re: Verdict: FLA July '18 'Stand Your Ground' - M. Drejka guilty in death of M. McGlockton

frick that old motherfricker, he placed himself in that position and is therefore 100% at fault and deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. My question to anyone defending that POS is, if he didn’t carry would he still confront people or did the gun make him fell superior to the people he confronted? I hope he dies alone in prison.

quote:

---

Abide by the law.

---

First, you have made some blanket statements about provocation when it requires more specifics of the case, just ask Buzz Aldrin.

After reading through the evidence presented I think the jury was probably moved by three factors:

1. the slow-motion version of the store video which did Drejka (the shooter) no favors

2. There was testimony Drejka had previously threatened to shoot a person (Kelly) parked in the same handicapped spot and also told Kelly's boss he should have shot him

3. In Drejka's questioning by police after the shooting he discussed things like the 21ft rule and legal terms for threat assessment normally used by police. It seems the police gave the jury the impression that Drejka may well have previously thought through this type of scenario at length. That coupled with the previous threats to Kelly built the impression he was literally looking for this scenario to unfold.

This case might have been much harder for the jury (it was a quick deliberation) had Drejka refrained from previously threatening to blow someones head off who parked in a handicapped spot. It probably didn't help him that he was accosting a woman with two small children in the car either.

OP is correct that there should be a degree of civil responsibility assigned to the shooter.

HOWEVER, there never should have been any criminal charges pressed to begin with.

The “victim” ran out and shoved the defendant to the ground and took a step towards him.

From a vulnerable position, the defendant drew his gun and fired a single shot. Justifiable.

seems to me the jury got it right.

there was absolutely no reason someone had to die that day.

quote:

---

What do you make of the shooter previously threatening to blow someones head off for parking in that handicapped spot?

---

Not a good look, but what does that have to do with the current case.

He didn't produce his weapon until dead dude pancaked him.

quote:

---

First, you have made some blanket statements about provocation when it requires more specifics of the case, just ask Buzz Aldrin.

---

Blanket statements... just pointing out the basic legal premise of assault, battery, and intent of laws to protect law abiding citizens. I don't believe I drew any conclusions other than you clearly see McGlockton committing a crime by pushing a man to the ground...there is no legal vehicle in place that would allow McGlockton to do so without being considered a criminal act. The simple act alone.. of yelling at someone is not a crime.

And Drejka could be a despicable, nazi, pedophile, psychopath for all I know or care.. but McGlockton's actions were neither prudent or legal... and generally speaking it would not be advisable that anyone think it's commendable to run up and shove someone to the ground thinking they are protecting someone they love from getting yelled at.. The wiser would be to know and abide by the law. I don't think Drejka needed to pull the trigger but as tragic as the outcome was... and with race withstanding if both men are white...Drejka's actions may have been closer to being supported by the law.

I'm not an attorney but I've spent more time in court than some I know... well aware it's not what you know or what anyone may say happened, it's what you can prove beyond reasonable doubt a judge considers... Drejka was NOT found guilty of murder, but manslaughter. He won't "rot" in prison, he could get anywhere from 12 months up to an average of 10 or 12 years but I doubt will serve anywhere close to maximum. This seems to be foolishness on the part of both... but if not for ineptitude, easily avoidable tragedy.

quote:

---

The “victim” ran out and shoved the defendant to the ground and took a step towards him. 

---

You could tell the way the victim ran out looking at them directly and someone walking out behind him looking at the loon that someone went in the store before that and said a man was yelling at a woman in the parking lot. Of course hes going to react the way he did.

quote:

---

OP is correct that there should be a degree of civil responsibility assigned to the shooter.

HOWEVER, there never should have been any criminal charges pressed to begin with.

---

The video is on YouTube in regular speed and it's not even close. Baby got pushed on the ground after he started shite. He shoots while he is in zero danger because he got emasculated. Dude should get the chair.

quote:

---

the jury ultimately, barely made the right decision.

---

quote:

---

Wtf does this mean? Seems they either got it right or they didn’t. How can one “barely make the right decision?”

---

What I mean is, if this situation were to be replayed TEN TIMES exactly, with random citizens playing the part of three people involved, any dude that commits such a violent ASSAULT on an armed person, the assaulter would get shot in TWO or THREE of the "replays".

The jury had a tough one. When you carry a weapon, and go around being a parking enforcer, you have to be aware of some situational facts.

And let me clarify... your awareness at a Whole Foods in a wealthy suburb needs to be different than at a Cigs & 40s in a shitty neighborhood. Just a fact of life.

All that goes against the shooter, who ultimately should not have fired.

But it is SUCH a close one... if the "victim" had not been such a violent piece of shite, he'd have gone home and had a story to tell about some "crazy mofo in the parking lot".

That violent shove was a triggering event, that FORCED a reaction of "fight or flight" to occur. When you violently shove another person... your outcome if he is armed (or can kick your arse), is now a HUGE question.