Ersland doesn't have a good case, which explains why so many unusual motions instead and delays in the trial. If you're facing the likelihood of life in prison, who cares how much money you owe on the house?

Ersland doesn't have a good case, which explains why so many unusual motions instead and delays in the trial. If you're facing the likelihood of life in prison, who cares how much money you owe on the house?


I'm still of the opinion Ersland should have been charged - BUT - should be found innocent or given little to no jail if found guilty by a jury. I really think this case will come down to who is better at selecting a jury and captivating them with your argument of the events and the application of law. I can see this going either way or even more probable, a hung jury.

will be interesting to see which, if any, lesser included instructions get requested.

will be interesting to see which, if any, lesser included instructions get requested.

Well, if it has to be a simple up/down on first degree murder - he's walkin'. No unanimous verdict, IMO. No way - no how.

Well, if it has to be a simple up/down on first degree murder - he's walkin'. No unanimous verdict, IMO. No way - no how.

I agree, seeking Murder 1 is almost guaranteeing an acquittal.

First of all no one knows what went thru the Pharmacist's mind when all of it was going on. It all happened so fast. We cannot slow it down like on a video tape. Someone comes in with a gun, your adrenaline is going to be pumping, I don't care who you are. The video does show the boy did move after being shot the first time. Who knows if he was trying to get up to shoot, to ask for help, or what, but the boy DID come into that place with a gun intent to kill. You don't have a gun for anything else. So, to avoid a lawsuit you should let yourself and female employees be killed by the thugs? I think not. Where is the culpability of the boys mother? This boy should not have been in that pharmacy, period. He should have had himself in school. What is this kids' attendance? What is his police record? Why did she let her minor son be with those thugs? If she has any other children she should be investigated by child welfare. She is responsible for what her minor children do. If they break a window, mom pays for it, etc... Any other children in that home should be removed. Live by the gun, die by the gun.... this boy was on a path to death...if it wasn't this pharmacist, it would be someone else. His path was already chosen by his mother and the people around her...who she really should be suing is the two thugs that took her son on a crime spree, not the person her son held up at gun point. Had her son killed the pharmacist, we would be hearing all about the poor black child, with no daddy at home, and a struggling mother, and it wasn't his fault, and boo hoo... sign of the times I guess. It has no baring whether he was black white latino or asian..he went in that store with one intent, to commit a crime. Do I think he should be dead, no, he should be in jail for the next 25 years, then he could come out early on good behavior and commit some more crimes in our city, and you would need to hope to god he didn't kill YOU this time or one of YOUR family or friends....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parker didn't have a gun

First of all no one knows what went thru the Pharmacist's mind when all of it was going on. It all happened so fast. We cannot slow it down like on a video tape. Someone comes in with a gun, your adrenaline is going to be pumping, I don't care who you are. The video does show the boy did move after being shot the first time. Who knows if he was trying to get up to shoot, to ask for help, or what, but the boy DID come into that place with a gun intent to kill. You don't have a gun for anything else. So, to avoid a lawsuit you should let yourself and female employees be killed by the thugs? I think not. Where is the culpability of the boys mother? This boy should not have been in that pharmacy, period. He should have had himself in school. What is this kids' attendance? What is his police record? Why did she let her minor son be with those thugs? If she has any other children she should be investigated by child welfare. She is responsible for what her minor children do. If they break a window, mom pays for it, etc... Any other children in that home should be removed. Live by the gun, die by the gun.... this boy was on a path to death...if it wasn't this pharmacist, it would be someone else. His path was already chosen by his mother and the people around her...who she really should be suing is the two thugs that took her son on a crime spree, not the person her son held up at gun point. Had her son killed the pharmacist, we would be hearing all about the poor black child, with no daddy at home, and a struggling mother, and it wasn't his fault, and boo hoo... sign of the times I guess. It has no baring whether he was black white latino or asian..he went in that store with one intent, to commit a crime. Do I think he should be dead, no, he should be in jail for the next 25 years, then he could come out early on good behavior and commit some more crimes in our city, and you would need to hope to god he didn't kill YOU this time or one of YOUR family or friends....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The good boy who loved to draw and play basketball was starting to amass himself a nice little criminal record before that May afternoon.
It irks me to no end that no responsibility has been placed at the mothers feet nor the criminal. Its been the blame game with her from 2 years ago blaming any and everything but herself and her child. And she should be investigated by child welfare. And why wasnt he in school that day?
Here is what i believed happened.....at least thru her eyes
While strolling along on a warm afternoon coming home from med school on his way to feed the homeless poor antwun came across some elder gentlemen outside of the realiable pharmacy who insisted that he take place in their devious scheme.

This is the criminal record going around the internet being purportedly Mr. Parker's:

Criminal Record:
01/13/94 Case # 94-004091 Injury Accident{hit and run}
01/19/00 Case # 00-005964 Warrant on above offense
07/28/04 Case # 04-073500 Assault and Battery on a police officer
08/30/07 Case # 07-076159 Domestic Violence 07/08/08 08-057149 Vehicle Grand Larceny
07/29/08 08-064014 Trespassing Private Property 04/20/09 09-032264 Vehicle Grand Larceny

Keep in mind that when Parker died, in 2009, he was 16. Let's do some arithmetic to see whether these things are likely:

01/13/94 Case # 94-004091 Injury Accident{hit and run}
Here, Parker was at the ripe 'old age of one (1). Are these people stupid?

01/19/00 Case # 00-005964 Warrant on above offense
In 2000, Parker would have been 7. That'd have been the warrant for the hit and run when he was 1.[b]

[b]07/28/04 Case # 04-073500 Assault and Battery on a police officer
Assault and battery by an 11 year old? Charged as an adult? A little hard to swallow.

08/30/07 Case # 07-076159 Domestic Violence 07/08/08 08-057149 Vehicle Grand Larceny
A 14 year old charged with domestic violence and stealing a car? And how did we get access to his juvenile record again?

07/29/08 08-064014 Trespassing Private Property 04/20/09 09-032264 Vehicle Grand Larceny
Considering the above, are you going to believe this? And believe it wasn't charged as a juvenile crime?

The above is the criminal record floating around. Surely you aren't dumb enough to buy into that. I mean, your confirmation bias levels are pretty off the charts, but this would be charting new territory.

This is the criminal record going around the internet being purportedly Mr. Parker's:

Criminal Record:
01/13/94 Case # 94-004091 Injury Accident{hit and run}
01/19/00 Case # 00-005964 Warrant on above offense
07/28/04 Case # 04-073500 Assault and Battery on a police officer
08/30/07 Case # 07-076159 Domestic Violence 07/08/08 08-057149 Vehicle Grand Larceny
07/29/08 08-064014 Trespassing Private Property 04/20/09 09-032264 Vehicle Grand Larceny

Keep in mind that when Parker died, in 2009, he was 16. Let's do some arithmetic to see whether these things are likely:

01/13/94 Case # 94-004091 Injury Accident{hit and run}
Here, Parker was at the ripe 'old age of one (1). Are these people stupid?

01/19/00 Case # 00-005964 Warrant on above offense
In 2000, Parker would have been 7. That'd have been the warrant for the hit and run when he was 1.[b]

[b]07/28/04 Case # 04-073500 Assault and Battery on a police officer
Assault and battery by an 11 year old? Charged as an adult? A little hard to swallow.

08/30/07 Case # 07-076159 Domestic Violence 07/08/08 08-057149 Vehicle Grand Larceny
A 14 year old charged with domestic violence and stealing a car? And how did we get access to his juvenile record again?

07/29/08 08-064014 Trespassing Private Property 04/20/09 09-032264 Vehicle Grand Larceny
Considering the above, are you going to believe this? And believe it wasn't charged as a juvenile crime?

The above is the criminal record floating around. Surely you aren't dumb enough to buy into that. I mean, your confirmation bias levels are pretty off the charts, but this would be charting new territory.

I thought he was 14 and his partner in crime was 16 - am I wrong on that?

This is the criminal record going around the internet being purportedly Mr. Parker's:

Criminal Record:
01/13/94 Case # 94-004091 Injury Accident{hit and run}
01/19/00 Case # 00-005964 Warrant on above offense
07/28/04 Case # 04-073500 Assault and Battery on a police officer
08/30/07 Case # 07-076159 Domestic Violence 07/08/08 08-057149 Vehicle Grand Larceny
07/29/08 08-064014 Trespassing Private Property 04/20/09 09-032264 Vehicle Grand Larceny

Keep in mind that when Parker died, in 2009, he was 16. Let's do some arithmetic to see whether these things are likely:

01/13/94 Case # 94-004091 Injury Accident{hit and run}
Here, Parker was at the ripe 'old age of one (1). Are these people stupid?

01/19/00 Case # 00-005964 Warrant on above offense
In 2000, Parker would have been 7. That'd have been the warrant for the hit and run when he was 1.[b]

[b]07/28/04 Case # 04-073500 Assault and Battery on a police officer
Assault and battery by an 11 year old? Charged as an adult? A little hard to swallow.

08/30/07 Case # 07-076159 Domestic Violence 07/08/08 08-057149 Vehicle Grand Larceny
A 14 year old charged with domestic violence and stealing a car? And how did we get access to his juvenile record again?

07/29/08 08-064014 Trespassing Private Property 04/20/09 09-032264 Vehicle Grand Larceny
Considering the above, are you going to believe this? And believe it wasn't charged as a juvenile crime?

The above is the criminal record floating around. Surely you aren't dumb enough to buy into that. I mean, your confirmation bias levels are pretty off the charts, but this would be charting new territory.

Does seem a tad young dosnt it?
Since he was using the last name of his father and not his mother{shocked!}it could possibly be the fathers record.

The only crimes I am certain of are being in a stolen vehicle and shoplifting.

Or perhaps an uncle's, or a cousin's, or a third cousin, or someone with a similar name.
Matters about as much as what color socks he wore I suppose.

Does seem a tad young dosnt it?
Since he was using the last name of his father and not his mother{shocked!}it could possibly be the fathers record.

So maybe the lesson here is to not take things you read on the internet at face value?

I thought he was 14 and his partner in crime was 16 - am I wrong on that?

Probably :-)

Mother of robber killed in Oklahoma pharmacy to get money from lawsuit settlement

Read more: http://newsok.com/mother-of-robber-killed-in-oklahoma-pharmacy-to-get-money-from-lawsuit-settlement/article/3661573#ixzz1qVc4x8aL

Mother of robber killed in Oklahoma pharmacy to get money from lawsuit settlement

I have mixed feelings about this.. First the kid was robbing the store and that's the chances he took and his family shouldn't be rewarded for his illegal actions. But the young man was executed after he was wounded and no longer a threat, plus he was unarmed, so I can see a wrongful death case here. Guess it was cheaper for the pharmacy chain to pay out than go to trial.

I have mixed feelings about this.. First the kid was robbing the store and that's the chances he took and his family shouldn't be rewarded for his illegal actions. But the young man was executed after he was wounded and no longer a threat, plus he was unarmed, so I can see a wrongful death case here. Guess it was cheaper for the pharmacy chain to pay out than go to trial.

I agree. The only reason I can live with this is because the person who shot him was convicted of murder.

Considering the attorney is taking a big cut (usually about half) and 35% of the remainder goes to the Dept. of Human Services, I don't think the mother is going to end up with a big payout.


Really a sad situation all the way around.

Yeah it is... no winners in this one, other than the lawyers. No offense to the lawyers out there

Pete, fwiw, in a settlement case such as here, almost half is likely an overstatement.

I don't know the counsel for the mom and I have no insider knowledge on the case, dinna even know of the settlement until reading about it here. However, whether counsel is a solo or part of a firm, a representation agreement poised at or near the 50% mark without a trial is not in my experience the norm.

Conversely, if there were oversized bucket loads of costs incurred along the way to the settlement, the counsel fee plus the client's reimbursement of a large case costs amount could get the figure somewhat closer to such a figure.

Then again, the matter could also have been pursued for a significantly lower than the norm arrangement. It happens more often than most would imagine, if only because so many would imagine it would never happen at all.