Not sure what to think of this

#3
#3
A prosecutor, however, said that after Ersland shot Antwun Parker in the head, knocking the 16-year-old to the ground, Ersland made himself “judge, jury, executioner” by getting a second handgun and shooting the boy five times in the abdomen. A coroner’s report said the latter shots killed Parker.
Click to expand...

I think it's a murder charge because the first shot incapacitated the would-be robber.

article didn't mention that he was defending his property, only that he worked at the pharmacy

I firmly believe in the Castle Doctrine, but what this guy did seemed to cross a line.
 
#4
#4
MG1968 said:
I think it's a murder charge because the first shot incapacitated the would-be robber.

article didn't mention that he was defending his property, only that he worked at the pharmacy

I firmly believe in the Castle Doctrine, but what this guy did seemed to cross a line.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a poor heat of the moment decision. Coming back inside, walking into the back room (presumably for another magazine) and coming back out and giving him 5 more was the catch.
 
#5
#5
JTrainDavis said:
Yeah, a poor heat of the moment decision. Coming back inside, walking into the back room (presumably for another magazine) and coming back out and giving him 5 more was the catch.
Click to expand...

That would do it. I don't blame him for protecting his property but he made a poor choice there.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#6
#6
I'm confused, doesn't first degree murder usually mean it was planned?
 
#7
#7
Probably him getting the second handgun to finish the guy off contributed to premeditated.
 
#8
#8
Weezy said:
I'm confused, doesn't first degree murder usually mean it was planned?
Click to expand...

There is quite a bit of wiggle room there. The fact that he took time to grab another gun and come out to finish the job probably crosses over in the prosecutors' eyes
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#11
#11
Dude should've called the cops and let them handle it after he knocked the ******* down.
 
#21
#21
therealUT said:
After the first shot incapacitated the perp, he was no longer a threat. Going back to shoot him five more times is immoral and wretched.
Click to expand...

That's the truth, upon more reading and reflection, before I read another more detailed story and saw the video, I was on the fence.

Going to rearm after clipping the punk in the head and giving him 5 while he's on the ground is pretty bad.
 
#24
#24
It should be noted that the Castle Doctrine, in some states, extends to places of employment, car, etc.

With that said... this is where we are. SWAT storms the house of a Former Marine on nothing more than a hunch and shoot at said Former Marine something like 70 times. Nothing happens to the cops.


Basically, if this guy was a cop, he'd get 1 month of paid leave and he'd be back to work.
 
#25
#25
I think this is at most 2nd degree murder and at least voluntary manslaughter. I don't see this rising to the level of 1st degree murder.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top