I agree that if he had put that first shot true, or if he had double tapped, even triple and one was a fatal shot, that would not have been a murder. But it's not being a bad shot that caused him to be convicted. He is guilty because, and only because, he later deliberately fired five shots into a downed person, and the jury disbelieved him on still perceiving Parker as a threat. All the lies and faking an injury play into it as well.

I agree with you on a lot of points they also said that the mother's boyfriend put them up to it. I also think that since everybody else got charged with murder that the boyfriend should have at least gotten charged as an accessory or charged with manslaughter. Now the mother is going to make money off of the death of her son and I have a problem with that too. Unfortunately this is going to get worse because there are too many parents out there who just simply don't care about their kids. All they care about is their social life and getting some man. Children are gifts from God to be loved and taken care of not something to make money off of. Unfortunately our society doesn't really care about children anymore they are just something to make money off of or to use as a bargaining chip. Children are the future if we don't care about them then they will grow up to not care about anybody else and that is how this stuff happens. As the old saying goes children learn by example if we don't show them a good example of what it is to be a good human being then how are they going to learn?

Assume mother gets a judgment for $100 trillion. How does a prisoner with a life sentence who has spent every last dime on his legal defense pay her any money? This is a worthless case. As an attorney, I have a small business to run. Quite frankly, I wouldn't have wasted my time and money on filing such a lawsuit, because the possibility of recovery is just about nil.

Well at least Prater is safe knowing that Sharpton and Jackson wont be knocking at his door anytime soon.

What an odd statement considering the jurors were a cross section of the community, and like the community, a majority were not folks of color.

I agree that if he had put that first shot true, or if he had double tapped, even triple and one was a fatal shot, that would not have been a murder. But it's not being a bad shot that caused him to be convicted. He is guilty because, and only because, he later deliberately fired five shots into a downed person, and the jury disbelieved him on still perceiving Parker as a threat. All the lies and faking an injury play into it as well.

That is the way it looks to me.

What an odd statement considering the jurors were a cross section of the community, and like the community, a majority were not folks of color.

I may be wrong but I think that he meant that by prosecuting the guy, it might have helped them avoid looking like they didn't care about a black kid shot by a white man.

All the same, a jury found the man guilty and I think that pretty much vindicates the idea that this was done to be politically correct.

Assume mother gets a judgment for $100 trillion. How does a prisoner with a life sentence who has spent every last dime on his legal defense pay her any money? This is a worthless case. As an attorney, I have a small business to run. Quite frankly, I wouldn't have wasted my time and money on filing such a lawsuit, because the possibility of recovery is just about nil.

At this point, he is pretty much judgment proof but if I remember correctly, the suit was filed before the criminal case ended. She might have been thinking there might be money to be had if he was acquitted and then wrote a book or made the celebrity rounds. Dunno.

Actually the first shot was a headshot which is a pretty good shot in my book.

My husband said the same thing.

Considering the reported actions taken pre-trial and during the trial during the state's case, I wouldn't call the above a fair characterization of the defense team's efforts on his behalf.

As far as a daily fee goes, 5G per day for a multi-attorney defense team is not something that would cause my eyebrows to raise. I realize others may hold different opinions.

I paid $7,500 a day each time my attorney spent a day in court. I didn't like it, but I didn't cry to anybody about it either.

Well at least Prater is safe knowing that Sharpton and Jackson wont be knocking at his door anytime soon.

Not so fast, the TBL case will now be the spotlighted one.

What he is ultimately guilty of is being a bad shot and nothing more. If he killed him on the first few shots because he had better aim we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Better aim? If I remember correctly he used .410 ammo with three pellets per round. All three hit Parker (two grazed the sides of his head and one hit dead center in the forehead).

Actually, his aim was fine, what he needed was some restraint after firing the initial shots.

Assume mother gets a judgment for $100 trillion. How does a prisoner with a life sentence who has spent every last dime on his legal defense pay her any money? This is a worthless case. As an attorney, I have a small business to run. Quite frankly, I wouldn't have wasted my time and money on filing such a lawsuit, because the possibility of recovery is just about nil.

She'll sue the pharmacy's insurance carrier who will settle for $100K+

What an odd statement considering the jurors were a cross section of the community, and like the community, a majority were not folks of color.

Only one minority in the jury and she appeared to be Asian.

YOu can see the uncut version of the verdict here.... http://www.newsok.com/jerome-ersland-verdict-uncut/multimedia/video/961948610001

Better aim? If I remember correctly he used .410 ammo with three pellets per round. All three hit Parker (two grazed the sides of his head and one hit dead center in the forehead).

Actually, his aim was fine, what he needed was some restraint after firing the initial shots.

And a sock in his mouth wouldn't have hurt.

She'll sue the pharmacy's insurance carrier who will settle for $100K+

Insurance doesn't generally cover these sorts of things.

Insurance doesn't generally cover these sorts of things.

There may be an exclusion in the policy, but the pharmacy is going to be in a tough situation if the owner knew and approved of the guns on the property for such purposes. I have no idea how much of a defense it will be that Ersland was licensed to carry a weapon.

Personally, I think its pretty stupid of a business owner to place guns on the property.

I wanna know what was up with Ersland having a handcuff key on him when he arrived at court today?

I wanna know what was up with Ersland having a handcuff key on him when he arrived at court today?

Let's see. Why might someone who has been on bond on a serious charge bring along a handcuff key to the courthouse on the first day his freedom status might be changed by a jury?

Nope, nothing comes to mind. It's a mystery.

Assume mother gets a judgment for $100 trillion. How does a prisoner with a life sentence who has spent every last dime on his legal defense pay her any money? This is a worthless case. As an attorney, I have a small business to run. Quite frankly, I wouldn't have wasted my time and money on filing such a lawsuit, because the possibility of recovery is just about nil.It will come off of the business insurance because he was the acting manager of the pharmacy. Also there is no way of knowing if the owner knew he kept guns in the pharmacy. I was also thinking that maybe the owner might even file bankruptcy to get out from underneath a judgement if there is one. Then you have to wonder if she will put a lean on the property to keep him from selling it. I guess we will have to wait and see if this actually goes to court to answer the suit.

At this point, he is pretty much judgment proof but if I remember correctly, the suit was filed before the criminal case ended. She might have been thinking there might be money to be had if he was acquitted and then wrote a book or made the celebrity rounds. Dunno.Actually if she were going to file suit by law she had to do it now. He died on May 19, 2009 which means she had to file no later then May 19, 2011 or not be able to file at all she filed on May 17 just under the wire.

I agree that if he had put that first shot true, or if he had double tapped, even triple and one was a fatal shot, that would not have been a murder. But it's not being a bad shot that caused him to be convicted. He is guilty because, and only because, he later deliberately fired five shots into a downed person, and the jury disbelieved him on still perceiving Parker as a threat. All the lies and faking an injury play into it as well.

Agree with this take....No way Parker could be perceived as a threat at that point

I agree that if he had put that first shot true, or if he had double tapped, even triple and one was a fatal shot, that would not have been a murder. But it's not being a bad shot that caused him to be convicted. He is guilty because, and only because, he later deliberately fired five shots into a downed person, and the jury disbelieved him on still perceiving Parker as a threat. All the lies and faking an injury play into it as well.Exactly.

Let's see. Why might someone who has been on bond on a serious charge bring along a handcuff key to the courthouse on the first day his freedom status might be changed by a jury?

Nope, nothing comes to mind. It's a mystery.

Okay, that might be why someone else might try and arrive with a hand grenade and a hacksaw. But I still want to know "why?" - What was he thinking? Did he really think he'd uncuff himself and then..... what? Its not like he's going to 'run' anywhere.

It will come off of the business insurance because he was the acting manager of the pharmacy. Also there is no way of knowing if the owner knew he kept guns in the pharmacy. I was also thinking that maybe the owner might even file bankruptcy to get out from underneath a judgement if there is one. Then you have to wonder if she will put a lean on the property to keep him from selling it. I guess we will have to wait and see if this actually goes to court to answer the suit.

Actually, it is very clear the owners knew about and provided two of the guns in the pharmacy (pistol in the front - used to kill Parker - and a shotgun in the back).

It will come off of the business insurance because he was the acting manager of the pharmacy. Also there is no way of knowing if the owner knew he kept guns in the pharmacy. I was also thinking that maybe the owner might even file bankruptcy to get out from underneath a judgement if there is one. Then you have to wonder if she will put a lean on the property to keep him from selling it. I guess we will have to wait and see if this actually goes to court to answer the suit.

Generally speaking, employers are not liable for the intentional torts of their employees unless it can be proved that committing the tort came within the scope of the employees employment. This is hardly an open and shut question of liability.

The on-point law is pretty thin, so this case could end up making law unless it settles (likely). It would be fine, in my legal opinion for the owners to allow the employees to keep firearms for self-defense in a store which was subject to multiple armed robberies. Unless those same shopowners can be shown to have a policy of requiring or asking employees to execute would-be robbers, this may be a tough case for the Plaintiff.

Or not... but it's not as Brian implies. This is hardly an open and shut question of liability. Were I the insurance defense lawyer here, I'd be strongly considering taking my chances with the judge and jury and court of civil appeals rather than paying a settlement.

I would like for Brian to obtain a copy of the gunshot entrance and exit (if any) hole(s) to the boy's head. Gunshot like this are almost always fatal. I know the Arizona Congresswoman survived, but she had immediate medical attention. Medical assistance wouldn't be able to arrive and save the boy in time. Its a no brainer, folks. That kid was good as dead. Really wish I was picked as a Juror on the case. I'm not saying I approve of the man's lies and afterward actions, it is just that, the kid was basically dead or about to be dead.
Good gawd! I hope your never on any jury!

Good gawd! I hope your never on any jury!

I have to believe that when someone sits on the jury, they tend to take the information actually provided and be less likely to toss it out the window in favor of emotion. We bat around stuff on the message board and in our personal lives but the jury isn't supposed to discuss it. I think that makes a big difference on how they consider evidence. One would hope so.

I have to believe that when someone sits on the jury, they tend to take the information actually provided and be less likely to toss it out the window in favor of emotion. We bat around stuff on the message board and in our personal lives but the jury isn't supposed to discuss it. I think that makes a big difference on how they consider evidence. One would hope so.
I would agree with you generally... for a reasonable person sitting on the jury... not every person would fall into that category...

Okay, that might be why someone else might try and arrive with a hand grenade and a hacksaw. But I still want to know "why?" - What was he thinking? Did he really think he'd uncuff himself and then..... what? Its not like he's going to 'run' anywhere.

In light of the man's past patterns for embellishing and creating events from thin air, my opinion is it would not surprise me greatly if he did harbor thoughts of excusing himself from the premises.

If so, as far as 'and then ... what?" goes, it's not really like he's been known for high level planning. His stories and the faked injury indicate an ability to start things, but not so much an ability to close them.

If departure was something floating around in his mind, he would not be the first defendant to move an idea toward action without a fully functional plan.

Brian, just because both agreed that he could be alive does not make it a fact that he was alive. Jury screwed up big time. I'd like a list of the people on the jury, if that info becomes available, but I am sure some of them come on here. They should be ashamed of themselves. Oklahoma was disgraced by them. My god, how would you feel of being charged with murder for shooting a dead body that was once alive and tried to do harm toward you? Geez. Wake up Jurors, wake up! They probably found him guilty out of fear of being attacked by the black gangs. True that, bet on it.

WTF is wrong with you? You have some major issues.

::snickers::

"...for fear of being attacked by the black gangs. True that, bet on it."

Seriously, Thunder, do you really believe this?

Exactly the reason juries never convict black people...Hardly any of them in prison

In light of the man's past patterns for embellishing and creating events from thin air, my opinion is it would not surprise me greatly if he did harbor thoughts of excusing himself from the premises.

If so, as far as 'and then ... what?" goes, it's not really like he's been known for high level planning. His stories and the faked injury indicate an ability to start things, but not so much an ability to close them.

If departure was something floating around in his mind, he would not be the first defendant to move an idea toward action without a fully functional plan.

Good point.

Generally speaking, employers are not liable for the intentional torts of their employees unless it can be proved that committing the tort came within the scope of the employees employment. This is hardly an open and shut question of liability.

The on-point law is pretty thin, so this case could end up making law unless it settles (likely). It would be fine, in my legal opinion for the owners to allow the employees to keep firearms for self-defense in a store which was subject to multiple armed robberies. Unless those same shopowners can be shown to have a policy of requiring or asking employees to execute would-be robbers, this may be a tough case for the Plaintiff.

Or not... but it's not as Brian implies. This is hardly an open and shut question of liability. Were I the insurance defense lawyer here, I'd be strongly considering taking my chances with the judge and jury and court of civil appeals rather than paying a settlement.

I agree with you on the point that I would not settle I would take this to court because bottom line is if the child had not gone into the store to break the law he would have never been shot in the first place. I am sorry she lost her child but she should have raised him to know that you don't break the law. If Ersland had never gone back and got that 2nd gun and shot him 5 more times this case would have never gone to trial.

Exactly the reason juries never convict black people...Hardly any of them in prison

I shouldn't have read this while I had food in my mouth!

Thank you Cleta Jennings for....
Proving that bad parenting does in the end payoff.....Cha-Ching
If you had a better handle on your "good boy" and did a better job of raising him then we wouldnt be tallking about this fiasco now.
Your cries yesterday of "justice for my baby" just shows your ignorance and lack of intelligence as well as common sense.
Thank you Mr Prater for......
Appeasing the Naacp as well as these subhuman scumbags.
For not standing up to these people and telling them sometimes things like this happen when you commit armed robbery.
You went against the grain and im sure your days as DA here are numbered.
Making business owners scared or giving a second thought about defending themselves if robbed.
And last but not least thank you Mr Ersland for ridding us of a future and career criminal.

Guys, we have a petition in progress to call on our Governor to commute Ersland's verdict/sentence. He is able to request for a pardon, so we have to wait for the pardon board and the Governor to review, etc. (I was going to mention before learning of this that the Judge do not have to honor the Jury's recommendation. I do not know when his sentencing hearing date is, so if that does not turn out for the good, then we hope for the citizens unity to convince the pardon board and Governor Fallin).

Here is a message from Facebook.


Just talked w/ Reliable Pharmacy. You have to go by there and sign petition and get a petition to take out in your area to help!! Call Karen & Greg 405.634.3956. Reliable Pharmacy is located at 5900 South Penn OKC and the numbere ther is 405.681.6631. She will be there tomorrow from 9am till noon and next week Tuesday - Friday 9am to 5:30pm. I am going to get one to get people to sign tomorrow!!!!

They are working on reaching the 500,000 signatures goal and its reaching toward that fast. OKCTalk should band together and support to free this man from wrongful conviction.

Update - The sentencing date is currently scheduled in July. Judge Elliott's number is 405-713-1428

Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/pages/Free-Jerome-Ersland/206832819343505

David Prater stepped over the line with the Murder One charges. There is a lot of comments explaining that. One poster have inside source that Mary Fallin agrees that the conviction is outrageous and Prater abused his position. But she can't officially comment on anything until...as stated earlier...after reviews are done.

Governor Mary Fallin
OK State Capitol.
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd.
Room 212 OKC 73105.
Email: info@gov.ok.gov
local phone 405-521-2342
Fax 405-521-3353

Contact Scott Pruitt @ 521-3921 and ask for a petition to overturn the verdict. (Attorney General?)

- I believe there may be a petition for David Prater to be removed from office. Lets work on that. Filing charges that should have never been filed. Hell, the charges filed does not even come close to what happened with Ersland. Wasted tax dollars down the drain. If the petition is not successful, he will NOT, I repeat, NOT win another election in the state of Oklahoma ever again. We will see to it.

Here's hoping that corrupt bafoon, Prater gets the boot. Such a scumbag. I hope he doesn't think he's getting re-elected.

Guys, we have a petition in progress to call on our Governor to commute Ersland's verdict/sentence. He is able to request for a pardon, so we have to wait for the pardon board and the Governor to review, etc. (I was going to mention before learning of this that the Judge do not have to honor the Jury's recommendation. I do not know when his sentencing hearing date is, so if that does not turn out for the good, then we hope for the citizens unity to convince the pardon board and Governor Fallin).

Here is a message from Facebook.



They are working on reaching the 500,000 signatures goal and its reaching toward that fast. OKCTalk should band together and support to free this man from wrongful conviction.

Update - The sentencing date is currently scheduled in July. Judge Elliott's number is 405-713-1428

Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/pages/Free-Jerome-Ersland/206832819343505

David Prater stepped over the line with the Murder One charges. There is a lot of comments explaining that. One poster have inside source that Mary Fallin agrees that the conviction is outrageous and Prater abused his position. But she can't officially comment on anything until...as stated earlier...after reviews are done.

Governor Mary Fallin
OK State Capitol.
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd.
Room 212 OKC 73105.
Email: info@gov.ok.gov
local phone 405-521-2342
Fax 405-521-3353

Contact Scott Pruitt @ 521-3921 and ask for a petition to overturn the verdict. (Attorney General?)

- I believe there may be a petition for David Prater to be removed from office. Lets work on that. Filing charges that should have never been filed. Hell, the charges filed does not even come close to what happened with Ersland. Wasted tax dollars down the drain. If the petition is not successful, he will NOT, I repeat, NOT win another election in the state of Oklahoma ever again. We will see to it.I am definately for Prater not being re-elected of all the cases he has prosecuted that he shouldn't have it took this one to get him noticed too bad that there are others who he maliciously prosecuted that will never see justice.

I tried to tell people how corrupt Prater was and I was ridiculed for saying it and now here we are 2 days later and because Ersland was found guilty now people are now agreeing with me. When I said the justice system was corrupt I was called crazy and I guess now I am not funny how the tide has turned.

While I believe an injustice was done, that Mr. Ersland should not have been charged and I'm still in shock he was found guilty, our system worked as designed and he was found guilty by a jury of his peers. If his defense team fights for, and gets this conviction overturned fine, but calling for a recall and calling Mr. Prater, our District Att. names is childish at best.

If you disagree with the system, fight to change the system.

I tried to tell people how corrupt Prater was and I was ridiculed for saying it and now here we are 2 days later and because Ersland was found guilty now people are now agreeing with me. When I said the justice system was corrupt I was called crazy and I guess now I am not funny how the tide has turned.

Dana, I don't see many who have changed any opinions and are now agreeing with you. I don't think any tide has changed in the least.

Btw, there was issues with certain Jurors, but I see nothing that indicated any Jurors being replaced. So, yeah, the system gone corrupted and something went wrong. I find it pathetic that some people think it is right, just because this set of Jurors found him guilty. Hell, if it was a whole different set of Jurors, chances are, Ersland would be likely to be found not guilty. Certain statements presented during trial should have been more than enough to set Ersland free. And the crappy video should have not been enough to convict him. So, yeah, everything about this is just wrong, so it is up to all of us to set it right and kick Prater out of here.

Btw, there was issues with certain Jurors, but I see nothing that indicated any Jurors being replaced. So, yeah, the system gone corrupted and something went wrong. I find it pathetic that some people think it is right, just because this set of Jurors found him guilty. Hell, if it was a whole different set of Jurors, chances are, Ersland would be likely to be found not guilty. Certain statements presented during trial should have been more than enough to set Ersland free. And the crappy video should have not been enough to convict him. So, yeah, everything about this is just wrong, so it is up to all of us to set it right and kick Prater out of here.

Thunder, if you have proof of any wrongdoing please report it to the proper authorities. If you're unhappy with our system of justice maybe you should look at moving elsewhere. It's worked fairly well for a number of years. You were not in the courtroom and subject to the same information as these jurors were. Unless you were, don't pretend to tell them they were wrong. Being a juror, especially in such a high profile case, is very stressful. They don't need sidewalk judges telling them they were wrong. I highly suspect that with the same trial evidence being presented the same verdict would have been given about 95% of the time. The short deliberation timing is a good indication that they didn't have much doubt about the verdict.

Brian said it himself that there were issues. Enough said.

The short deliberation time is HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS. They were in a hurry and they knew of their verdict.

I wonder if Prater paid them off...

Brian said it himself that there were issues. Enough said.

The short deliberation time is HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS. They were in a hurry and they knew of their verdict.

I wonder if Prater paid them off...

OK then, If Brian said there were issues, that decides everything then. LOL

The short deliberation time is not suspicious in the least. It merely indicates that the prosecution made a very good case and it didn't take too long for the jury to agree. As for your last statement, that is bordering on libel and you should be careful about the public statements you might make about something like that. You might find yourself as a defendant in court.

Defendant in court? Will you be saying that to the 500,000 people signing the petition?

Defendant in court? Will you be saying that to the 500,000 people signing the petition?

OK, Thunder. Get back to me when you have 500,000 signatures then. LOL

I don't think any number of signatures on a petition has any affect on the possibility of libeling someone though. The law doesn't work that way.

Just you watch, Governor Fallin will pardon him if the Judge do not ignore the Jurors' idiotic recommendation. :-)

Normally the crooks that are done in with crappy surveillance video but this time it made it pretty cut and dry for the jurors

Walks calmly back by, turns his back on a supposedly still a threat Parker, reloads and shoots him 5 times at point blank range...Not much to discuss as you believe this to be murder or self defense...Guess they didn't have to go round the room more than once

Brian said it himself that there were issues. Enough said.

The short deliberation time is HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS. They were in a hurry and they knew of their verdict.

I wonder if Prater paid them off...

Are you serious?? He shot the unarmed kid after turning his back, went to go grab another gun to finish him off. Bragged to the police about nailing him. Lied to cover up his murder. Lied to fabricate an arm wound. Lied about being a combat veteran. Lied about everything. Took a handcuff key to prison with him thinking he'd escape. There's nothing Ersland hasn't lied about. This case is about racism, because how could an old white guy be sent to jail for killing a black kid?

You Fallin people need to get over yourselves...

Are you serious??

Consider the source and let it go!!!!!!!!!!!!!

True point.

Brian said it himself that there were issues. Enough said.

The short deliberation time is HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS. They were in a hurry and they knew of their verdict.

I wonder if Prater paid them off...

wow... calling your posts ignorant is a huge understatement.

You people are failing to understand what Murder One charges actually are. Those charges are unjustified in this situation.

I tried to tell people how corrupt Prater was and I was ridiculed for saying it and now here we are 2 days later and because Ersland was found guilty now people are now agreeing with me. When I said the justice system was corrupt I was called crazy and I guess now I am not funny how the tide has turned.

Actually, this really isn't about you, Dana.

You people are failing to understand what Murder One charges actually are. Those charges are unjustified in this situation.

It is very apparent you do not know what Murder 1 is in this jurisdiction. The best thing you can do for Ersland is keep him in commissary items.

I read a comment back in this thread and want to clarify, hopefully with the guy that watched the trial. Box only called one witness? Or did I misread that?

I tried to tell people how corrupt Prater was and I was ridiculed for saying it and now here we are 2 days later and because Ersland was found guilty now people are now agreeing with me. When I said the justice system was corrupt I was called crazy and I guess now I am not funny how the tide has turned.

Oh Dana, you live in a reality of your own creation. People are not clamoring for Prater's head. In fact, most public outcry was in support of the charges against Ersland. The fault many people are finding now is in the conviction and sentence. Neither of which does Prater have blood on his hands. He gave a jury of his peers the option of acquittal, lesser charges or murder. The jury chose a murder conviction and life in prison.

I personally disagree with the sentence and I attended most of the trial. But I do not disagree with him being charged and convicted.

Brian said it himself that there were issues. Enough said.

The short deliberation time is HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS. They were in a hurry and they knew of their verdict.

I wonder if Prater paid them off...

Thunder, I was clear the issues with the juror were 'alleged' and addressed by the judge. They will also most likely be used partly in the appeal process.

Actually, a deliberation of 3.5 hours is not all that short on such a clear cut case (as far as 'elements of the crime' being met IMO).

I've seen deliberations of 30 minutes.