Okay, here's the story. So two teenage guys try to rob a pharmacy when one of the pharmacist, Jerome Ersland, pulls out a gun and shoots one of them in the head. Sounds like self-defense, no one would argue against that. The story changes when Ersland, after driving the other robber out of the store, returns to the pharmacy, grabs a second gun, and proceeds to walk over to the first robber, Antwun Parker, and shoot him five times while he was on the floor unconscious. Some are saying it was self-defense others are claiming murder. Ersland was given a guilty verdict and sentenced to life in prison.
Personally, if Ersland had pleaded temporary insanity then I might have at least understood him. Emotions run high during that kind of situation and no one is going to react perfectly. But his claim that an unconscious person with a head wound was still a threat is beyond sketchy to me. So what do you think Escapist?
Link to the article
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43710936/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/?GT1=43001
video report
Personally, if Ersland had pleaded temporary insanity then I might have at least understood him. Emotions run high during that kind of situation and no one is going to react perfectly. But his claim that an unconscious person with a head wound was still a threat is beyond sketchy to me. So what do you think Escapist?
Link to the article
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43710936/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/?GT1=43001
video report