Ersland Trial Begins

[BBatesokc]

Next witness is a 5-year veteran of the Oklahoma City Police Department:
Questioned by prosecution (Prater)
He was dispatched to the armed robbery at the Reliable Pharmacy. Arrived within 2 minutes of the call. Arrived at the front door of Reliable Pharmacy and took a tactical position. He saw a victim on the floor and another male behind the counter (Parker and Ersland). Secured the immediate area and checked Parker for vital signs. Parker had no vital signs. Ersland said he was trying to protect the ladies. Parker was not armed.

EMSA was allowed to confirm he was dead and then they were asked to leave.

The female employees were in the back and were kept separated from Ersland.

The most noticeable injury to Parker was a single shot to the forehead. Then he noticed 5 close proximity bullet wounds to Parker's chest. Powder residue indicated the shots were fired extremely close to the victim.

[BBatesokc]

OCPD witness is identifying photos:
1. Photo of Parker with a pool of blood around his head.
2. Similar photo also showing he is wearing a backpack, laying flat on the floor and the ski mask is covering his eyes as he was shot while putting it on and never moved it again. Also shows merchandise on Parker's body (indicating he most likely never set up or moved after he hit the floor)
3. Photo showing the close grouping of the 5 gun shots to his chest (indicating Parker was not moving).
4. Photo showing powder burns and stippling on Parker's shirt.

[PennyQuilts]

Are they going to try to show that the forehead injury was the first one and that it was fatal?

[BBatesokc]

Cross examination by the defense (Jeff Box):
Confirmed he was trained for 1 year to become a police officer. Has never had a gun pulled on him or pulled a gun on someone else while working for OCPD.

Several objections are being fired off by the prosecution regarding the defenses line of questioning regarding situations involving a weapon.

Has never responded to the pharmacy regarding any other crime.

When he arrived at the pharmacy the door was locked and he had to be buzzed in by Ersland.

He did not search or move Parker's body in any way. He did not touch Parker to confirm his lack of vital signs.

He said Ersland picked up and moved at least one shell casing at the scene. Saw some brain matter and skull from the forehead shot.

Defense is pointing out the boxes on Parker could have been knocked down by Parker's as he tried to get up. Witness does not know.

Officer believed the head wound was fatal but admitted he has no training in that area.

Witness dismissed

[BBatesokc]

Next witness;
Another police officer (of 19 yrs on the department).
Responded to the armed robbery call. Took him 5 minutes or less to respond. Made contact with the females in the furthest storage room. She was separated and left in a patrol car until taken to be interviewed by homicide.

He noticed the chest wounds on Parker first. He then maintained the crime scene security.

Witness passed to defense.

[ExtremistPullup]

Are they going to try to show that the forehead injury was the first one and that it was fatal?

I don't see how the prosecution could prove the first shot wasn't fatal, the other 5 wouldn't make it murder.

[PennyQuilts]

I don't see how the prosecution could prove the first shot wasn't fatal, the other 5 wouldn't make it murder.

Yup, if the first shot killed him, murder wouldn't work no matter what sort of statements he said or what he did, afterwards. But it would depend on what the autopsy showed, presumably. I thought the autopsy said it wasn't fatal but I may be misremembering. A shot to the head with brain matter and an officer who didn't check for signs of life won't trump the ME but raises a question, seems like.

[Thunder]

Prater is done. Ersland's attorneys have objected about 6 times (all overruled). Joe Brett Reynolds is now opening for the defense. In only 6 minutes Prater has objected no less than 9 times (all sustained).

Not a good start for the defense.

BINGO! Rigged Judge right there. Now it all goes down to the Jury when the time comes.

[PennyQuilts]

BINGO! Rigged Judge right there. Now it all goes down to the Jury when the time comes.

Oh stop, Thunder. It will come down to the jury, regardless. The judge is just keeping order and making sure things go according to Hoyle.

[Thunder]

Oh stop, Thunder. It will come down to the jury, regardless. The judge is just keeping order and making sure things go according to Hoyle.

I know, but still... Judge is not allowing the defense team the freedom while Prater roamed free. That is what Brian reported.

And I like these reports coming from Brian. Really interesting to read.

[USG'60]

Thunder, Brian did not have time to specify the objections nor what they regarded. You might consider them legit if you heard the whole thing.

[Thunder]

Yeah. I'd like to know about those objections and such.

[BBatesokc]

Okay - I'll sum up the rest of the day. They had three cell phones go off so I had to turn my ipad2 off.

[BBatesokc]

Had some major fireworks erupt with the police officer on the stand. Went something like this....
Irvin Box (defense) kept asking questions he knew would be successfully objected to, but he simply wanted the jury to hear the questions. The questions were basically asking the officer if its OCPD police that if you fire your weapon your intent should be to kill, not simply wound. The others had to do with the state of mind a person would be in if being confronted by an armed robber.

Prater (prosecution), finally called Irvin on the purpose of his questioning and described it as poisoning the jury and "slimy." Irvin responded with something like "Why don't you call me slimy to my face Mr. Prater." Prater didn't back down and then Irvin made some comment about how should try to hit him, because he doesn't have M.S. (reference to the defendant in the previous trial that attacked Prater).

Judge Elliot cleared the jury out of the room and admonished both attorneys.

[BBatesokc]

The next witness was an EMSA worker who arrived on scene.

The EMSA worker stated Ersland claimed he suffered a gun shot wound. The witness said it was a tiny scratch requiring nothing more than a small bandaid. The witness stated the wound looked like it was caused by Ersland's watch.

The defense on cross examination basically just had the witness admit he is not a gun shot expert and that the would might have been caused by a ricocheting bullet - the witness said he didn't think that was possible.

[BBatesokc]

The next witness was a female police officer. She helped secure the perimeter and was later asked to transport Ersland to the downtown police headquarters to be questioned by detectives.

The officer stated Ersland engaged in conversation with her on the way downtown. Ersland stated that he was wearing a backbrace because of injuries he received in a IUD explosion in a Humvee he was in while fighting in the war. He also claimed he had sustained a gunshot wound during the robbery.

[Thunder]

Brian, did you see the picture of the bullet hole in his head? Where was the exact position? Was there an exit hole?

[BBatesokc]

The last witness was a computer forensic police officer.

He was the officer to collect the surveillance video from the computers at Reliable Pharmacy. He testified that once shot the first time, Parker was no longer a danger to Ersland and that Ersland simply "executed him."

Under cross examination however he admitted that he couldn't see any part of Parker once he was shot and fell the first time and that he actually had no idea if Parker posed a threat.

Testimony for the day ended.

[BBatesokc]

I'll be back in the courtroom on Monday. But, since I can't turn my ipad2 on in the courtroom I'll have to post during breaks or when I step out.

[BBatesokc]

Are they going to try to show that the forehead injury was the first one and that it was fatal?

The defense is once again forwarding two possibilities; The initial shot was fatal and justified and/or Parker was still a threat to Ersland because he was conscious and moving so the subsequent shots were justified also.

[BBatesokc]

Yup, if the first shot killed him, murder wouldn't work no matter what sort of statements he said or what he did, afterwards. But it would depend on what the autopsy showed, presumably. I thought the autopsy said it wasn't fatal but I may be misremembering. A shot to the head with brain matter and an officer who didn't check for signs of life won't trump the ME but raises a question, seems like.

EMSA arrived within 10 or so of the police and their medic did check more thoroughly for vitals. Of course, that doesn't prove when Parker died. Yes, the initial ME's report said the first shot was not fatal. Reports by other ME's only varied by how fatal the first shot was..... As in, would he have died without immediate treatment or could he have ultimately survived if he got help in a reasonable amount of time. I believe all ME reports would agree the first shot was not immediately fatal and that there is absolute medical evidence Parker was alive when he was shot 5 more times - how long hev would have lived after the first shot is in question.

[BBatesokc]

BINGO! Rigged Judge right there. Now it all goes down to the Jury when the time comes.

No Thunder. Elliot is the most fair and unwavering judge in the whole court house. Very by the book. The defense was out of line in their opening statements. They were indeed grandstanding and talking about things that were not within the boundaries of opening statements.

[BBatesokc]

I know, but still... Judge is not allowing the defense team the freedom while Prater roamed free. That is what Brian reported.

And I like these reports coming from Brian. Really interesting to read.

Basically the defense was editorializing and getting into topics that are not to be brought up in opening remarks (but could potentially be brought up in closing). Opening remarks should be limited to summarizing what FACTS that are directly pertinent to the case that are going to be presented. The defense was getting into things like the original ME being fired not long after do the autopsy on Parker.

Closing arguments are all about editorializing and swaying the jury (within reason).

[BBatesokc]

Brian, did you see the picture of the bullet hole in his head? Where was the exact position? Was there an exit hole?

Yes, we saw the pictures (depending on where you were sitting). The forehead shot was not very big and the amounts of brain matter and skull showing was very small.

[BBatesokc]

My impression after the first day is that the prosecution was much better at presenting their information - it flowed well, was easy to understand, Prater was likable and very few objections from the defense.

The defense started off really bad with their opening. However, it got much better. Irvin was good at attacking the prosecution fearlessly. His son Jeff did very well at picking prosecution witnesses apart and exposing their weaknesses in their testimony.

After day one, I still feel Ersland technically broke the law and should be punished. But, I'm not convinced the jury would find him guilty at this point. So far the jury has exactly what I think they will desperately want - any excuse to find reasonable doubt.

The ME's testimony will really mean alot.

Noticed two jurors (one man and one woman) nodding off during the last couple of witnesses.

We'll see how next week goes. Hope you enjoy the updates. I encourage anyone who can attend to do so.