Pharmacist kills gun toting robber, gets life in prison

[DwightShrute]

He wasn't armed.



He wasn't armed.




He still wasn't armed.




... and when he was killed .. not only was he not armed .. he was lay on the floor - motionless - with a bullet through the head.

ok point taken, my bad.

"Two black kids run in, both masked and one with a gun pointed at the pharmacist and demand drugs and money" is all I need

[crustyme]

come on. You think that it is even humanly possible to do it? Ok, if he was able to do as I described, I would recommend a day in jail.

And "murdering one" isn't accurate as I see it.

If I came into your store, armed and ready to do who knows what ...I would expect you to do anything and everything you needed. All bets are off the table at that point. I started it. You have every right to kill me. Kill or be killed.

so if someone tries to rob my store, laws go out the window and i am free to do anything I want to them except rape.



if I am free to murder any intruder then why cant I rape them, torture them, keep them in the basement as sex slaves, or force them to work at the store with no pay?

[bettilimbroke999]

ahhh - ok - this statement makes where you are coming from in this argument more than clear .. thanks .. I fully understand now ... :0)

Yes Im against armed robbing gangmembers...I consider them n####rs....apparently that makes me a racist...I guess the blacks gotta find some example of "racism" to blame whitey for the way they act

[jw]

"Two black kids run in, both masked and one with a gun pointed at the pharmacist and demand drugs and money" is all I need

Why does it matter what color they were ?

Yes Im against armed robbing gangmembers...I consider them n####rs....apparently that makes me a racist...I guess the blacks gotta find some example of "racism" to blame whitey for the way they act

Why does it matter what color they were ?

[King Mayan]

Yes Im against armed robbing gangmembers...I consider them n####rs....apparently that makes me a racist...I guess the blacks gotta find some example of "racism" to blame whitey for the way they act

yes whites enslaved them, segregated them for 200 years....

And black should forget after 50 years....

You're not in their shoes, so you wouldn't know shit.

[crustyme]

ahhh - ok - this statement makes where you are coming from in this argument more than clear .. thanks .. I fully understand now ... :0)

swastika, anyone?

[King Mayan]

Why does it matter what color they were ?



Why does it matter what color they were ?

disgruntled inbreds.

[tropolis]

i hate whites that use the race card as much i hate blacks that use it.

and im half white half black.

that guy is the perfect example of the stereotypical white trash Oklahoman though.

[Mac4Lyfe]

Im just sorry this kid died, what a productive member of society he couldve been had he not been gunned down by this dangerous pharmacist, thank you for getting these pharmacists off the street Oklahoma so us armed robbers can rob in peace

Noone is defending the kid. We don't know the kids story but who cares. He did the crime and had what was coming to him, no matter what color he was.

I think your just focusing on the immediate situation and your not looking deeper into the details. It's not about the kid, he's dead. It's about this pharmacist. This guy obviously has some mental issues and the courts want him off the street. You obviously haven't been around the justice system. If they thought he wasn't a threat in the first place he would have been released on his own recognizance and not have a 100,000 bail set. If you look close, even his defense didn't put up a big fight for him because they couldn't. They found 1 person to testify on his behalf. Even the other woman in the shop didn't testify for him. Think...

The jury did the right thing. You have to find him guilty, now leave it to the judge to determine the proper sentence. If the guy is level headed (which he does not seem to be) the judge will give him very little time (2-3 years) maybe even release him on probation. If the judge thinks he's a threat he will give him 5-7 years and hope he doesn't kill someone when he gets out in 2-3.

I'm telling you that this guy was on edge and would have killed someone else eventually. He's obviously delusional by his lies and talks of killing people before. I'd bet the police are investigating him even more so today to see if he's killed others. I've seen guys like him before and it was a matter of time. Your just looking at the event and not looking deeper into the guy.

[bettilimbroke999]

so if someone tries to rob my store, laws go out the window and i am free to do anything I want to them except rape.



if I am free to murder any intruder then why cant I rape them, torture them, keep them in the basement as sex slaves, or force them to work at the store with no pay?

Well....and I hate to admit this on an internet forum but Im a pharmacist in Oklahoma myself and was robbed in an identical way the other day, you havent read about it in the paper bc I didnt feel like reporting it to the police, now dont get upset I didnt kill the robber but this is my new uniform. All you armed robbers feel free to stop by Zed's Pharmacy

[DwightShrute]

Why does it matter what color they were ?

it doesn't

I just copied and pasted it from the article posted on the first page. Doesn't matter the slightest as to their color, race, age or anything.

[bettilimbroke999]

i hate whites that use the race card as much i hate blacks that use it.

and im half white half black.

that guy is the perfect example of the stereotypical white trash Oklahoman though.

I mean white devil, you enslaved blacks, stole the land from the Indians and commit all the violent crimes today,

[DwightShrute]

so if someone tries to rob my store, laws go out the window and i am free to do anything I want to them except rape.



if I am free to murder any intruder then why cant I rape them, torture them, keep them in the basement as sex slaves, or force them to work at the store with no pay?

if someone comes into your store with a weapon, like a gun, then all bets are off when you are talking about what happens in the "heat of the moment" so to speak. Not " keep them in the basement as sex slaves, or force them to work at the store with no pay?" Btw , would paying them be ok? just kidding.

It's not like you are sitting behind the counter, creating the plan as to what you will do to the next shady looking character that comes through the door. You are likely thinking about a millions other things. Maybe taking your wife to dinner or doing inventory etc etc ... and then suddenly you are faced with a potential life and death scenario.

Maybe you are cool as a cucumber and deal with it professionally and maybe go and have a word with their parents later, but I can't say that I or most would.

[MUHerd37]

The pharmacist shouldn't have finished he kid off like that. However, I wouldn't have convicted him if I was a juror. Kid got what he fukkin deserved. I don't feel sorry for thieves.

[dherd]

what, they dont have an electric chair there? i say burn the s.o.b.

[JohnGalt2341]

Im just sorry this kid died, what a productive member of society he couldve been had he not been gunned down by this dangerous pharmacist, thank you for getting these pharmacists off the street Oklahoma so us armed robbers can rob in peace

Gold Jerry!!! Gold!!!

If it wasn't for this damn Pharmacist this kid could have had a bright future robbing all kinds of people and stores! He might have even taken up stealing cars and selling drugs or maybe even robbing banks if he set his heights high enough! His criminal future was limitless!! Now, he's dead. And none of us will have the opportunity to pay the taxes it would have cost us to put him behind bars and keep him there.

[jstblaze]

This is very tough to judge.

It is not premeditated by any means. He intentionally killed the kid, but there was no time for premeditation, and the circumstances of the robbery situation make premeditation absolute BS.

He should go to jail, there is no reason to intentionally kill the kid. Life sounds liek way too much, but i couldnt tell you what a fair sentence would be.

[bettilimbroke999]

Noone is defending the kid. We don't know the kids story but who cares. He did the crime and had what was coming to him, no matter what color he was.

I think your just focusing on the immediate situation and your not looking deeper into the details. It's not about the kid, he's dead. It's about this pharmacist. This guy obviously has some mental issues and the courts want him off the street.

Yep he shoots at armed robbers that enters his store this guy is clearly nuts. Going to trial has nothing to do with the court wanting you off the streets thats why we have juries and trials, the cops had to arrest him since clearly he had the choice not to kill this kid, if they hadnt arrested him it would've been fuckin allover the news that Oklahoma is racist and killing innocent blacks who happen to be armed robbing stores and Rev Sharpton and Jesse James would've had a parade and blah blah blah, no way in the world did anyone think that 12 jurors would unanimously convict this guy, you had to find the 12 dumbest inbred democrats in the state to only deliberate 3 1/2 hours to return a 1st degree murder conviction for the pharmacist that was armed robbed killing one of the armed robbers?

You have to look at THIS event, now in truth this pharmacy had apparently been robbed a couple times before and I have little doubt that he was sick of all these n####rs robbing him but to call him a danger to society I mean come the **** on hes a fuckin hardworkin pharmacist that got tired of coons swingin in everyday and stickin a 9 mm in his face and robbin him so he killed one of em, good for him, I just wish hed gotten the other kid in the head as well and saved the tax payers 40k/year for the next 30 years or whatever that niglet is in prison

[bettilimbroke999]

if someone comes into your store with a weapon, like a gun, then all bets are off when you are talking about what happens in the "heat of the moment" so to speak. Not " keep them in the basement as sex slaves, or force them to work at the store with no pay?" Btw , would paying them be ok? just kidding.

It's not like you are sitting behind the counter, creating the plan as to what you will do to the next shady looking character that comes through the door. You are likely thinking about a millions other things. Maybe taking your wife to dinner or doing inventory etc etc ... and then suddenly you are faced with a potential life and death scenario.

Maybe you are cool as a cucumber and deal with it professionally and maybe go and have a word with their parents later, but I can't say that I or most would.

Would make an incredible cross examination though

So what did you do after you shot the armed robber

Well I uhh umm well I kind of umm well I noticed she was a pretty attractive armed robber and uhh well I kinda got a boner and ripped all her clothes off and raped her

Now why did you do that?

Self-defense

[DwightShrute]

[JohnGalt2341]

Would make an incredible cross examination though So what did you do after you shot the armed robber Well I uhh umm well I kind of umm well I noticed she was a pretty attractive armed robber and uhh well I kinda got a boner and ripped all her clothes off and raped her Now why did you do that? Self-defense

You do bring up a good point though. MAYBE, the pharmacist was a homosexual and he was so terrified of getting a boner that he had to kill the kid in order to not rape him. Just a theory.

[scottie2005]

should do some time for sure

[Glitch]

never go full retard.

he should've gotten about 15 years. sad story.

[crustyme]

if someone comes into your store with a weapon, like a gun, then all bets are off when you are talking about what happens in the "heat of the moment" so to speak. Not " keep them in the basement as sex slaves, or force them to work at the store with no pay?" Btw , would paying them be ok? just kidding.

It's not like you are sitting behind the counter, creating the plan as to what you will do to the next shady looking character that comes through the door. You are likely thinking about a millions other things. Maybe taking your wife to dinner or doing inventory etc etc ... and then suddenly you are faced with a potential life and death scenario.

Maybe you are cool as a cucumber and deal with it professionally and maybe go and have a word with their parents later, but I can't say that I or most would.

calmly walking over to an unconcious person and shooting them five times 2 mins after the first shot is "in the heat of the moment"?

so if a store owner rapes the robber within 2 mins wouldnt that be "in the heat of the moment" too?

this of course has nothing to do with you saying once a robber enters the store they no longer have any rights and should be murdered even if they surrendered.

so why would you convict him had he raped? either there are laws or there isnt. you cant have it both ways.

[DwightShrute]

calmly walking over to an unconcious person and shooting them five times 2 mins after the first shot is "in the heat of the moment"?

so if a store owner rapes the robber within 2 mins wouldnt that be "in the heat of the moment" too?

this of course has nothing to do with you saying once a robber enters the store they no longer have any rights and should be murdered even if they surrendered.

so why would you convict him had he raped? either there are laws or there isnt. you cant have it both ways.

I doubt he calmly did anything.

Crusty I would not find you guilty even if you did what he did. Chances are, you would have.

[crustyme]

I doubt he calmly did anything.

Crusty I would not find you guilty even if you did what he did. Chances are, you would have.

you're completely off on your assumptions cause i would never shoot an unarmed, unconscious kid who's been shot in the head already. because i know the difference between self defense and murder. i also would not have ran after the gunman and had a shootout in the streets like it was the ok corral.

i've watched the survelliance video 10 times and each time he looked cool as a cucumber and knew exactly what he was going to do with that 2nd gun, because he didn't even hesitate for 1 second.

[jgray]

So who decides what crimes should be met with gunfire? This is not disingenuous. At a minimum, if you introduce the firearm and you die, it will have to be particularly egregious before I convict on premeditated murder. I don't see that here.

We have to set the law and can't just give citizens the right to interpret them as they see fit. The bottom line is that if you fear for your life, you have every right to defend yourself but you also open yourself up for legal interpretation. If you shoot someone that pulled a gun on you, it's a lot easier to defend then someone that pulled a knife or a hoagie sandwich. You defend yourself in the act is a lot easier defense then waiting for the guy to be laying defenseless on the ground and you shoot him in the back several times. Just because someone else broke the law does not give you a license to break the law in return, even if the other person is a scumbag.

I don't disagree. I think he broke the law. I just don't think it's worth paying to imprison him. Laws are supposed to keep society in check. How is that served here? It's not like he went looking for this fight. He just finished it. Exactly what type of conduct are we hoping to deter here? Do we want to tell criminals that the law will protect them? I'd rather they think that the law will protect the victim in every instance and that the victim gets every benefit of the doubt. Isn't that a better deterrent to future crime that punishing the victim?

Do you not know that a car is a weapon? More people are killed in one week then all the people robbed and killed in a year. We are more at danger by a drunk driver than a random robber.

Again, I think bringing a gan into the equation changes everything. Obviously, we can't have traffic accidents ending in shootouts. That's not even close to what happened here.

I've lost a family member and several friends at the hand of drunk drivers. If a drunk driver struck your car and killed your wife and kids, does that give you the right to take out a gun and shoot him while he lay's defenseless in the road after the crash? Trust me, you would want this person dead and you feared for your life while the guy careened into you and killed your family. BUT, We can't go murdering drunk drivers just like we can't go murdering armed robbers. 2 wrongs do not make a right.

I don't think you aren't looking for it, but let me start by saying sorry for your losses. I agree that a car is a weapon but a hand gun is quite a bit different. The drunk driving accident is also a poor example. By definition, it's an accident (at least the collision part is). A better example using a car would be some dude purposely driving through a crowd, backing up, and the trying to hit those that were still moving. If the crowd got him out of the car and beat him to death, according to you, it's still murder because we have laws and they were no longer acting in self defense (the guy was removed from his car). If we could identify the guy(s) that beat the driver to death, should they go to jail? Is society a better place because they are in jail? Alternatively, is it more dangerous to society if they aren't in jail?


Leave that to the police.

Police a very good at cleaning up the mess, not stopping the problem in the first place. How long did it take for the police to arrive in this instance? I don't know. They seem to have taken their time getting there if this guy could shoot one, chase other, find another gun and shoot the perp again.

I get that there's something off about this guy. Problem is that can't be the standard for incarceration. There's lots of people that are uneducated, bigoted, and/or just off. We can't throw those folks in jail just because they might kill someone. In this case, whatever his faults, he seems to have a problem with armed robbers. I think we can safely keep him around. You said that you think he'll kill again if given the chance. If it's another armed robber, I'm cool with that. Really.

[DwightShrute]

well OK Crust, we've reached an impasse and doubtful we will ever agree. Let's hope you are never in the position as was the pharmacist. I suspect if you were, you would feel differently but we will likely never know.

[Cap dat 4ss]

yes whites enslaved them, segregated them for 200 years.... And black should forget after 50 years.... You're not in their shoes, so you wouldn't know shit.

Mayan,
No blacks alive today were slaves. They know nothing more than you or I, just what we've read out of a book. In fact, most blacks today have no connection to slavery other than very distant lineage. This gives no one the right to pull the slavery card.

The color of the kids isn't that important, just an interesting side note. Remember the list of the top 10 most dangerous cities. All cities but two had a caucasian population <50% (one being 52%). Now, I really doubt those are the 10 most dangerous cities in the US, but those are certainly 10 dangerous cities. Reality is, while there is certainly trashy people in every race, where there are more minorities their is a lower quality of life, more crime and more violent crimes ie. assaults, murders, rapes etc....

[Cap dat 4ss]

I don't think anyone here has a problem that James Ersland shot the kid in the head initially. It seems to be divided what people believe about the second time he shot the kid. But why didn't he just give the kids the money and drugs? This is EXACTLY the reason most major retailers, back by high dollar attorneys have the "no hero" policy in place for employees. Had he just given the kids the drugs and money, this would have all been avoided. And theres a pretty good chance the kids got caught anyways.

[jgray]

I don't think anyone here has a problem that James Ersland shot the kid in the head initially. It seems to be divided what people believe about the second time he shot the kid. But why didn't he just give the kids the money and drugs? This is EXACTLY the reason most major retailers, back by high dollar attorneys have the "no hero" policy in place for employees. Had he just given the kids the drugs and money, this would have all been avoided. And theres a pretty good chance the kids got caught anyways.

Really? You have a lot more faith in police investigations than I do. And then even if you are right and they are caught, they do 3-5 years only to get out and do something similar or perhaps worse.

[Cap dat 4ss]

Really? You have a lot more faith in police investigations than I do. And then even if you are right and they are caught, they do 3-5 years only to get out and do something similar or perhaps worse.

Well they had them on camera, so there's at least a chance. That was really not my point, I just kinda tacked it on to the end. My real point was had the pharmacist just handed over what was probably not a large amount of cash and some lortab's, he would still be a free man today. He is honestly the biggest loser here, meaning he had the most to lose and lost it all. Again, this is why large corporations have policies in place. I would be utterly surprised if there is not a civil suit against him and the pharmacy now, going after all both have. He's already been found guilty in criminal court so they can easily proceed with civil now.

[MBENZ]

Fact is this guy most likely saved the lives of more working people.How many gangbangers in OK City plotting robbing a drugstore today?Scrambled brains scattered on the floor might just curb some nitwit from trying the same thing.

[bettilimbroke999]

I don't think anyone here has a problem that James Ersland shot the kid in the head initially. It seems to be divided what people believe about the second time he shot the kid. But why didn't he just give the kids the money and drugs? This is EXACTLY the reason most major retailers, back by high dollar attorneys have the "no hero" policy in place for employees. Had he just given the kids the drugs and money, this would have all been avoided. And theres a pretty good chance the kids got caught anyways.

I think he owned the store, the "no hero" rule would always work if it wasnt your stuff they were stealing, apparently this pharmacy was in a shit neighborhood as well and had been robbed several times before (I mean when was the last time you went to K-Mart pharmacy and the pharmacist had 2 loaded guns behind the counter) so clearly this pharmacist was tired of gettin robbed every other day and ready to fill the cemetary with some fresh bodies

Cleanup on aisle 3!

[jgray]

Well they had them on camera, so there's at least a chance. That was really not my point, I just kinda tacked it on to the end. My real point was had the pharmacist just handed over what was probably not a large amount of cash and some lortab's, he would still be a free man today. He is honestly the biggest loser here, meaning he had the most to lose and lost it all. Again, this is why large corporations have policies in place. I would be utterly surprised if there is not a civil suit against him and the pharmacy now, going after all both have. He's already been found guilty in criminal court so they can easily proceed with civil now.

Fair enough. It seemed like a throw away line and I should have left it as such.

I'd also be happy if the jury failed to provide any damages for such a frivolous suit just like I would have liked to see a not guilty at the end of the criminal trial. We give juries a great deal of power. I'd like to see them exercise it properly in both instances.