Latest in the Jerome Jay Ersland saga.

[_CY_]

just my opinion... Prater is an attention grubbing moron who should be fired. my sincere hopes is that the voters of OKC will not forget this and reward Prater by voting him out of office.

the word here is "discretion" ANY District Attorney makes decisions each and every day about which case to prosecute and which case to let it go.

Prater knows Ersland didn't ask to be robbed at gun point. And what folks do things in the heat of the moment cannot be predicted.
He could have just as easily decided not to destroy Ersland's life with zero repercussions to himself. but that meant letting go one of the highest profile case of his career. IMHO Prater is out for the publicity of this case... by staying in the media, Prater thinks he's winning.

Sure hope the voters of OKC prove him wrong by voting Prater out.

mr prater believes he can.

 

[Michael Brown]

just my opinion... Prater is an attention grubbing moron who should be fired. my sincere hopes is that the voters of OKC will not forget this and reward Prater by voting him out of office.

the word here is "discretion" ANY District Attorney makes decisions each and every day about which case to prosecute and which case to let it go.

Prater knows Ersland didn't ask to be robbed at gun point. And what folks do things in the heat of the moment cannot be predicted.
He could have just as easily decided not to destroy Ersland's life with zero repercussions to himself. but that meant letting go one of the highest profile case of his career. IMHO Prater is out for the publicity of this case... by staying in the media, Prater thinks he's winning.

Sure hope the voters of OKC prove him wrong by voting Prater out.

CY,

I've noticed that you almost always have some good foundation for your posts.

What are you basing your opinion on?

I don't know much about OKC politics but everything I've ever heard about Prater, outside this case, has been positive.

That leads me to believe there is some forensic evidence we may not be privy to yet.

I know folks around Tulsa, particularly on this board, have been critical of Tim Harris when it comes to certain high profile cases like the Gumm shooting.

I don't know Prater but I do know Tim Harris and I think he generally makes his prosecutorial decisions on what he thinks is right (a little legal cherry-picking aside) despite folks not agreeing with him.

Do you have any reason to believe Prater doesn't believe Ersland is guilty of a crime?

I ask because I've never seen you just jump on the bandwagon so I'm guessing you have some information.

Michael Brown

 

[ez bake]

CY,

I've noticed that you almost always have some good foundation for your posts.

What are you basing your opinion on?

I don't know much about OKC politics but everything I've ever heard about Prater, outside this case, has been positive.

That leads me to believe there is some forensic evidence we may not be privy to yet.

I know folks around Tulsa, particularly on this board, have been critical of Tim Harris when it comes to certain high profile cases like the Gumm shooting.

I don't know Prater but I do know Tim Harris and I think he generally makes his prosecutorial decisions on what he thinks is right (a little legal cherry-picking aside) despite folks not agreeing with him.

Do you have any reason to believe Prater doesn't believe Ersland is guilty of a crime?

I ask because I've never seen you just jump on the bandwagon so I'm guessing you have some information.

Michael Brown

This. Prater has said in more than a few videos that he would have stood up for Ersland's actions - even the stupidity of firing shots wildly down the street in the middle of a city (based on the fact that by shooting an armed robber, he could have been protecting some other citizens). That's a damn lot more credit than I would expect if I was chasing someone down the street and shooting at them (no matter if they had just robbed me with a gun or not).

Seems like bandwagon talk to me. Prater is a moron now because of just this incident? Or are there other incidents in which he's acted like a moron (I'm seriously asking - I don't keep up with OKC politics too much)?

I'll say this - the suspect that was killed with the 5 additional shots didn't have a gun and Ersland has lied several times regarding his case - he lied about the order in which his shots were fired, he lied about the robbers shooting at him first (or at all - nobody fired a shot but Ersland), he made up an injury and even bandaged it for TV (and proceeded to run his mouth on TV like he had just signed a book deal or something), he lied about being a veteran with PTSD.

The man is a scumbag plain and simple - if anyone had done half of what he did and it didn't involve a gun/self-defense case, most of the folks cheering for Ersland would be calling him a moron. The first shot with the Taurus Judge in the pharmacy was justified (even though he shot the unarmed suspect and not the guy with the gun - Prater even called this a good shot) not his shooting down the street - everything after that first shot was just stupid.

So it didn't matter what the suspect was doing as he was bleeding on the floor, deadly force wasn't justified (especially since Ersland had twice turned his back on him - that indicates that there was no threat) if he had no weapon (or anything suspicious in his hand - which Ersland's defense has never stated that the suspect did) no matter what he was doing.

Ersland's defense has flip-flopped back and forth to almost contradict his earliest defense, and with the circus that this case is turning into, there is no good end to this case now - no matter what, we as gun-owners will loose some ground in the fight for our rights, Ersland will be punished for a crime he didn't have to commit, or the worst case, two armed gang-members will walk because of Ersland's lack of forethought.

Some folks need to actually watch the video and listen to Ersland's statements over the course of his entire case - there's a lot to crucify him with in there that he provided.

 

[_CY_]

thanks for asking... unfortunately not privy to any more info than anyone else in the public.

but what I have done is watched video clip over and over again.
http://newsok.com/pharmacist-in-fat...l/article/3373194?custom_click=lead_story_tit

1. Two robbers run in Pharmacy one with gun at 15:40.35
2. One robber is shot in head by Ersland and goes down at 15:40.46
3. Robber with gun runs outside followed by Ersland 4 seconds later at 15:40.50
4. Ersland comes back inside 25 seconds later at 15:41.15
5. Ersland walks by downed robber at 15:41.19
6. Ersland goes to back drawer gets a Keltec .380 at 15:41.28
7. Ersland walks back to downed robber and unloads .380 at 15:41.32

11 seconds elapsed between time armed robbers ran into pharmacy and Ersland shooting one. 4 seconds elapsed between time Ersland got Keltec pistol out of drawer and shooting downed robber again.

a total of 57 seconds elapse between time robbers run inside pharmacy to shooting downed robber second time. 46 seconds elapsed from first shot at robbers head to second set of shots.

after shot robber goes down... NO footage exist showing what downed robber did or didn't do. Ersland is the only person that witnessed downed robber's actions after he went down.

that Ersland is a loud mouth scumbag doesn't change the fact Ersland didn't ask to be robbed at gun point. A lot happened in ONE minute which is the total time all this took place. No one can predict how someone will react under dire duress.

not a pathologist but did do research on clinical proof for time of death. downed robber could have been already dead when second set of shots were fired.

here's standards used in proof of time of death http://www.arrakis.es/~jacoello/date.pdf

Estimating the Time of Death Ed Friedlander MD
http://www.pathguy.com/TimeDead.htm

~ (p2) it's futile mentioning time of death in units of less than an hour. even when death is recent. a medical witness that attempts to give time of death by temperature estimation in units of minutes or fractions of hour is exposing himself to severe challenge to his expertise to point of ridicule. thus denigrating rest of evidence.
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/timedeath.pdf

CY,

I've noticed that you almost always have some good foundation for your posts.

What are you basing your opinion on?

I don't know much about OKC politics but everything I've ever heard about Prater, outside this case, has been positive.

That leads me to believe there is some forensic evidence we may not be privy to yet.

I know folks around Tulsa, particularly on this board, have been critical of Tim Harris when it comes to certain high profile cases like the Gumm shooting.

I don't know Prater but I do know Tim Harris and I think he generally makes his prosecutorial decisions on what he thinks is right (a little legal cherry-picking aside) despite folks not agreeing with him.

Do you have any reason to believe Prater doesn't believe Ersland is guilty of a crime?

I ask because I've never seen you just jump on the bandwagon so I'm guessing you have some information.

Michael Brown

 

[HMFIC]

this. Prater has said in more than a few videos that he would have stood up for ersland's actions - even the stupidity of firing shots wildly down the street in the middle of a city (based on the fact that by shooting an armed robber, he could have been protecting some other citizens). That's a damn lot more credit than i would expect if i was chasing someone down the street and shooting at them (no matter if they had just robbed me with a gun or not).

Seems like bandwagon talk to me. Prater is a moron now because of just this incident? Or are there other incidents in which he's acted like a moron (i'm seriously asking - i don't keep up with okc politics too much)?

I'll say this - the suspect that was killed with the 5 additional shots didn't have a gun and ersland has lied several times regarding his case - he lied about the order in which his shots were fired, he lied about the robbers shooting at him first (or at all - nobody fired a shot but ersland), he made up an injury and even bandaged it for tv (and proceeded to run his mouth on tv like he had just signed a book deal or something), he lied about being a veteran with ptsd.

The man is a scumbag plain and simple - if anyone had done half of what he did and it didn't involve a gun/self-defense case, most of the folks cheering for ersland would be calling him a moron. The first shot with the taurus judge in the pharmacy was justified (even though he shot the unarmed suspect and not the guy with the gun - prater even called this a good shot) not his shooting down the street - everything after that first shot was just stupid.

So it didn't matter what the suspect was doing as he was bleeding on the floor, deadly force wasn't justified (especially since ersland had twice turned his back on him - that indicates that there was no threat) if he had no weapon (or anything suspicious in his hand - which ersland's defense has never stated that the suspect did) no matter what he was doing.

Ersland's defense has flip-flopped back and forth to almost contradict his earliest defense, and with the circus that this case is turning into, there is no good end to this case now - no matter what, we as gun-owners will loose some ground in the fight for our rights, ersland will be punished for a crime he didn't have to commit, or the worst case, two armed gang-members will walk because of ersland's lack of forethought.

Some folks need to actually watch the video and listen to ersland's statements over the course of his entire case - there's a lot to crucify him with in there that he provided.

+1...

 

[HMFIC]

thanks for asking... unfortunately not privy to any more info than anyone else in the public.

but what I have done is watched video clip over and over again.
http://newsok.com/pharmacist-in-fat...l/article/3373194?custom_click=lead_story_tit

1. Two robbers run in Pharmacy one with gun at 15:40.35
2. One robber is shot in head by Ersland and goes down at 15:40.46
3. Robber with gun runs outside followed by Ersland 4 seconds later at 15:40.50
4. Ersland comes back inside 25 seconds later at 15:41.15
5. Ersland walks by downed robber at 15:41.19
6. Ersland goes to back drawer gets a Keltec .380 at 15:41.28
7. Ersland walks back to downed robber and unloads .380 at 15:41.32

11 seconds elapsed between time armed robbers ran into pharmacy and Ersland shooting one. 4 seconds elapsed between time Ersland got Keltec pistol out of drawer and shooting downed robber again.

a total of 57 seconds elapse between time robbers run inside pharmacy to shooting downed robber second time. 46 seconds elapsed from first shot at robbers head to second set of shots.

after shot robber goes down... NO footage exist showing what downed robber did or didn't do. Ersland is the only person that witnessed downed robber's actions after he went down.

not a pathologist but did do research on clinical proof for time of death. here's standards used in proof of time of death http://www.arrakis.es/~jacoello/date.pdf

Estimating the Time of Death Ed Friedlander MD
http://www.pathguy.com/TimeDead.htm

~ (p2) it's futile mentioning time of death in units of less than an hour. even when death is recent. a medical witness that attempts to give time of death by temperature estimation in units of minutes or fractions of hour is exposing himself to severe challenge to his expertise to point of ridicule. thus denigrating rest of evidence.
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/timedeath.pdf

Charles, there is another video that exists that shows a different angle also that you might not have seen.

Also I think if I'm not mistaken that the coroner made an assesment of what the cause of death was based on the injuries and forensic analysis, not time of death.

Those two things might make you view it a little differently.

 

[ez bake]

thanks for asking... unfortunately not privy to any more info than anyone else in the public.

but what I have done is watched video clip over and over again.
http://newsok.com/pharmacist-in-fat...l/article/3373194?custom_click=lead_story_tit

1. Two robbers run in Pharmacy one with gun at 15:40.35
2. One robber is shot in head by Ersland and goes down at 15:40.46
3. Robber with gun runs outside followed by Ersland 4 seconds later at 15:40.50
4. Ersland comes back inside 25 seconds later at 15:41.15
5. Ersland walks by downed robber at 15:41.19
6. Ersland goes to back drawer gets a Keltec .380 at 15:41.28
7. Ersland walks back to downed robber and unloads .380 at 15:41.32

11 seconds elapsed between time armed robbers ran into pharmacy and Ersland shooting one. 4 seconds elapsed between time Ersland got Keltec pistol out of drawer and shooting downed robber again.

a total of 57 seconds elapse between time robbers run inside pharmacy to shooting downed robber second time. 46 seconds elapsed from first shot at robbers head to second set of shots.

after shot robber goes down... NO footage exist showing what downed robber did or didn't do. Ersland is the only person that witnessed downed robber's actions after he went down.

not a pathologist but did do research on clinical proof for time of death. here's standards used in proof of time of death http://www.arrakis.es/~jacoello/date.pdf

Estimating the Time of Death Ed Friedlander MD
http://www.pathguy.com/TimeDead.htm

~ (p2) it's futile mentioning time of death in units of less than an hour. even when death is recent. a medical witness that attempts to give time of death by temperature estimation in units of minutes or fractions of hour is exposing himself to severe challenge to his expertise to point of ridicule. thus denigrating rest of evidence.
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/timedeath.pdf

So are you saying that the suspect was basically dead already? None of that answers why you or others bash Prater as a moron.

Ersland's testamony (and evidence) suggests that he shot at the fleeing armed-robber a couple of times while outside (that's one of the biggest no-no's out there for CCW or HD incidents - we're not in Texas, you can't shoot a fleeing felon). Evidence also showed that no shots were fired in the pharmacy other than Ersland's. Evidence also showed that the robber who was killed had no weapon (and Ersland hasn't said that he tried to use a weapon or that he had anything in his hand - only that he "was cursing and trying to get back up" - which he later flip-flopped on).

If you look at most of his statements online, he's actually pretty cool about the whole thing. Again, look at all of Ersland's statements - they are Ersland's biggest enemy right now.

None of that suggests that Prater is a moron to me (including all of his statements to the press).

 

[_CY_]

just my opinion... Prater is prosecuting this in large part due to the publicity that any high profile case will generate.

that's why I personally think he's a Moron for doing this.
just my opinion... but seem I'm not alone.

again... fact that Ersland is a loudmouth scumbag doesn't change the fact, he didn't asked to be robbed at gun point. there is No video or other evidence that proves what downed robber did or didn't do. just because Ersland turned his back on him doesn't prove anything.

speculation, he could have thought downed robber was not a threat first time by him, then saw him move the second time, then ran back to his drawer fumbling for 9 seconds getting his Keltec out. then shot him again 4 seconds later.

or down robber was cold dead when he passed second time... but he though he saw movement and panic... ran back to get his Keltec then pumped more shots into him...

not say above is what happened... but it could have
someone is innocent until proven guilty ... Nothing I've seen so far indicates solid proof of anything.

if Prater has such convincing evidence ... why has it not surfaced?
IMHO it doesn't exist... in the absence of irrefutable evidence. the benefit of the doubt belongs to Ersland... loud mouth scumbag or not.

So are you saying that the suspect was basically dead already? None of that answers why you or others bash Prater as a moron.

~
None of that suggests that Prater is a moron to me (including all of his statements to the press).

 

[_CY_]

we've got dueling coroner's reports ... one says first shot was non fatal, second senior coroner says otherwise.

could you please post link to other video that shows anything different?

--------
former Medical Examiner Dr. Collie Trant's report stated the first shot Ersland fired was non-fatal, but follow-up investigations done by the medical examiner's office show that as incorrect.

Read Antwun Parker's autopsy report by Dr. Collie Trant
http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/griffin/NEWS9/PDF/1003/ME Autopsy.pdf

Box said that according to new testimony by another pathologist, Ersland actually fired a lethal shot the first time he fired his gun. The earlier reports labeling his first gunshot as non-fatal led prosecutors to say Ersland's five gunshots to the suspect were unnecessary force.

http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=12915764

Charles, there is another video that exists that shows a different angle also that you might not have seen.

Also I think if I'm not mistaken that the coroner made an assesment of what the cause of death was based on the injuries and forensic analysis, not time of death.

Those two things might make you view it a little differently.

 

[ez bake]

just my opinion... Prater is prosecuting this in large part due to the publicity that any high profile case will generate.

that's why I personally think he's a Moron for doing this.
just my opinion... but seem I'm not alone.

again... fact that Ersland is a loudmouth scumbag doesn't change the fact, he didn't asked to be robbed at gun point. there is No video or other evidence that proves what downed robber did or didn't do. just because Ersland turned his back on him doesn't prove anything.

speculation, he could have thought downed robber was not a threat first time by him, then saw him move the second time, then ran back to his drawer fumbling for 9 seconds getting his Keltec out. then shot him again 4 seconds later.

or down robber was cold dead when he passed second time... but he though he saw movement and panic... ran back to get his Keltec then pumped more shots into him...

not say above is what happened... but it could have
someone is innocent until proven guilty ... Nothing I've seen so far indicates solid proof of anything.

if Prater has such convincing evidence ... why has it not surfaced?
IMHO it doesn't exist... in the absence of irrefutable evidence. the benefit of the doubt belongs to Ersland... loud mouth scumbag or not.

The same argument could be made for either of the Robbers (or Parker specifically, since he was not armed or really threatening anyone the entire time he was on camera - his hands were clearly visible as he was fumbling with his hat/mask) - you can stretch "no one knows for sure" too far.

The evidence does show that Parker was not armed at any time during the whole incident - with a knife or gun. So he could have moved or started dancing for that matter - why does that make it ok that Ersland shot him (where was the threat)? Keep in mind that Ersland's defense has changed since the time he said that - he later tried to use the defense that Parker was already dead. Ersland also moves very nonchalantly over to Parker when shooting him those last 5 times.

Even if you can't see what's going on off-camera, and Ersland is innocent until proven guilty, and he never asked to be robbed... Who is to be believed as to what happened off-camera? Ersland has lied several times about the case, so his testimony is useless in my opinion.

Is Parker to be assumed to have been a threat off-camera based on his on-camera actions, or is Ersland to be believed based on his off-camera actions and his testimony?

Its not 100% what Parker or Ersland did off-camera, but there's more than enough reason to prosecute Ersland based on the evidence, the video, and his statements/actions (he is innocent until proven guilty, he's getting a trial - prosecuting someone doesn't remove their rights, especially if they've done as many stupid things as Ersland has done).