Pharmacist charged with murder after defending himself

Like I said, you have to be some kind of lawyer to properly use a gun in the USA these days. Three men robbed a store and this pharmacist was shot at and he carried a pistol and shot back at them and killed one and now he's being charged with murder.

http://www.examiner.com/x-5919-Norfolk-Crime-Examiner~y2009m5d24-Oklahoma-pharmacist-kills-armed-robber-saves-the-lives-of-his-staff

watch the video

http://newsok.com/article/3373432

"Parker was shot once in the head and five times in the stomach area. The autopsy found Parker was still alive after the head shot and died from the stomach wounds. ........... The injured teen was trying to get up, Ersland said, so he emptied his gun into the would-be robber’s chest.........Parker was unarmed and unconscious on his back when he was shot the last five times."

He could have let him just sit there.... and waited for police.... Not that I think the robbers are victims here at all, but he did actually go back, and pump 5 more rounds into someone who was defenseless and unarmed and would have otherwise lived. Thats murder, although not premeditated.

hopefully he won't get more than a year or two. Here's how I think. Wouldn't we all be a little angry at someone who just tried to murder them?

I just watched the video. Thanks. Looks to me like they were expecting something. They didn't look surprised when those guys rushed in with guns almost like there was previous beef with them. I can see why they charged him with murder now but I still don't agree with it.

This is just wrong. That is why my personal carry is a 45 for the stopping power. I'm surprised the keltec didnt' jam.

It's all about the timing. If he had unloaded 6 rounds into the kid all at once it's self-defense; there would be no questions.

From the security video, it appears the pharmacist hit the kid with one of his first shots, then pursued the armed robber out of the pharmacy, returned, retrieved a larger handgun and then unloaded 5 rounds into the wounded robber on the floor. The kid was a thug and deserved to get shot when the pharmacist was defending himself, but the last five rounds are going to be difficult to justify as self-defense.

Exactly, you have to prove that you were affraid for your's and other's safety and well being.

frodus said:

"Parker was shot once in the head and five times in the stomach area. The autopsy found Parker was still alive after the head shot and died from the stomach wounds. ........... The injured teen was trying to get up, Ersland said, so he emptied his gun into the would-be robber’s chest.........Parker was unarmed and unconscious on his back when he was shot the last five times."

Click to expand...

I don't know, from watching the video it seems to me there's no way the pharmacist could have known the kid was unarmed. His partner in crime was certainly armed. Whether he was conscious seems to be a point of debate in the case.

From the article said:

Prosecutors said Parker was unarmed and unconscious on his back when he was shot the last five times. Ersland contends he acted in self-defense when the suspect tried to get up.

A police detective said Ersland lied to the police and news reporters about the shooting. Ersland, for instance, said the robbers shot at him. "Fortunately, God made them miss me, except for this minor scratch,” he told The Oklahoman. "I was able to return fire and protect the girls’ lives. God was helping me.” Prosecutors say there is no evidence anyone but Ersland fired inside the store.

Click to expand...

After watching the surveillance video, when the pharmacist comes back into the store, he turns his back on the kid... it doesn't seem like he really thinks the kid is still a threat. Then he comes back and puts some more rounds into him.

I still don't think I would have charged him with a crime. The fact that he turned his back on the kid isn't enough to prove to me that the pharmacist didn't fear for his life at the time the last shots were fired... maybe he was afraid the kid with the gun would come back, and frisking the wounded kid would have been a risk. Maybe the kid looked unconscious when the pharmacist walked in, then he started getting up or something. The kid and his buddy brought deadly force into a peaceful pharmacy, I think they deserved what they got from the evidence I've seen.

Of course, it's likely the DA has evidence he's not sharing with reporters... but then on the other hand it's really weird that he was arguing with the judge to let the guy remain armed while out on bail.

The court restricted his access to knives?? Huh?