Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Druggist in OKC is convicted of murder (shot robber)
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20110527_222_A15_CUTLIN912500 ^

Posted on 05/28/2011 11:54:51 PM PDT by TigerClaws

OKLAHOMA CITY - An emotional jury decided Thursday that pharmacist Jerome Jay Ersland is guilty of first-degree murder for fatally shooting a masked robber two years ago in an Oklahoma City drugstore.

Jurors recommended life in prison as punishment.

Two co-workers at Reliable Discount Pharmacy told jurors that Ersland was a hero who saved their lives on May 19, 2009.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20110527_222_A15_CUTLIN912500

(Excerpt) Read more at tulsaworld.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: armedcitizen; banglist; ersland; robbery; selfdefense
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351-374 next last
To: Eaker

The 5 shots at issue weren’t “immediate” they followed him removing himself from danger and then returning to load a separate weapon to execute the robber with. Texas’ law covers the first shot the same as Oklahoma’s.


301 posted on 05/29/2011 7:23:21 PM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

The code word is reasonable, not possibility.

If, by most people’s definition, something could happen, then it is permissible. However, if the Oklahoma jury thought that it was a reasonable possibility that the black man, who had taken a bullet to the head could bounce up, like they do in movies, they probably would have found the pharmacist not guilty.

Remember, there is more evidence than just the video. The jury would have also had a gander the the medical examiner’s report and other pieces of evidence.


302 posted on 05/29/2011 7:30:58 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

Please show me in the video or anywhere else that the robber was incapacitated. He still could have been moving.

Looking at the linked video the robber could be bouncing on a pogo stick with his gun as he is clearly not in the picture.

According to the O.J. jury all of the lab boys were wrong about everything. Was this the same jury?


303 posted on 05/29/2011 7:38:04 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

The jury sure seemed to think he was incapacitated. It is likely that in any appeal that will be a judicial fact, operate from that basis moving forward. He may have been doing all kinds of things, but the behavior of the pharmacist shows that at the least the use of other than deadly force could keep everyone safe.


304 posted on 05/29/2011 7:53:52 PM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

According to the O.J. jury all of the lab boys were wrong about everything. Was this the same jury?

As to the evidence, YOU don’t know because YOU weren’t there. At the pharmacy or the trial. I am not defending the pharmacist, I am correcting your errors concerning the law.

Further do not presume to lecture me on what the Texas Penal Code says or means.

You are giving your knee jerk opinion based on nothing where as I have been concealed carrying since it became legal in Texas, have been to numerous classes and field training and have lived the life.

You on the other hand have no training and no clue.


305 posted on 05/29/2011 7:54:19 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

I wasn’t there or at the trial. What I am saying is that nothing that I have seen on this thread or at the link has convinced me that the robber wasn’t on a pogo stick much less moving.


306 posted on 05/29/2011 7:58:31 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
black man

Before long you are going to be calling him the victim.

Call him what he is, the robber, the criminal, the instigator or possibly the scumbag not black man.

Acting like a liberal journalist is not going to help your case here.

307 posted on 05/29/2011 8:01:24 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

I don’t need to explain anything to you.

However, the jury saw all the experts, saw all the evidence, and choose to convict. They had far more evidence than you or I do.

I can trust the juries judgment on this.

If the jury thought that anything was doubtful, or that the prosecutor had a weak case, they likely wouldn’t have convicted the pharmacist.


308 posted on 05/29/2011 8:02:34 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

That doesn’t mean the jury was wrong. And it definitely doesn’t mean that he wouldn’t have been convicted in Texas despite a similar law. The jury likely had more information, specifically ME testimony about the likelihood of the robber being conscious in addition to the behavior of the pharmacist when he reentered the pharmacy to arrive at their verdict. There is also the issue of the defense arguing pure self defense which is a hard defense to argue in this case. He may have been on a pogo stick, but I think we can agree a pogo sticking robber isn’t a threat to your life. When he reentered, it seems very possible that he could have prevented any threat to himself and others with less than deadly force whatever condition you think the robber was in. By turning his back on him, it looks like he wasn’t training a gun or close to doing so on the pharmacist who could have held one of his guns on him until police arrived.


309 posted on 05/29/2011 8:06:53 PM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

No. You can’t presume what I think.

It’s just good writing to not keep using the same terms repeatedly.

My position on this hasn’t changed.


310 posted on 05/29/2011 8:08:40 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

I’ve served on two juries this year - a Grand Jury, and a mock trial jury. Depressing experiences. Juries are dominated by loudmouth uninformed idiots, no exceptions to the rule in my experience. That in a case such as this one, there was not one, not a SINGLE juror skeptical of the very basis of the case, may say something about the case OR about the jury.


311 posted on 05/29/2011 8:09:53 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde; Jonty30

Based on both of your posts clearly O.J. was innocent.

The jury said he was so he was.

The evidence that I saw made him look guilty but the jury said he was innocent so I guess I interpreted what I saw incorrectly.

I sure hope they catch the real killer someday.


312 posted on 05/29/2011 8:11:53 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

However, the opportunity is there to say something and it is your responsibility to do so if you have reasonable doubt.

According to the facts, as presented in the news story and the video, I didn’t see anything that would cause me to doubt the juries decision.


313 posted on 05/29/2011 8:14:30 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
My position on this hasn’t changed.

That's fine. I just hope you actually read the link I posted and have learned something about actual gun laws. Also, if you break Texas law you will be tried in Texas by Texans so even if you have a goofy liberal interpretation of the law we don't.

314 posted on 05/29/2011 8:17:24 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

No, I think the jury of OJ was wrong. I am capable of making my own decisions on that, thank you very much.


315 posted on 05/29/2011 8:18:08 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Well, you certainly are not guilty of being consistent that’s for sure.


316 posted on 05/29/2011 8:20:03 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

My views are hardly liberal, but I suppose such an accusation is dependent upon to whom I am talking to.

From where I sit, you don’t get to kill people, just because you think they should get to die.

Obama does though. And you have something common with Obama, congratulations.


317 posted on 05/29/2011 8:22:52 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

Thank you. I take that as a compliment.

Sorry for the above cut, didn’t mean anything by it. :( Unfortunately, you can’t edit posts once you’ve laid them down.


318 posted on 05/29/2011 8:26:05 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

Perhaps you think it is entirely unreasonable for the jury to have come to the conclusion they did. I don’t think so at all. I know how I would have acted if someone who had just tried to rob was moving on the floor at all. For starters I wouldn’t take my eyes off him. Maybe to you it is reasonable to turn your back on someone you think is dangerous and wants to kill you, it isn’t to me.

The right to self defense is only to use the force necessary to protect yourself. I think that is reasonable to find that he went well beyond that in this case, did so with malice aforethought and murdered someone. The jury took all the evidence available to them, considered the defenses given (again if you are mad at someone, be mad at the defense attorneys) and found that what he did constituted murder 1. It was not self defense even if that is what you saw. Had you sat through the trial you may have thought so as well.

Why do you think their decision was unreasonable? Not why you wouldn’t reach the same decision, but why no reasonable person could reach the one they did.


319 posted on 05/29/2011 8:29:22 PM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

I am being consistent.

I’m just not being simplistic.

I do believe in defending one’s home, even if it means taking somebody out to do it, but that doesn’t give one the right to take somebody out if they are no longer in position to harm you.

That is a consistent position.


320 posted on 05/29/2011 8:29:45 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

And Oklahomans are known for being incredibly liberal with liberal laws right?


321 posted on 05/29/2011 8:31:09 PM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

My position is that anyone who attempts armed robbery should be executed. I am a strong supporter of the death penalty. Murderers, rapists, kidnappers, child molesters, arsonists should also face the death penalty. And not after 20 or more years of appeals, either.

Under use of the death penalty is criminal.

I don’t care about the details of this case. The druggist was the victim of an armed robbery or attempted one, and anyone assisting that crime deserves to die.

Sorry I may sound harsh but “justice” has been subverted and perverted too long in this country. It’s a legalese game now with innocent citizens doing time or being judged guilty of crimes they didn’t commit, or things they did that shouldn’t be crimes, and damn career criminals being known as “clients” by the cops. Criminals live lives of nothing but crime and this is one of the things that is ruining our country.

“Mercy to the cruel is cruelty to the innocent”.


322 posted on 05/29/2011 8:36:34 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

Anybody I have met, who came from Tornado Valley, are usually chock full of good sense.


323 posted on 05/29/2011 8:42:12 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde; Jonty30

I have said repeatedly that I am not defending the pharmacist and simply came on the thread to correct misinterpretations of the law.

Most notably my first post on the thread #294.

However, you cannot convince me that this guy is guilty simply because the jury said so and in the next breath say that O.J. is guilty even though the jury said differently. That is not a convincing argument.

I will say that I never would have left a wounded person on the floor and chased the other one down the street and then returned, turning my back on him again just to return and shoot him. That is pretty damning behavior.


324 posted on 05/29/2011 8:45:30 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde; Jonty30
I think that is reasonable to find that he went well beyond that in this case, did so with malice aforethought and murdered someone.

Based upon the video, what do you think motivated the pharmacists action after re-entering the store?

Vengeance or sadism? (Maybe a distinction without a difference?)

Or might it have been something else entirely? Even considering that a significant interval of time passed between the initial shooting of the intruder and the subsequent shots, could he still have been acting on an adrenaline rush?

I'm not advocating a particular viewpoint one way or another (having not heard all the evidence as presented to the jury). I'm just curious about how fellow FReepers analyze this case. To a certain extent, this is reminiscent of the Bernhard Goetz case of 1984 and his remark, "You don't look so bad, here's another" when Goetz shot one of the thugs a second time.

325 posted on 05/29/2011 8:46:53 PM PDT by re_nortex (DP...that's what I like about Texas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde
And Oklahomans are known for being incredibly liberal with liberal laws right?

Juries are fairly conservative in Texas too but we have our share of liberal idiots and there are sections of Houston that if the jury was drawn from them O.J. would have gotten off too.

That is my point, "the jury decided" is not a convincing argument.

326 posted on 05/29/2011 8:54:07 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex

He was likely robbed before, I’m guessing, and he probably swore something like that would never happen again.

I know that, if something like that happened to me, I’d definitely have a different attitude about it.

As far as Bernie Goertz, I don’t know the details. However, my general position would be the same. If Bernie was in a reasonable amount of danger, I wouldn’t vote to convict. If the thug was on the ground and out, I might vote to convict, depending on the other evidence.


327 posted on 05/29/2011 8:54:49 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
but that doesn’t give one the right to take somebody out if they are no longer in position to harm you.

Show me on the video or on this thread where the bad guy didn't revive and start moving.

That is all I ask.

Oh, and in reference to my first post to you on this thread one can shoot a bad guy in the back in Texas and can even chase him down the road for two miles and then shoot his ass if one thinks he still has your 10 year old VCR.

328 posted on 05/29/2011 9:01:21 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
As far as Bernie Goertz, I don’t know the details.

While not wanting to divert the focus of the thread, the Goetz case is quite fascinating and does have certain parallels with that of Ersland. When time permits, I think you'll find researching it to be rewarding. It was very big here in the states in the mid-80's and triggered much debate on both sides. Since it occurred in New York City, there was probably more nationwide attention than that of this one in the smaller city of Oklahoma City.

I'm nearing 70 years of age and was in my 40's when Bernhard Goetz dominated the headlines for weeks. Supposedly it was a trigger (pun fully intended) for loosening restrictions on CCL.

329 posted on 05/29/2011 9:05:30 PM PDT by re_nortex (DP...that's what I like about Texas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

But you can’t show me that you can shoot a prone person in Texas.

If somebody has a gun, and he has shown his tendency to use it to kill. If you’re at all conscious, and you see him coming at you with a gun in his hand. If you aren’t moving at this point, it’s probably because you cannot move.

If you’re unconscious, and therefore unaware of the events around you, you aren’t moving.

Either way, you’re not moving and not a threat.

If you watch the video, the pharmacist had his arms stretched out when he shot the thug the second time. There is a fair amount of space shown between the gun barrel and the kid.

I’m no expert, but it looks like to me that if the kid could move he would have and his ability to move would have shown up on the bottom screen. Not to mention, the pharmacist, if he was aiming for a moving target at all, his arm would have been moving along with the target to ensure a clear shot.


330 posted on 05/29/2011 9:15:32 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex

I’ll look it up on Wikipedia and see what it says. Human interest stories interest me.


331 posted on 05/29/2011 9:17:51 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

I served on a jury two years ago on a case of a pedophile who was pulling up to bus stops occupied by little girls and masturbating in front of them. To me is was a slam dunk because of numerous eye witnesses and the car description including license plate number.

Two jurors were going to vote to acquit because of the timeline. Notably that part of the scenario involved him dropping the BMW off at the dealership and getting a rental. They said that they couldn’t get service that fast at that dealership!

Two others were going to acquit because being on the Sex Offenders List would ruin his life.

Finally some sense was talked into them and we had decided on the maximum, ten years just to find out that he plea bargained a guilty verdict in exchange for six years.

We found out later that he had prior convictions and pending charges for the same activity. Had it not been for a few of us non-idiots and his plea he would have gone free.


332 posted on 05/29/2011 9:19:48 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
Show me the video of him not moving.

Yes, I certainly can shoot a prone person if I think that they are a threat.

YES I LEGALLY CAN!

the pharmacist had his arms stretched out when he shot the thug the second time.

As opposed to what? Tucking them in?

I’m no expert,

We agree.

but it looks like to me that if the kid could move he would have and his ability to move would have shown up on the bottom screen.

For all that video shows and you know he could have crawled five feet farther out of the frame toward his gun. You have no idea.

333 posted on 05/29/2011 9:29:03 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

The idiots on my Grand Jury never in a month grasped the difference between “beyond a reasonable doubt” (the job of a courtroom jury) and “probable cause” (the standard for the grand jury.) Also, it was beyond their ability to comprehend, that the district attorney wanted to indict a couple of flunkies only in order to make them spill the beans on the bigger fish in exchange for leniency. The flunkies got away scotfree.

On the mock jury organized by the deep pockets defendant, the idiots could not accept that a corporation has a right to profit from the sale of its products.


334 posted on 05/29/2011 9:31:55 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I’m late as our my guests. If you come to rob me expect to be shot with any part that is before me. I am quite clear on this.


335 posted on 05/29/2011 9:32:34 PM PDT by eyedigress ((Old storm chaser from the west)?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Eaker
Two others were going to acquit because being on the Sex Offenders List would ruin his life.

That's astounding and quite sickening.

People with that kind of attitude are thankfully still the minority here in Texas...or so I hope. Were these two newly arrived Yankees by any chance?

336 posted on 05/29/2011 9:33:24 PM PDT by re_nortex (DP...that's what I like about Texas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

If the kid was moving, you would have seen the pharmacist’s move his arm to compensate for the new direct, otherwise the pharmacist would have either missed or not hit his target as intended.

If the kid was able to move at all, forensics would have shown that through the blood stains.


337 posted on 05/29/2011 9:38:40 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

In texas, perhaps you can.
But you can’t in Oklahoma.


338 posted on 05/29/2011 9:41:51 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: eyedigress

If you will murder unconscious people, then you shouldn’t have a gun, thank God this Stolen Valor head case’s only victim that we know of, is a robber.


339 posted on 05/29/2011 9:48:51 PM PDT by ansel12 ( JIM DEMINT "I believe [Palins] done more for the Republican Party than anyone since Ronald Reagan")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
Please cite the Oklahoma Penal Code section that states this.

Note, it is legal for me to conceal carry in Oklahoma too so I will be surprised if you can.

Since you seem to know so much about the law, in which States can you carry legally and how long have you done so? I can always use advice from those with more true experience.

Here is where I can carry, how about you?


340 posted on 05/29/2011 10:01:24 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex
Were these two newly arrived Yankees by any chance?

No, just fairly young and emotional women. They also had the attitude that a reasonably young and decent looking man like the defendant wouldn't "need" to do this. Even though it was admitted that the night before the scumbag spent the night at his girlfriend's apartment and was confident he wouldn't be caught because he had his fiancee's car.

Really good insight there ladies.

341 posted on 05/29/2011 10:07:18 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
If the kid was moving, you would have seen the pharmacist’s move his arm to compensate for the new direct, otherwise the pharmacist would have either missed or not hit his target as intended.

Oh, I must have crossed threads.

I was under the assumption that he was shooting at an armed squirming man on the ground not a cheetah running across the Serengeti.

Please forgive me as I try to find the other thread.

342 posted on 05/29/2011 10:14:27 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
If the kid was moving

I forgot to point out that it wasn't a "kid", it was an armed robber and POS, not a "kid".

Calling him a "kid" makes you appear to be a liberal idiot. Would your dad have wanted your sister to date a "kid" like this?

343 posted on 05/29/2011 10:23:13 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

Regardless, the law in Oklahoma didn’t allow for it, otherwise there wouldn’t have been a case to prosecute.


344 posted on 05/29/2011 10:34:57 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

Actually, watch the video.

Even if he was squirming, he wasn’t armed.


345 posted on 05/29/2011 10:38:20 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

So you admit that you don’t know what you are talking about concerning Oklahoma law.

Good.


346 posted on 05/29/2011 10:42:22 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Show me a freeze frame of him in the video after he left the frame the first time.

Specifically a close up of his empty hands.

Thanks,


347 posted on 05/29/2011 10:44:04 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

Does Oklahoma define somebody who doesn’t have a weapon as armed?


348 posted on 05/29/2011 11:01:59 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

You can freeze the video yourself to see if he showed a weapon. The defense was free to bring up evidence that he had a weapon, if he had a weapon.


349 posted on 05/29/2011 11:04:46 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Show me a freeze frame of him in the video after he left the frame the first time.

Specifically a close up of his empty hands.

Thanks.

Here you go, try again.


350 posted on 05/29/2011 11:08:07 PM PDT by Eaker (The problem with the internet, you're never sure of the accuracy of the quotes. Abraham Lincoln '65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351-374 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson