One thing is certain. Antwun "Speedy” Parker would be alive today if he had stayed at home playing with his X-Box. He's dead because he decided to rob a pharmacy.
There is no way he was surprised by this man. His back was turned when he went to get the gun, and he went up in one fluid motion and shot the guy 5 more times, then turned his back instantly, and walked back.
Does anyone know a reason why this bloke is wearing his brace outside his shirt, as opposed to inside? It doesn't look that difficult to cover.
I certainly wouldn't convict him of first degree murder, but he crossed a very plain line, no matter how distraught and hopped up on adrenaline he was.
It is so *wonderful* that you know exactly how Ersland was supposed to react, and can point out to everyone that the deviation proves him guilty! Thank Goodness!
I would *hate* for anyone to give him an opportunity to explain his state of mind and reasoning for the other shots.
It isn't as if there was *any* possibility that the young robber was getting up to continue the assault, and Ersland shot until the threat was gone, and then exited the store to verify if any more threats remained!
Thank goodness it has been explained away by you! Such a helpful Bloke you are!
I'd have to sit through the whole trial to be sure, but I doubt I could vote to convict for anything more that 5 negligent discharges within city limits.
Had he had an unlimited amount of time to evaluate the deadly threats he was facing, hie might have chosen differently, but that option was never given to him.
I'd even hang the jury if I had to - although with people like me, they try very hard to keep out of the jury box in the first place.
I reserve the right to not publish ignorant ill-informed and filthy comments from vile cretins who have a four letter vocabulary. Further, anonymous comments with strong opinions and personal attacks may be rejected. If you want to voice a strong opinion, at least have the courage to sign your name to it. You don't even have to use your name, make something up so the next person can address your comment without confusion.
There is no way he was surprised by this man. His back was turned when he went to get the gun, and he went up in one fluid motion and shot the guy 5 more times, then turned his back instantly, and walked back.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know a reason why this bloke is wearing his brace outside his shirt, as opposed to inside? It doesn't look that difficult to cover.
I certainly wouldn't convict him of first degree murder, but he crossed a very plain line, no matter how distraught and hopped up on adrenaline he was.
-Sans Authoritas
S.A.-
ReplyDeleteIt is so *wonderful* that you know exactly how Ersland was supposed to react, and can point out to everyone that the deviation proves him guilty! Thank Goodness!
I would *hate* for anyone to give him an opportunity to explain his state of mind and reasoning for the other shots.
It isn't as if there was *any* possibility that the young robber was getting up to continue the assault, and Ersland shot until the threat was gone, and then exited the store to verify if any more threats remained!
Thank goodness it has been explained away by you! Such a helpful Bloke you are!
-W
Because he shot a criminal, he should not be convicted. Those other criminals will be out on the street shortly.
ReplyDeleteThe big question: why did he not shoot the kid holding the gun.
I'd have to sit through the whole trial to be sure, but I doubt I could vote to convict for anything more that 5 negligent discharges within city limits.
ReplyDeleteHad he had an unlimited amount of time to evaluate the deadly threats he was facing, hie might have chosen differently, but that option was never given to him.
I'd even hang the jury if I had to - although with people like me, they try very hard to keep out of the jury box in the first place.