Should he "plea out"?

Should a plea deal happen in the pharmacist case?

  • ABSOLUTELY NOT!

    Votes: 30 51.7%

  • Yes, if it is a reduced charge and minimal jail time.

    Votes: 23 39.7%

  • Yes, But only if it is probation only no jail time.

    Votes: 5 8.6%
  • Total voters
    58
H

hogdogs

Staff In Memoriam
Okay if you were a defense attorney, would you suggest a plea deal as the wise move for the Oklahoma Pharmacist?

I rarely feel innocent folks are best served by a plea, but in this case... Maybe.
I know this is veering a bit so if PAX or other mod feels it is too far off base, I guess I will suck it up and move on...
Brent
 
D

doh_312

New member
Only because it is entirely possible he gets a jury of anti-gunners or anti-defendyourselfers. There is no convincing that type of jury that you were in the right for stepping on a fire ant, much less shooting someone.
 
S

Shadi Khalil

New member
Okay if you were a defense attorney, would you suggest a plea deal as the wise move for the Oklahoma Pharmacist?
Click to expand...

I think a plea is the best thing the defense can hope for. I believe the execution video leaves them little to no recourse.

Only because it is entirely possible he gets a jury of anti-gunners or anti-defendyourselfers.
Click to expand...

I would be upset if a jury of card carrying NRA members didn't put this guy under the jail. Anti-gun or not, most people are anti-murder.
 
P

pax

New member
Brent,

I think this question would fit better down in the L&CR forum -- moving it there now. Dunno if the mods there want it or not ... ;) ... so they'll make that call.

pax
 
W

Wagonman

New member
I would be upset if a jury of card carrying NRA members didn't put this guy under the jail. Anti-gun or not, most people are anti-murder.
Click to expand...

Not quite an Amen from me, he was wrong and should be punished. But, let's not take out eye off the ball. He was the victim until he shot the offender after the play.
 
J

johnwilliamson062

Moderator
It looks like to me:
hmmm. Well the armed robber was getting up, according to the only living witness of the event, and he emptied the gun into him.
The robbers fired at him within the last 30 seconds.
The pharmacist believed he had a firearm in his hand or in his close proximity, reasonable in my mind since the robber was part of a group that had a gun.
The store owner has no responsibility to disarm the assailant or to check him for weapons in my mind. Way too much risk involved in that. If he is moving, and he can reasonably assume the robber is armed I think he is clear to fire in the court of common sense. I think that if a person is clearly part of an armed robbery it is reasonable to assume he/she is armed. If not the initial shot to the head would not be justified as this particular person was not an immediate threat.

IDK what the bullet to the head really did. If the robber was laying on the ground clearly unconscious but twitching or something and the Pharmacist knew he was no threat, than it is clearly murder. If he was under control of his body or the pharmacist believed him to be then it is not in my mind. If this guy was reaching under his persons or something similar that could lead the pharmacist to believe he was going for a still holstered gun or such. I assume we have all seen the action v. reaction quick draw police demonstration where the actor clearly fires before the weapons drawn reacting officer pulls the trigger. This all happened very quickly and I think the unarmed robbers association with the clearly armed robber opens him up to being shot at as it is reasonable in my mind to assume every one of the attackers is armed.

How about a new rule, if you don't want to get shot don't commit armed robbery.

How often do you hear of an point blank "execution" with five quickly fired shots to the torso?
 
Last edited:
H

hogdogs

Staff In Memoriam
John, There are 21 pages of posts to this in the T&T section. Of that there are reports that there is resounding evidence that the BG was down and not moving. What the evidence is has not been released but is "forensic". It goes so far as to say he was not conscious when shot. The bad guys did not fire a single round although the pharmacist claimed to have been shot. He is also repeatedly trying to play the "cripple card" but in the video you see a man able to run after the BG that ran off...
Brent
 
5

5whiskey

New member
I've seen enough now that my first reaction is that I would find him not guilty of 1degree if I were on the jury. I definately would find him guilty of manslaughter or 2degree. I'm aware that there may be some evidence that has not been revealed. My reaction may change.

There is a totality of circumstance, and I do take into account that this man didn't ask to be robbed. He still showed malicious and willful ability to take a mans life that was no longer a threat to him. I don't agree with that. I don't want to see him convicted of 1st degree murder, but I don't want him to walk. A few years in the pen to reflect on his actions could do the man some good.
 
K

KingEdward

New member
If he had gotten behind the counter (cover) after returning inside while keeping a gun pointed toward in the direction of the downed robber to "contain any remaining threat", chances are he would not have fired any
other shots since the robber was down.

Then police come and secure the scene.

The water would not be as hot had he taken a little more of a defensive position / approach.
 
J

johnwilliamson062

Moderator
Of that there are reports that there is resounding evidence that the BG was down and not moving. What the evidence is has not been released but is "forensic".
Click to expand...
Whoever did the autopsy saying "This injury would clearly cause temporary disablement." What other forensic evidence could they have? The blood splatter analysis could possibly point to an immobile target if there was no smeared blood, but if he bled out on the ground and there was not a slant to the floor there is a very good chance the puddle exceeded the area he could have been moving in. We all know brain injuries are very odd and know of cases where someone received one that should have been catastrophic but was not. I am not buying anything from a medical examiners mouth about his condition at the time. It is very possible the kid was KO'd at first then regained consciousness.

It goes so far as to say he was not conscious when shot. The bad guys did not fire a single round although the pharmacist claimed to have been shot.
Click to expand...
I have read 4 or 5 papers report on this and all indicated there were shots fired. One was from the second of June. Not saying they did or did not shoot.

He is also repeatedly trying to play the "cripple card" but in the video you see a man able to run after the BG that ran off...
Click to expand...
When he is walking back he is clearly walking very awkwardly. I would not refer to his movement in any of the video as "running."

If you had video of the guy on the floor it very well might show him incapacitated and you could get a conviction. I would not convict someone on an expert witness who claims to know exactly what a certain gunshot did to someones brain beyond reasonable doubt, but can not tell me what the purpose of sleep is as it pertains to the brain. We know very little about the brain and I see know way he could reliably make this assertion.
 
Last edited:
J

johnwilliamson062

Moderator
the more I think about it the more I decide the blood splatter analysis could be pretty strong evidence that the robber did not move after the initial shots were fired.
 
H

hogdogs

Staff In Memoriam
John, Quite possibly (just me guessing) the secondary shots passed through the torso and hit the vinyl flooring... so holes in torso with vinyl chips stuck in the shirt and dents in floor lining right up could be part of the forensic evidence. And as you already stated, blood smears on floor, blood lacking or present on robber's palms could also exist.
from a purely speculative mindset, I think, had I felt the guy was still a threat, would have leaned over the counter, where I could duck for some cover, and finished the deed of stopping the threat.
Brent
 
B

brair

New member
Without solid proof(impartial eye witness) about the movements of the 16 year old(whatever color he may be) let's go with what the hero says.The crippled,older white man who the thugs tried to murder and rob.He says the mugger/murder was moving.Good enough!

If the thug had wrestled the older man and taken his handgun who would have been the victim then?.I think the term would have been disparity of force.Perhaps the old,crippled man(A.K.A.) potential victim and unwilling combatant did what he had to to save his life,store and the lives of his employees.

He shouldn't be charged but should be recognized for not only the foresight but the courage to protect himself and his employees.

Regards,
brair

P.S.I don't care if every cop in L.A. has to run for safety from the riots.It doesn't change a thing.
 
B

Brian Pfleuger

Moderator Emeritus
let's go with what the hero says.
Click to expand...

Would could..... if there was a hero. The only witness has a story that keeps changing. A story that, in none of it's forms, matches the video or the forensics.

In other words, your "hero" is a murderer. A murderer who's doing what murderers do, namely, covering his tracks as best he can.
 
H

hogdogs

Staff In Memoriam
But peet... Obviously the pharmacist didn't follow the lead of OJ Simpson who also is an innocent man...
SHUT UP!!! DON'T SAY NUTTIN'!!! PROVIDE ONE STORY AND DON'T DEVIATE NO MATTER WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS!!! I don't care if the thug still had a gun in his hand... If he is down plain and simple... the shooting is done!
I would kick the gun across the room though. But in this case, Brair, no gun was there not much need for 5 CoM is there? Or are you all for alley way justice?
Brent
 
B

brair

New member
Is there any doubt who tried to rob whom and who did it while masked and armed?If there is I missed something,
Regards,
Brair
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top