossible. But they add up, and for such a short story, my count of six issues is a bit much.

You said he went back upstairs. That covers walking, and heading towards possible victims, I already covered likely still armed.

I don’t know, he seemed to be moving basically the same speed the whole time to me. Which makes sense, given the situation I’d think he would want to go full speed right out of the gate. Which wasn’t very fast, probably because of that back brace.

The forensics lab could probably use the different camera angles create a 3D computer simulation of the whole event and determine his exact speed at any given moment, but that’s a bit beyond me.

604

Yes but in a nonspecific way. A wounded perp is still dangerous to you and others. A dead one isn’t.

I agree, but we’ve established that we **don’t know **if the downed perp in the drugstore was trying to get up or not. In court case about homicide it’s beyon d reasonable doubt rather than more likely than not. That’s what I’ve been saying all along. Regardless of what you or I think is *probably true * without clear strong evidence showing the robber could not have been trying to get up the reasonable doubt goes to the guy who was being robbed at gunpoint. IMHO.
What we don’t want is for a hospitalized druggist to talk about his regret because he didn’t finsh off an armed robber who manged to get away and hurt someone in the process. See how it applies now?

Sorry, I don’t agree. Based on the point I’m trying to make I think it is.

605

First of all,with the medical examiner saying he was unconscious, if nothing else comes out that can prove that wrong (which is unlikely, since medical examiners do this for a living), I’d say there’s clear, strong evidence that he wasn’t getting back up.

In regards to the story, even in the very unlikely situation the robber did begin to move, that’s still far different than already up, still moving, and heading towards other victims.

Why do you think prosecutors go on in court about how heinous the crime was even though that has nothing to do with whether or not the defendant did it? Why do think defense attorneys often try to attack the character of the victim even when it in no way legally justifies the crime or prove the defendants innocence?

It’s because juries are made up of ordinary people who are affected by those things. The same way, Ersland claiming to have been shot or shot at, makes him appear more of a victim, therefor people would be more sympathetic toward him, and more likely to believe his actions were justified.

606

Please provide a cite where the medical examiner is saying he was definitely unconscious.

And exactly what difference does that make? Moving, trying to get up. indicates he might pose a threat since seconds ago he was a culprit in an armed robbery. We’re talking about a druggist not a trained police officer. If a criminal who was willing to kill you moments ago is conscious and moving then he’s a threat.

607

Prosecutors charged Ersland with murder after the medical examiner reported Parker was alive, unconscious and on the floor when Ersland fired five shots into his abdomen, killing him.

–The Oklahoman

It makes a big difference, since by time Ersland got back with the gun, the robber was still on the ground, and still unarmed. It’s still very debatable whether he should have fired his gun. While in your story, it’s far less debatable.

608

Somebody with a gunshot wound went and raped two girls while police were getting organised? That seems very unlikely.

The friend went and got a gun, but didn’t ask staff to leave along the way?

This story just doesn’t seem to square with logic

609

Comon. You just said you couldn’t think of* any* logical reason why he would drop it and I provided a very logical and fairly obvious reason that you hadn’t thought of. It’s not about cause and effect. It’s about plausibility. Being shot and dropping your weapon is pretty dam plausible. Because of that I’m also suggesting that all the points in the story you find far fetched are have equally plausible reasonable answers. According to the evidence we just saw, just because you haven’t thought of it, doesn’t mean it’s highly unlikely.

Non Sequiter. Skepticism can mean you acknowledge it may or may not be true, which is different than calling it very unlikely. I understand that there’s no reason to eagerly accept a story on a discussion board as true. I’d say there’s equally no reason to dismiss it as untrue when you lack details and evidence. There’s nothing that far fetched about the story. I purposely told an abbreviated version lacking in details because it wasn’t about convincing anyone but rather making a point that related to the thread subject. The lack of detail has nothing to do with believability. It logically means you don’t have enough details to make a conclusive judgment. Instead you assume things without evidence and declare it’s extremely unlikely. That’s your call. It doesn’t matter to me.

Considering the example we just discussed I’d say your math is what should be doubted. Regardless, your belief or doubt is irrelevant to the thread.

610

So is your bullshit fantasy story.

611

ITT: badly written fiction.

612

What type of* logic *do you apply to an armed robbery with gunplay from robber and intended victim? Perhaps you can explain the *logic * of a serial rapist or a simple compulsive shoplifter. IOW, how the hell do you logically explain extreme occurrences in the human condition? Think of outlandish things you’ve read about or seen reported as fact and accepted and then tell me how this story is so very unlikely. Things that don’t make rational sense happen in real human life all the time and especially in violent crime. I understand healthy skepticism but the desire to piss on this story you know so little about baffles me.

I don’t see anything any more unlikely about it than the true story we’re discussing in the thread. Imagine that’s a story someone related rather than actual news. Is it unlikely? I suppose, but we know unlikely things do happen among a population of hundreds of millions. It’s unlikely to win the lottery but yet someone just won over 200 million. Do you believe that?

613

So 1 out 200 million people shot will rape your sisters?

614

Ask a cop if they’ve ever heard of anything like that and they’ll tell you some doozies.

615

This really hurts because I value your opinion so much. Oh wait. I don’t value it at all.
Whew! What a relief.
Honestly, I don’t get the seemingly random arbitrary need to piss on this story but if it makes you feel special or clever or whatever, knock yourself out.

What I’d point out to the skeptics who seem to think you have reasoned this out is that violent crime and other extreme human behavior often doesn’t follow a logical reasonable pattern. IMO imagining you can logically decide whether this is plausible based on so few details is in itself illogical and unreasonable but hey.YMMV.

616

You seem to think something unlikely can’t happen. People who fall out of planes and live would tell you different. Or do you believe that never really happens?

617

Anyone with a concealed carry and tactical training, and that’s a lot of people, will absolutely try to get the first shot off. If the bad guy does then you might be too dead to counter. And none will feel guilty for doing it. It’s how you stay alive. It just is not a point of contention in a robbery trial. A victim obviously must protect themselves from the threat of a gun pointed at them.

618

Let’s see.

1 someone is shot, after repelling, mission impossible style through a skylight
2 they wonder off, instead of fleeing, seeking medical treatment, or dealing with the still armed older brother
How about someone cough up a cite for this fiction or retract it?

619

Hasty opinion. The old adage about them is true.

620

And evidently 6 out of 10 posters will be opinionated enough to make a snap judgment based on very little information and seemingly enjoy pissing on a story for no good reason. Go figure.
That’s enough of a hijack for me. For the sake of GD and the thread I’m done with this foolishness.