Skip to comments.GUILTY: Ersland found guilty in pharmacy shooting trial
Posted on 05/26/2011 3:05:28 PM PDT by FourPeas
OKLAHOMA CITY -- A jury has found Jerome Ersland guilty of first-degree murder after he shot and killed Antwan Parker who was attempting to rob Ersland's southside pharmacy. They are suggesting life...
(Excerpt) Read more at kfor.com ...
A lot of irrelevant side issues are being injected into this case and the DA was doing it himself. Repeated mentions that Antwun was "a child" and he was "16." Does that mean that if he had legally been an adult they wouldn't have charged Ersland? References to Ersland faking his back injuries. So he wore that back brace because he knew he would be robbed and would murder a poor unarmed armed robbery accomplice? He lied about his service record. That is relevant to being targeted for armed robbery and self defense during the robbery?
He didn't do himself any favors by telling lies about those things but it looks like he has been convicted of 1st degree murder because he has some emotional issues not because of the facts of the case.
I think we are just throwing insults now. I know most of the posters on this thread and they are all good FReepers. Let’s talk facts and save the insults for trolls....
Ersland is more than a ham, he was uncovered as a stolen valor war phony, something that some freepers that aren’t defending him, do not like and will not tolerate.
I have delivered facts until I’m exhausted, there are a couple of hyped up 14 year olds on this thread that are as ignorant about this case as can be but are obsessed with playing a game of asking daddy a thousand questions rather than reading some articles or watching the videos themselves.
“Once the robbers made a decision to rob, then that is the path you chose. Someone pulls a gun usually means business.”
Cops fire multiple rounds into people, who move the wrong way.
People ask: “Why did they kill him? Coulda just wounded him.”
But the PDs reply they are trained to fire to kill, period. And that scenario usually prevails.
But now this civilian is different. He doesn’t get to keep shooting until the threat is stopped, dead.
It is a double standard.
Maybe. They said it was a solid projectile that split on his skull with the larger piece bouncing off and the smaller piece entering his cranium. At any rate it made him fall. Pull one on me and I'll fall before you pull the trigger. LOL
The only question for me is what happens after.
That's true. That is where I think things become debatable and his story telling, Antwun's age and the coroner's speculations are only marginally relevant to that determination.
People living in liberals’ Utopia seem to think the victim pharmacist should have offered the robber a free aspirin after shooting him once.
So the suspect was moving on the floor?
How do you know he was not attempting to get up or suddenly produce a weapon?
Are you just guessing?
Feel free to answer the questions that repeatedly go unanswered on this thread.
Yes I am guessing Dragnet, we can't see what is happening on the floor. And as you have pointed out, he MIGHT have had a weapon, as it turns out he did not. This is why this case is very important.
No, I didn't. The video you linked was poor in audio and video quality. I had to turn the sound up to the max setting and could barely hear the DA and couldn't hear any of the questions. I've never had to turn the volume more than a little past halfway before for any other video or audio file. The video ScreamingFist linked to was crisp and clear and showed the pistol clearly for one second. That was enough to answer my simple question which I would have accepted a simple written reply about if you had bothered to just answer a simple question instead of acting like the jerk you so often do.
Yep, and if so the robbery victim would likely have viewed any movements as a potential threat.
Hard to believe the robbery victim was found guilty when the main evidence against him was not even visible on the video.
For any of those that think this guy should get FIRST DEGREE MURDER... I'll ask this. Why aren't the cops in Arizona being charged with murder of a Marine whose house was assaulted by mistake, shot 60 times, and allowed to bleed out while they made up a scenario that he shot at them (found his gun on safety),...
The cops can now break into your house, murder you and you best not defend yourself or you'll die and/or get charged with murder.
As another angle to this where I grew up in San Antonio, if somebody was a witness to a felony by a gang banger, you better move cause you're DEAD if you try to testify or give eyewitness evidence to the police.
NO SNITCHES... that's why the little punk should have been killed and the runner should have met the same fate. Just because he was not a threat at the time, if this pharmacist had tried to testify against him or the runner, I'd bet he would have been threatened or worse.
A little maggot got killed, too bad.
I don't have to like the pharmacist but I can't say I wouldn't have done the same thing.... all except for the talking to the cops.
He should have done what the Home Depot did when the cops murdered that Navy guy in Vegas.... "lose the video". Gee , isnt' it funny how stuff like that happens when cops are pulling the trigger, but this clown actually kills a robber and is now facing prison, loss of his career and his life is now screwed. I feel sorry for the pharmacist.
LOL, the video and audio in post 12 is just fine, and it shows the pistol just as well, and the DA clearly describes the 380, too bad you are having computer problems.
You can clearly see the large pistol at 3:49, I am looking at it.
One more childish reply from you is no surprise at this point.
By the way, for a guy that kept claiming that he had watched the video as I kept requesting you to, it sure took you a long time to come up with these fake audio/video claims.
Your childish lies are tiring.
>>And THAT, my friends, is about the bottom line. <<
The bottom line is “DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN ARMED ROBBERIES IF YOU EXPECT TO BE WALKING TOMORROW.”
I’m just glad that we could fill you in this Stolen Valor, fake war hero guy.
Another childish response? Is that all you have? Another non-sequitur straw man from the FR king of straw men? LOL
There was nothing childish about that, didn’t I make you aware that the man that you are so aggressively defending is a Stolen Valor, fake war hero, claiming fake war injuries?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.