Just recently, Mr. Jerome Ersland, a 57 year old Disabled Veteran was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder in the first degree. It seems that the Oklahoma County District Attorney is a pretty zealous fellow. First Degree Murder Mr. Prather? Where in the hell did you park your mind, in the handicapped zone?
A brief synopsis of what occurred in Mr. Ersland's Oklahoma City pharmacy is that one day two "little criminals" decided to make entry into his store and start waving and pointing a firearm at the female employees. All the while demanding money and drugs and hurling threats. Upon further research it appears that on top of threats the "little criminals" were hurling some fast moving lead also. It's at this point Mr. Ersland retrieved a handgun of his own and fired a round hitting one of our heroes in the head thus knocking him down. The other idiot ran out the door with Mr. Ersland in foot pursuit. Alas, that one got away. The rub here is that Mr. Ersland came back into his store, went to what appeared to be a drawer, retrieved another handgun, walked back to the perpetrator that he'd initially shot and dumped five more rounds into him. There are some reports that this "little criminal" had regained consciousness, but nothing substantive that I could find.
Hmmmmm, Yep,..."Houston,...we have a problem."
Now at about this point hopefully you have gleaned from this article that I have absolutely NO sympathy or compassion for these two "little criminals". I don't give a rat's ass as to how socio/economically deprived they were, or that their daddies ran off when they were born or that their mommies didn't let them suck tit until they were fourteen. Nope, not interested. I do however have a few questions for you, mommy and daddy. Where the hell were you when your two "little criminals" were learning their "trade"? Did you instill some family values in them, some core values? Perhaps some self respect, maybe some respect for others and their hard earned property? And here's the big one Mom and Dad, the really important one you idiots,... You Don't Fuc*ing Point a Gun at law abiding citizens and not expect to get your dumb ass blown up!
Lets get back to Mr. Ersland's dilemma. Things seemed to be going swimmingly well right up to the point where he dumped the additional five rounds into the "little criminal". Some folks have jumped on this by saying you can't kill a corpse. True enough, but the coroner's report said that the little darling was still alive at the time. ( But very briefly I might add! ) So, based on that tid bit of information Mr. Ersland seems to have screwed the pooch.
I don't condemn him for shooting the "little criminal"; as a matter of fact I believe he made quite the statement in doing so. I also feel it's a shame he didn't cap the other snot wad. I don't give one good damn that they were "just kids". They were in the process of articulating an armed robbery and as far as I'm concerned were acting in an "adult" criminal manner. By threatening several people with a firearm, they were very much in need of being removed from this planet.
My issue with this case is the pursuing of a first degree murder charge by the DA. "First Degree Murder" as defined legally is; "To kill a person with malice aforethought and the killing was premeditated.
Malice aforethought = "To kill either deliberately or intentionally or recklessly with extreme disregard for human life."
Premeditation = "With planning or deliberation. The amount of time for premeditation of a killing depends upon the person and circumstances. It must be long enough, after forming the intent to kill, for the killer to be fully conscious of the intent and to have considered the killing."
Now, I'm no lawyer and God knows I sure as hell would never want to be one but I'm really having some issues with all of this. I will grant you that the insertion of the five extra bullets by Mr. Ersland may have been a bit excessive, but by the legal definition of first degree murder, this prosecution and subsequent conviction was a quantum leap. In the furthest reaches of my mind, such as it is, maybe involuntary manslaughter.
Involuntary Manslaughter = In order for a person to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter the government must prove that someone was killed as a result of an act by the person. Second, in the circumstances existing at the time, the person's act was by it's nature dangerous to human life or was done with reckless disregard for human life, and Third, the person either knew that such conduct was a threat to the lives of others or knew of circumstances that would reasonably cause the person to foresee that such conduct might be a threat to the lives of others." Don't we all just love legalese?
After watching the videos of this incident several times and doing the math on the time frame in which it all occurred it seems to me that a person would be pretty damned hard pressed to fulfill all the legal requirements of first degree murder in a matter of thirty nine seconds. That was the time frame between the initial shot by Mr. Ersland and the last of the additional five shots.Keep in mind that a lot happened in that thirty nine seconds. Lets see, malice aforethought... yep, your right there Mr. DA. a deliberate killing did happen but that definition also applies to involuntary manslaughter. Premeditation? I don't think so. I'm fairly certain that Mr. Ersland had enough adrenalin in him to float a row boat and was probably scared shit less, both of which would go to state of mind. Anyone in a firefight situation who says they were not is either a damn liar or a complete fool in which case probably should be locked up in a rubber room anyway.
The State of Oklahoma does not have a "Castle Law" but does have a "Stand Your Ground Law". Simply put; no duty to retreat regardless of where the attack takes place. There are also several provisions for the justifiable use of deadly force. Wouldn't/shouldn't this have come heavily into play in his defense?
Something just isn't right with this case. Premeditated murder, just not seeing it. An absolute incompetent boob for a defense attorney? Stranger things have happened. A predominantly Black jury with a white defendant and a dead Black "little criminal"? ( Purely speculative as I have not been able to ascertain the racial profile of the jury so keep it in your britches folks. Seems to be some National Secret at this point.) Anyway you look at this case, SOMETHING STINKS. Oh, and while were on the subject of smelly things let's not forget the lawsuit filed by the dead "little criminal's" mother. Damn, that one caught me completely by surprise. Blindsided my ass. I never would have seen that coming!
I could write about this until we all were nauseous but I'll spare you. In closing I'd like to say that this is the kind of outcome one would expect to see come out of a California courtroom not Oklahoma or for that matter any other state. Based on the information available it seems to me that a huge travesty of justice has occurred here and needs to be righted. To; The Honorable Governor Fallin, how about it?
I look forward to your comments, Derran
No comments:
Post a Comment