It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pharmacist charged with murder (*with actual video*)

page: 10
15
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by BingeBob
Usually when confronted by this kind of danger you wouldnt just fire 1 round at 2 guys...Most likely you would empty that thing on them which is what i think happened.


Watch the video. One shot to the head, went outside, came back, got other gun, 5 gutshots. That was the problem, the delay (and possible changing of weapons) before the gut shots.

The pharmacist should have unloaded more into the guy right away (the other guy ran immediately anyway), his mistake was delaying the rest of the shots. He claims the guy lifted his head but it appears maybe the head shot made that impossible. Not sure.




posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Fremd
 


I don't think anyone disagrees that the second robber deserved a lead bullet in the brain. I think what people are disagreeing with is the fact that the store owner left the building, came back, got a second gun and emptied the clip into the second robber while he was lying on the ground.

If the first shot did the robber in, I think that there would be no problems here. The guy deserved that. I don't think that there would have been a problem if the store owner emptied the clip into the second robber when he first came out from the back room.

The issue is, when the store owner left, then came back, walked by the second robber on the ground, went back into the back room, got a second gun, came back and unloaded it into the second robber while he was on the ground.

That's the problem. That's why it is murder, it is a second event.

There is no doubt in my mind the second robber deserved to be shot the first time and I wouldn't have blamed the store owner if he emptied a clip into the robber when he first came out of the back room. That would have been well deserved. Cause that is what you get for trying to stick up a store that is armed.

When the store owner left the premises, came back in, walked past the guy on the ground, got a second gun, came back out and opened up on the man, that is when it turns from a man protecting his store, and sticking up for his rights to a man murdering another man.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Sonya610
 



He claims the guy lifted his head but it appears maybe the head shot made that impossible. Not sure.


I wouldn't say impossible.
I've read countless stories of people being shot in the head, one case in particular

Hunter shot in the face (im sure you all remember this one?)

The point is, we don't know where in the head he was shot. You were not there. You were not the one getting shot at.

Don't be so bold as to try and monday morning quarterback a life and death situation.

If it had been you, you would not have taken any chances either.


This guy has no training like, say, a police officer.

Could he have handled the situation better?

I doubt it. If someone is shooting at me, i'm defecating myself. And if i can get a clear shot, i'm going to shoot back.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sonya610

Originally posted by BingeBob
Usually when confronted by this kind of danger you wouldnt just fire 1 round at 2 guys...Most likely you would empty that thing on them which is what i think happened.


Watch the video. One shot to the head, went outside, came back, got other gun, 5 gutshots. That was the problem, the delay (and possible changing of weapons) before the gut shots.


Did watch the video...when the robber gets hit he slumps over as if being shot in the midsection not fall back or straight down as if sot in the head or face...


Added note: The pharmacist was using a Keltec 380...Small round... and then a Taurus Judge which can fire either 410 shot or .45 colt -thats a spicy meatball...
And also if you delve further into the case the pharmacist was actually being fired at too and was shot in the arm and had one whizz by his head.

[edit on 1-6-2009 by BingeBob]



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fremd
The point is, we don't know where in the head he was shot. You were not there. You were not the one getting shot at.

Don't be so bold as to try and monday morning quarterback a life and death situation.

If it had been you, you would not have taken any chances either.


If you had read any of my posts, INCLUDING THE FIRST ONE you would realize I do support this guy.

But as far as monday quarterbacking? An autopsy has been done. You can be sure if the guys brain was GONE they could reasonably say he was NOT capable of lifting his head voluntarily. Head shots often take a while to kill even if the brain virtually obliterated.

I am assuming THAT is what the DA is basing their case on, and that is why they say they do NOT think the guy raised his head.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   
wow...this thread is really getting speculatory...This video tells only half the story at best.

First, to all of you that have a problem with the pharmacist shooting the first shot into the robber's head, then shooting him 5 more times later...1. You don't know if the "head shot" was in fact a solid shot or a grazing wound. We are all speculating. It is conceivable that the robber was hit in the head, stunned and went down. The pharmacist at that point may have believed he was no longer a threat. So the pharmacist looks outside to see where the other robber/threat went. Then as the pharmacist is milling around back inside, at some point we are to believe that the robber that was shot in the head started to move again. How much movement? None of us know. However, if the pharmacist still felt that he presented a threat at that point he can shoot to stop that threat.

Second, the pharmacist isn't required to have any kind of training that would make him capable of running up and disarming or detaining the injured robber. All he was doing was keeping himself and possibly his employees from dying. Maybe the robber should have picked a better trained victim.




[edit on 1-6-2009 by PhoenixDemon]



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
Another case of a drug addict trying to rob a pharmacy for Oxycontin (likely), only this time the robber (s) got a lot more than a high out of it. The video looks like a straight up drug house shoot out to be honest,but all that aside I believe the pharmacist wil not go to trial and the case will be dismissed. I would like to see the reports on the head wound to see if the kid was dead or not after the first shot. Because if he was or was incapacitated then yes a murder charge would be fitting,if not then no charge would be fitting.


Oh I just want to bury my head in the sand from reading these posts where people think the Pharmacist overreacted.

The Pharmacist, the guy who WORKS for a living instead of expecting a living to be provided to him by pointing a gun at someone's head should have paused and thought to himself hmm I better check his vitals before I shoot the sorry you-know-what again?



[edit on 1-6-2009 by Bombeni]



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Sonya610
 


so here's what i find amusing from the point that you're arguing, and the manner in which the accused is being prosecuted:


They're claiming it was murder. The guy claims the kid lifted his head and so he shot again.

Either the guy was dead or he was alive

If your brains are splattered all over the inside of your skull, you're certainly not going to be moving. But you're also not alive. I don't care if your heart is beating or not. Nerve impulses keep on ticking for a while after death, even decapitation. So on one hand you claim the guy was still alive and say it's murder

on the other hand you claim the guy was dead and could not move.

Can't have it both ways.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by PhoenixDemon
 


your trying too hard to justify it now!!! sorry but watch ALL the vids closely and look at the pharmacist body language upon re entering his shop, he could quite easily of said the classic "freeze mo'fo" movie line and held a gun aimed at him, reports are still mentioning nothing of this dead kid having a gun so how exactly could he feel threatened, perhaps the kid was spitting blood at him ? or throwing bottles of mouth wash!!! maaaaan wake up he executed him, right or wrong its what happened!! and the LAW prevents us taking those decisions to end life ESPECIALLY when the kid is dying from a head shot, if he wasnt dont ya think he would of got up and ran out the door!!! ??? like i said in previous posts, i am all for protecting yourself but we have ALL witnessed via cctv recordings plain and simple an execution! that did not need to happen! No gun on the kid = no need for 5 MORE bullets.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sonya610
[quote
But as far as monday quarterbacking? An autopsy has been done. You can be sure if the guys brain was GONE they could reasonably say he was NOT capable of lifting his head voluntarily. Head shots often take a while to kill even if the brain virtually obliterated.

I am assuming THAT is what the DA is basing their case on, and that is why they say they do NOT think the guy raised his head.


But if you want to even question that the article and the prosecutor are trying to say that the wounds were recieved 1 to the head first then 5 to the belly after the fact and say that the guy got shot 5 times with the .380 and then once with a 410 00buck from the judge i could see where he could survive a headshot with that (i know unlikely but still).

And again, another article about this said that the judge presiding on this case was shocked when the DA requested that the pharmacist be able to carry a gun while on bail.

I wonder if the DA really doesnt want to charge this guy but is fearing racial backlash about a white guy killing a black guy "and the PO-leece dint do nuttin about it"



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Andy Ashe 30UK
 


Yeah, except for the fact that the PHARMACIST HAD BEEN SHOT!!!!

This was a gunfight, not just a couple of kids holding up the local subway (the footlong one not the travel from point A to point B on a predetermined, usually underground route) with a bb gun


[edit on 1-6-2009 by BingeBob]



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Bombeni
 


So would you say that the pharmacist was your typical "hardworking honest LAW ABIDING" citizen and the kid your stereo typing as a drug dealing crack head? the self defence moment passed the second he walked back to his shop, he felt secure enough to leave his shop with the female assistants ALONE inside along with an injured/dying criminal to chase the REAL threat, yes the man with the gun!!! he casually walks back into his shop (am i off fact here or not?) reloads/changes gun whatever- he drops another 5 into the kid c'mon that aint no LAW abiding citizen there that is somebody thinking they can decide to act as judge and jury and commit an unarmed kid to inevitable death, sorry but he AINT above the law, Judge Dredd would have charged him for murder and rightly so



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Andy Ashe 30UK
 


Ill bet you a million euros that if that kid was playing hopscotch instead of committing armed robbery he would still be alive to this day...hell, probably wouldnt have ever met this pharmacist...well maybe if he needed a bandaid for the scrape on his knee from falling during hopscotch...

Please, read a few posts up and take into consideration the timing and when the shots couldve happened?



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by BingeBob
 


just one ISSUE!!! the red shirt guy had they gun hence why he was chased out of shop by pharmacist!!! prove me wrong that the other kid had a gun too and i will gladly retract my views!!! whats that, cant hear ya???? nothing!!! oh yeh he had no gun!!!!



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Mack


Ersland has said he opened fire in self-defense.

Parker was shot once in the head and five times in the stomach area. An autopsy determined Parker was still alive after being shot in the head.


Unless you are defending against zombies, shooting a man 5 times is not self defence. I do have to tell him NS.

[edit on 28-5-2009 by The Mack]


You are completly right. This is a segment from www.lectlaw.com...


Use of force is justified when a person reasonably believes that it is necessary for the defense of oneself or another against the immediate use of unlawful force. However, a person must use no more force than appears reasonably necessary in the circumstances.


In other words. This guy took it past self defense after the second shot was fired.One in the head and five in the stomach is NOT self defense it is over kill. It is murder.

This guy took his actions way past self defense and defending his store all the way to murder.

This guy COULD have been considered a hero, but it does not take six bullets to simply stop a man from robbing a store. Let alone one in the head and 5 in the stomach. It is clear to me what his intentions were.

His intentions with that many bullets in such lethal places was not self defense. His intentions were to kill the robber.

For this to be self defense he would have had to stopped immediatly after the robber stopped. But he didnt. He fired 5 more rounds into this guys body.....

He should be charged with murder.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Andy Ashe 30UK
 


He did what he felt he needed to do---at the time under extreme duress---to make sure the perpetrator was no longer a threat.

I wish the manager at the fast food chicken place here in Tulsa had had a gun or two, when two no good #*#&#*^%$##^% walked him and his six employees, all under the age of 22, into a walk-in freezer and shot them all in the head, that's what I wish.




[edit on 1-6-2009 by Bombeni]



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andy Ashe 30UK
reply to post by BingeBob
 


just one ISSUE!!! the red shirt guy had they gun hence why he was chased out of shop by pharmacist!!! prove me wrong that the other kid had a gun too and i will gladly retract my views!!! whats that, cant hear ya???? nothing!!! oh yeh he had no gun!!!!


Typical...

Ok prove that he didnt have one....there you go...oh wait...one thing though

You dont get more than half a second to find out if he does or not... all you get to do is react to the situation -Is he moving? Whats he reaching for? Ive already been shot once...

You might be ok with allowing criminals to shoot you or stab you in britain...Eh, they are just cheeky bastards right..."Careful ill call the unarmed bobbies on you"

You want to curb pharmacy robberies heres how...Allow pharmacists to shoot armed robbers on sight



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by BingeBob
 


what you on about read a few posts? been reading it since first came on??

as for the timing not sure what you mean but if you have seen all 4 videos then maybe we would be on same page!!! if you have wath em all again!! as the different angles clearly show the kid who died wedging the door open on one clip, then run in behind his mate who is firing the weapon and as he runs past him the pharmacist catches him witha shot to the head from video angle 3 (i think) - trust me i have done my research and i am entitled to my opinion as you are to yours!! i think he no longer needed to defend his life with a hail of bullets after the 1st kid runs off! and his body language is not like the begining of the seige where he is rightly so, hiding at the end of his counter firing back!!! thats great!!! but he didnt do that towards the end he calmly stepped up after changing gun and walked to the kid stood over him and emptied 5 more shots!! how can you say that is not murder!!! the kid never fired a gun at him the red shirt kid did that!!! this kid that died deserved to spend the next 20-30 years in prison and learn a massive lesson about right and wrong, i mean lets not forget he is 16 and made a bad bad decision to carry out this attempted robbery.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


finally....


bravo, well put



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by BingeBob
 


well were on insults now huh!!! being british has no bearing on this!! you no longer deserve replies



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join