I agree that it is murder, I am not sure I would put First Degree murder on this case. Second Degree might have been more appropriate.
For this discussion let's make sure we all have the same understanding of the law. Let's look at the law
http://www.oklegislature.gov/osstatuestitle.html
[§21-701.7. Murder in the first degree.
A. A person commits murder in the first degree when that person unlawfully and with malice aforethought causes the death of another human being. Malice is that deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a human being, which is manifested by external circumstances capable of proof.
B. A person also commits the crime of murder in the first degree, regardless of malice, when that person or any other person takes the life of a human being during, or if the death of a human being results from, the commission or attempted commission of murder of another person, shooting or discharge of a firearm or crossbow with intent to kill, intentional discharge of a firearm or other deadly weapon into any dwelling or building as provided in Section 1289.17A of this title, forcible rape, robbery with a dangerous weapon, kidnapping, escape from lawful custody, eluding an officer, first degree burglary, first degree arson, unlawful distributing or dispensing of controlled dangerous substances, or trafficking in illegal drugs. [/quote]
Paragraphs c-e are not applicable in this case
Second degree murder
[§21-701.8. Murder in the second degree.
Homicide is murder in the second degree in the following cases:
1. When perpetrated by an act imminently dangerous to another person and evincing a depraved mind, regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual; or
2. When perpetrated by a person engaged in the commission of any felony other than the unlawful acts set out in Section 1, subsection B, of this act. [/quote]
Justifiable Homicide by person (non-law enforcement)
Quote:
§21733. Justifiable homicide by any person.
Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in either of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder such person, or to commit any felony upon him, or upon or in any dwelling house in which such person is; or,
2. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of his or her husband, wife, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant, when there is a reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony, or to do some great personal injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or,
3. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed; or in lawfully suppressing any riot; or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.
|
Unfortunately the court has not released its case decision in State of Oklahoma v Jerome Jay Ersland so until that is released we can only rely on the what the media chooses to publish. Not exactly a preferred way to form an opinion.
There is at least one media story that Ersland shot one of the robbers, then when Ersland returned to the store, picked up another handgun (he had two in the store) and then shot the first robber (who was on the floor) with the second gun. Again, this what a media chooses to publish, not the facts as entered into the trial.
http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/05...se-tip-stfu-2/
That may have been what put the jury to consider First Degree Murder. Taking the time and effort of picking up another hand gun and then moving back to a position to shoot a robber which appears to be incapacitated might have counted as malice aforethought. Shooting cases like this can be complicated. The difference between the "heat of the moment" and malice aforethought can be measured in seconds depending on the case.
Another factor is that Ersland talked with the police. When you are involved in a self-defense shooting situation. NEVER. TALK. TO. THE. POLICE.
The police are not on your side, nor is the District Attorney.
"Officer, my life was endangered. I would like to talk to my attorney before making any further statements. "
Keep thy trap shut.
Again without the benefit of reading the case decision (State decisions are not always published in a timely manner) it is difficult to render any opinion based on the evidence.
Based on what the media chooses to publish, I can understand the First Degree Murder conviction. I would have liked to see Second Degree. But the way the Oklahoma law is written for Second Degree Murder it may not apply.
So what is Ersland facing with First Degree Murder Conviction?
Quote:
§21-701.9. Punishment for murder.
A. A person who is convicted of or pleads guilty or nolo contendere to murder in the first degree shall be punished by death, by imprisonment for life without parole or by imprisonment for life. A person who is convicted of or pleads guilty or nolo contendere to murder in the first degree, as described in subsection E of Section 701.7 of this title, shall not be entitled to or afforded the benefit of deferment of the sentence.
B. A person who is convicted of or pleads guilty or nolo contendere to murder in the second degree shall be guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in a state penal institution for not less than ten (10) years nor more than life.
|
A minimum of life and a maximum of the death penalty. Pretty harsh.
