Pharmacist who killed robber guilty of murder

[Don Vito Corleone]

There was no justification to kill someone he already took down. The robber was already unconcious, because a bullet was already in his head.

So, he shot one of the robbers. Robber goes down - he is out. No longer a threat.

Pharmacist goes after the second robber. Pharmacist comes back. Still, downed robber is no longer posing a threat.

Pharmacist goes and gets another gun. STILL, downed robber is no longer a threat.

He then shoots and kills downed robber, who is no longer a threat.

Sure, lets throw out the racist comment. OK. Do you think the folks in prison will be just as willing as me to let this go?

Doubtful.

He had NO reason to kill someone he already took down. OK, lets say it was wanting revenge - great - but, you already shot him. He is already down. And, that is why he will be in prison now.

Oh, dis good ol'boy is gonna hava gran ol'time in prison, he shooo is!!

Again, I don't approve of his actions at all, and I think he was appropriately convicted - I just don't see any evidence that the shooting was motivated by race.

Oklahoma's maximum-security prisons are just disgusting - the conditions are, in my view, inhumane. This guy will not have a nice time and will die in prison. I would personally just as soon he not be victimized by his fellow inmates as well, but as you correctly point out that may very well happen. On the other hand I'd expect that the Aryan Brotherhood types will regard him as a hero so he may get some protection there.

 

[DrunkenSano]

What if you're robbing someone but instead of a gun, you're using your computer or clever (read:illegal) accounting?

It would be armed robbery, so not computers, embezzlement, or shoplifting. If you are committing armed robbery, then you forfeit your right to your own safety, you are knowingly running the risk of getting killed.

 

[her209]

It would be armed robbery, so not computers, embezzlement, or shoplifting. If you are committing armed robbery, then you forfeit your right to your own safety, you are knowingly running the risk of getting killed.

So we should tolerate who rob us just not rob us with guns?

 

[Cogman]

So we should tolerate who rob us just not rob us with guns?

To be more accurate, we aren't tolerant of being armed with weapons of any sort, that and trespassing.

If, however, you steal our bits we are made, but can't justify physically harming you.

It is the difference between lying to have sex and rape.

 

[DrunkenSano]

So we should tolerate who rob us just not rob us with guns?

It's not about toleration. It's about knowing the risks in what you do. If you're going to use a weapon to rob someone, don't be surprised or expect sympathy when you get shot and killed.

 

[masterxfob]

if i were in a similar situation and it were a family member those punks pointed the gun at, i'd have done the same thing. not saying it's right, but i doubt i'd be in a mindset where i cared.

 

[actuarial]

if i were in a similar situation and it were a family member those punks pointed the gun at, i'd have done the same thing. not saying it's right, but i doubt i'd be in a mindset where i cared.

If I were in that position I would probably keep shooting the guy until the gun had no bullets anymore, but I doubt I would leave, come back, change weapons, and then continue firing.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

dumb, the guy was probably already dead since he was shot in the head.

So basically, he is sentenced to life in prison for shooting a dead person.

Pretty much. At most he should have gotten was tampering with evidence or desicration of a body.
There's no doubt that jury was stacked high by the prosecution to get this guy.
How do you murder someone you lawfully killed already?

 

[Acanthus]

While i am all for self defense, what the pharmacist did was despicable.



If Parker was alive... shooting him FIVE more times was assassination.
There was no reason to shoot him five more times.

Under current laws, it is fairly likely that he could be sued by the robber if he had lived. This is the rationale i can think of for this guy.

I would have convicted him if the article is accurate on the events.

 

[classy]

Under current laws, it is fairly likely that he could be sued by the robber if he had lived. This is the rationale i can think of for this guy.

I would have convicted him if the article is accurate on the events.

He is being sued, by the guy's mom.

 

[her209]

It's not about toleration. It's about knowing the risks in what you do. If you're going to use a weapon to rob someone, don't be surprised or expect sympathy when you get shot and killed.

If some thief stole a [large] portion of my life savings, I think I would be just as, if not more, justified than the guy who was robbed of a couple hundred dollars.

 

[Cattykit]

:thumbsup: for headshot. :thumbsdown: for execution.

 

[SP33Demon]

This makes me want to get a bigger caliber gun + hollow points.

 

[soulcougher73]

If some thief stole a [large] portion of my life savings, I think I would be just as, if not more, justified than the guy who was robbed of a couple hundred dollars.

But you wouldnt be in immediate danger since no gun was present if some hacker got your life savings. Add a weapon and the situations are totally different. Sure youll be pissed he stole it but its not life threatening.

 

[Printer Bandit]

would this be a good gun for personal protection?:

Barret M107A1

http://www.barrett.net/firearms/m107a1

 

[slayer202]

I'm watching the interrogation videos now. The dude needs to be in a mental hospital, not jail

and that guy shouldn't have been allowed to own a fucking gun...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I'm watching the interrogation videos now. The dude needs to be in a mental hospital, not jail

and that guy shouldn't have been allowed to own a fucking gun...

Yeah, he has a weirdly childlike affect. It's strange that he was allowed to fill prescriptions in that condition, and it's certainly questionable whether he should have been carrying guns.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

As though investigations can't determine where and from what distance a person was shot from.

Store video showed the dude going back for the last 5 shots... so they could have worked it out from that.

 

[mrjminer]

He is being sued, by the guy's mom.

Now we see where the dead piece of shit got it from.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I'm watching the interrogation videos now. The dude needs to be in a mental hospital, not jail

and that guy shouldn't have been allowed to own a fucking gun...

Bet he's faking it.

 

[alkemyst]

Now we see where the dead piece of shit got it from.

Especially that the mom thinks her newly deceased son is a hero.

 

[eits]

His mindset is that of a criminal, I worked at a store and was robbed at gun point, and given the chance I would have never done what this guy did. He went so far beyond simply defending himself it's not even funny. Fear isn't going to make a person do what he did, it's nothing but an excuse. Take a woman who cheats on her boyfriend and blames in on the fact she was dunk. Regardless of a situation a person will never do anything that goes against their core beliefs. Fear doesn't make you execute a person, it takes a certain mentality to do that.

rage can. i'm not saying it's right or excusable. i'm just saying that it's hard to judge when you're not him and going what he just went through. he shot some motherfucker who was trying to rob him and/or kill him. once he overcame the fear through shooting him in the head and saw he was dying on the ground, a sense of rage and victory probably went through his head and he did what he did. wrong as it may have been, i don't know for sure whether he would have done the same thing had the situation been different.

think about superfans who destroy the city and other peoples' belongings when their team wins something. i'm sure both you or i would never do something like that, but some people do because they don't know how to handle their emotions. again, not saying it's right or excusable, just giving a potential explanation of why it happened.

if that's how it happened, he belongs in therapy, not jail.

by the way, i'm kinda anti-gun... i don't want you thinking that my mindset is similar to that of someone like nick1985 or something.

 

[eits]

No matter what it should not be 1st degree murder. The pharmacist has a right to protect himself and the scum should have never robbed, unless they were ready to die.

he shot him in the head. he was unarmed and posed no threat. he should have waited for the cops to deal with him, not unloaded on him.

 

[eits]

This story sickens me. I'm 100% in favor of self defense. I love my state laws when it comes to self defense. I would shoot someone if I thought my life depended on it and I carry everyday.

This was not self defense after he walked back into the store. It started off as self defense and quickly turned into a cold blooded murder.

yeah, i kinda agree.

 

[eits]

Watch all of his his police interrogation, watch the surveillance video. It's not at all hard to see why it only took the jury four hours to convict him and recommend life.

link?