Was this self-defense
A pharmacist in Oklahoma was just convicted of first degree murder after shooting an already incapacitated robber. I think the verdict was excessive.
The security camera recordings show Parker and a friend, Jevontai Ingram, then 14, rush into the drugstore. Ingram points a handgun at the two female workers who flee to a backroom. Parker, who does not have a gun, tries to adjust a gray mask. Parker drops to the floor when the pharmacist shoots him in the head.
The recordings show Ingram flees from the store. Ersland follows the fleeing robber outside, then returns to the store, walks by where Parker has fallen, gets a second gun, walks back to Parker and shoots five more times.
The last shots were fired from 18 to 24 inches away and struck Parker in the abdomen and chest, according to the testimony.
The sequence of events happens over a minute and 2 seconds, according to the evidence. Police said Ingram never fired his gun inside the store.
The security camera recordings do not show Parker again after he falls on his back. Prosecutors said physical evidence proves the boy never moved on the floor. Prosecutors also said Ersland obviously did not think of the boy as a threat because he walked right over the boy and has his back to the boy as he gets the second gun.
Defense attorneys contended Parker could have moved his arms or feet, even while unconscious, and been perceived as a threat.
What do you guys think? I think, the charges were way too severe. Maybe manslaughter, not murder.
No, once the subject is already incapacitated he should have been restrained until police arrived. Kid was unarmed, only his counterpart was armed but he had already fled the store. Flat out the guy commited murder on an unarmed teenage boy, he shot the kid from point blank range. Must have woke up on the wrong side of the bed that day, Oh well you can only wake up on one side of the bed in prison
The first shot (the one that initially incapacitated the kid) was justified. Everything after that was not. He became a vigilante when he pulled the trigger a 2nd time.
There should be a "he-fucking-deserved-it" exemption. Fuck the kid. Protect the douchebag who robbed a store at gunpoint? Fuck that.
You know, I gotta agree. If you look at what adds value to society more, locking up the pharmacist for life is completely excessive
I agree. The kid was worthless person who turned into societal detritus once he tag teamed with his pal to terrorize the workers at the pharmacy. Did the kid deserve to die? Of course. But the pharmacist calmly walked back to the register, unlocked it to get his second gun (I believe his first one jammed) and put numerous bullets into the kid. I think manslaughter with a sentence of time served would have sufficed.
One of the first times eok....I agree completely. It honestly sets a dangerous precedent either way the ruling goes. Strike his sentence down completely...it removes legal limitations to what someone can retaliate while being robbed, the sentence stays the same then it removes the power of self-defense (because other cases could use it as a precedence and say, shots x, y, z were past the limit).
This would amount to a slap on the wrist, but it is self defense at some point. Do I think the robber deserved to die? Maybe. But I'd rather not let every person have the authority to decide when they are not in immediate danger. But as I said we don't know everything. If a robber came into my house with a friend and threatened me an my family, and i KO'ed him, or knocked him down- I think 5 or more bulltes would be warranted. Anger is powerful, and if thought the man could or was intentioned to hurt me or my loved ones, I would take the burden of saving them. This man was courageous and protected his employees and himself. We should discourage killing and vigilantism, but not destroy the man who potentially saved the lives of his employees (had the robber not been unconscious and attacked, or his friend had, etc.)
Very easy to judge when you arent there. The threat that his mate would come back with friends/firepower is suspect. State gets it wrong here imo. I'd love to put the prosecutors in the same scenario. There was a iconic case like this in the UK, Search Tony Martin and read the full story of what the guy had been through.
Sounds like the kid was dead after the first shot to the head. I think the follow-up shots were unjustified. I don't think the guy deserves life in prison -- he was clearly in a very heightened emotional state.
The kid on the other hand -- any time you pull a gun on someone I think you have to assume that your own death is a potential outcome.
I'd say he gets obstruction of justice for lying to the cops. It's easy to say, that the pharmacist shouldn't have shot him more, but it would be different someone came in and threatened you and everyone with you.
The kid may have been dead after the first shot, but him being unconscious is a dangerous situation. If it was me i might have shot him in the legs or incapacitated him in some physical way. But that would have sent me to jail if the dude had been paralyzed. IMHO the pharmacist did nothing worthy of jail. He should have known better, but if someone threatens your life, your business, and has a partner that could come back and kill you later- I assume that he was just scared for his and his employee's lives. I'd rather have him in jail for a few weeks for obstruction of justice.
why does the fact he is 14 matter? i have been robbed and a 38 year old robber feels the same as a 14 year old
I'd be more worried about getting robbed by a 14 year old than a 38 year old. They've got to "prove" so much more.
And if anybody tries to rob me, regardless of whether they're the one carrying the gun or not, if I get my hands on a gun I'm putting as many bullets into them as possible until I'm comfortable that they're not getting up.
Just goes to show, your entire life can be completely reversed and destroyed in the space of under a minute and a half, just because some worthless fuck decides to rob your store.
You have to be shit sharp to just stand still in this day and age.
Seriously guys?
You can't empty clips into an incapacitated kid. The pharmacist deserves at least manslaughter sentence for his gross, gross indiscretion
And the pussification of America continues...
Its bullshit like this why it is "ok" to rob people. I'm sure it's not his fault he decided to rob a pharmacy, it's societys fault. Cry me a river. I'm glad he's dead so he can't rob anyone else.
Yes, the pharmacist was excessive. I agree with eok in the time served point.
Were you reading the same article as I was? He clearly defended himself, than with calmly retrieved a second gun and executed the guy. Obviously his conduct is wrong, I just disagree with the charges.
ill agree with the "he fucking deserved it" exemption here.
One of the things I really do not like about the U.S.A. is its ridiculous political correctness clauses. I think what pissed me off the most over the last 2 decades of living here is when the border patrol agent got 10 years for killing some drug runners because the ACLU lawyer happened to be better than the border patrol minimum wage lawyer.
Illo quaerat praesentium voluptatem deserunt. Harum earum aut autem consequatur tempore nihil. Reprehenderit error ut cum quibusdam exercitationem odio repellendus.
Quia molestiae dolores et voluptatem corrupti. Quas eaque quae qui rerum illo enim provident. Quia velit dolores aliquam tempore.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...