Ersland petition..

[TKR Reptiles]

I bet you would not be saying that if it was your bussiness being robbed !!!

Sure would, because I wouldn't be a moron and empty a gun into someone that is no longer a threat out of pure rage and revenge...

 

[beast1989]

I think it's more popular than you think. It's just that people on here are tired of being attacked for it by the squeeky wheels here, so it's best to just keep it to yourself.

I'm with you that there would have to be some kind of hard evidence showing that he was not moving at all. Even if the movement was unvoluntary at that point of time and in that situation there is no way for anyone to know. I would think even if it was involuntary there is that small chance that he (the robber) could have become aware enough for a half second to realize he was in "danger" and tried to "defend" himself. I really would hope that they would have showed that proof that he wasn't moving at all, and that it would now become public knowledge. I also can't believe the defense only called one witness. I would have thought the worst he would have gotten was manslaughter. But also I'm curious how many people that owned guns and who keep them for self defense ended up on the jury. I know they tried to cull those jurors out.

Well i have to disagree. Most of us on here know that you shoot to stop the threat plain and simple. Once you cross that line then there is a problem. Listen to yourself, an involuntary flinch while incapacitated and face down is cause for Ersland to pump more bullets into him? really? Believe me, if the robber was still any threat at all (ie still moving and attempting to harm) Ersland would have surely said that in court right? As outspoken as Ersland is why would he omit that fact?

Like i have said numerous times he should have got a slap on the wrist, at the most 5 yrs.

 

[saddlebum]

Tom Bevel proved from the blood evidence that he was not moving. Blood pooling around his head on the floor from passive flow blood from his wound....no way he could have been moving around in his blood without disturbing that. The pharmacist lied in his interview, lied in a letter to OSBI (contradicting the story he gave the Homicide Detectives), lied in a letter to the media. He tried to plant evidence and was caught.



You have to remember that the investigators saw the evidence and put the details in a probable cause affidavit. A judge reviewed the arrest and approved it, the DA reviewed the case and filed charges, another judge heard the case at a Preliminary hearing and felt it should go to a trial, a jury saw the evidence and felt he was guilty....they all made their decision based on facts. Not many of the people criticizing this conviction know the facts.

 

[beast1989]

This is beginning to remind me of the Dave Chappelle episode where he is on the O.J. Simpson jury:

"C'mon man. What black person don't have some bloody gloves in his car? I got some right here."

Michael Brown

Michael I love your posts brother, always informative, funny, or both.

Kill is ok, overkill not so much.

Short and sweet....

 

[swoklagunner]

Well unless someone can show me pics or some kind of proof that the criminal was NOT a threat, then I have reasonable doubt to believe otherwise. Does not matter if the criminal is on the ground or not, still moving, may have another weapon on their person = still a threat. They entered that business with the intent to commit a crime, and armed as well, they caused the situation, they are responsable not the store owner.
Reasonable doubt = not guilty.

In the video, Mr. Ersland followed the other suspect out of the store. He left his employees in the store with the other suspect. He clearly believed the downed suspect was no longer a threat or he would have stayed to defend himself and his fellow employees. Then, when he returned inside the store, he nonchalantly walked around the downed suspect, barely looking his direction, calmly walked to the drawer to retrieve the other gun, then walked (not ran) to the suspect, leaned over him, and proceeded to shoot again. He NEVER assumed a defensive posture during the 2nd round of shootings. That is proof enough for me.

 

[RidgeHunter]

This is beginning to remind me of the Dave Chappelle episode where he is on the O.J. Simpson jury:

"C'mon man. What black person don't have some bloody gloves in his car? I got some right here."

Michael Brown

"Sir, my gun ownernershipness will not permit me to make a statement like that."

 

[Michael Brown]

He would have been tried if he fired 1 or 50 rounds, at elast by what I have read here.

I am done, I have stated my view, you have yours, we dont agree, eh so be it.

I thought you were done.......

Michael Brown

 

[Michael Brown]

"Sir, my gun ownernershipness will not permit me to make a statement like that."

"I must have been real confused sir because we'd have killed O.J. the first time he beat my sister up. We'd have made some orange juice outta that motherf**ker."

 

[Biggsly]

Sure would, because I wouldn't be a moron and empty a gun into someone that is no longer a threat out of pure rage and revenge...

I wish you would have been at my home during my home invasion. It would have been nice to have someone who can remain that cool while I was getting the hell beat out of me. I guess I was just a moron and fought for my life in a big blur of confusion.

 

[KenL]

Everybody will have their differing opinions on the follow-up shots to the perp, but in my view, the STUPIDEST thing he did was running outside with bullets flying in the general direction of somebody that had already left the scene and was running away from him. Reckless vigilante-ism if you ask me.