Stand Your Ground / Murder / Other

[Reynolds]

I agree. No arrest. No Grand Jury. No prosecution. The guy went home. The police refused to arrest him.

Every shooting should go to a grand jury. Our D.A. used to say "I want every clear cut case of self defense drawn up on indictment and No Billed so some overzealous dumb a.. can't decide to try to prosecute it years later."

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Can't say from just the snippet. What happened before?

A perfectly healthy, but entitled man was screaming at a girl about where her car was.

How many people did the man face?

Exactly one person....
One, no more no less.

His vs. their physical condition

.
HIs physical condition?
Good enough to roll out and sit up after an incredibly nasty shove onto hard concrete, and expertly present a deadly weapon smoothly and expertly.

What injury did the shooter sustain?

An injury insufficient to prevent him from rendering his weapon in a masterful and controlled manner.

What was the person shot saying?

Dunno….
But, It's provable what he was doing, and that was engaging in two full seconds of backing down...
maybe it was...
"ok ok Don't shoot!"

Was he verbally threatening the man?

He was backing off
look at 15 seconds into the video and 17 seconds when the man chose to shoot him.

Kick boxers step back before kicking a downed opponent(back in the day when it was legal to do). I have seen a seemingly unjustified use of deadly force justified by the prosecutor and grand jury because the initial attack on the shooter fractured his skull and severely impaired his thinking and judgment.

An unlikely scenario in this case, but possible.
In which event, the man should face said grand jury and the defense should demonstrate that that was plausibly the thinking of the man who shot him.
It's possible, but quite unlikely....
That is an ad hoc argument.

Worst case, this shooting is manslaughter because you can not prove premeditation and it was not committed during the commission of a felony.

That's what this is.
It's manslaughter.

If I were on the jury, Not Guilty.

Not guilty of what???
Murder or manslaughter?
Murder, I agree, but manslaughter? That is a crime too people.

 

[Benjamin]

I think the sheriff needs to brush up on his comprehension skills because it seems he has missed justifying the statues in the law as written with the key elements of “reasonable belief” that deadly force was “necessary” to stop an “to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself”.

The sheriff said it is not his call and considering his interpretational skills that is probably a good thing. Hopefully, the prosecutor who isn’t so bent on trying to justify senseless manslaughter in order to protect this law about gun rights in an unscrupulous way.

Several years ago I had a discussion about carrying with my very liberal uncle from Illinois and he tried to come up with all these scenarios about what if a person did this to me or that to me would I get angry and draw my gun and maybe end up shooting that person? I honestly said no but he acted like he didn’t think that was reality. I told him that if he didn’t think a person can control themselves that much then he is speaking for himself and probably should never carry but shouldn’t try to deny me that right.

That gunman had to have some serious attitude problems, he wanted to be a tough guy, an enforcer, somebody he was not, but the only thing that he had to back himself up with and make him feel powerful and in control was a gun but reality is he was far from being tough or even in charge of the situation which is proven by his cowardly response. Sorry to tell him but he ain’t no cowboy.

So maybe what irritates me, besides the unnecessary loss of life, is that a guy like that helps makes the case for liberals and puts me in the position to have to defend my right to carry a gun against that nonsense. These things always turn political but I refuse to defend this clown’s actions just to support my position, so people like him leave us (conservatives) a bad mark and it makes those who try to defend his actions lose credibility in their arguments if they try to justify his behavior with saying he was within the law. Therefore, I condemn him and have no problem with him being made an example out of in what happens to those who abuse their right to bear arms.

 

[777]

Couple of questions - was this girlfriend/Baby Momma the same person?.

https://www.rapsheets.org/florida/clearwater-jail/MCGLOCKTON_MARKEIS/1309676

and where was the five year old that went into the store with him?

An EASY 2 FULL SECONDS 15 seconds, the victim was backing off....

That murderer fired at 17 seconds.....
The only person afraid for their life was the victim of this senseless murder.

Just so I'm hearing you right, are you calling this sheriff a liar?:

So if you count it, between the time that Drejka goes to the ground, and the time he shoots, it’s a count of 4 seconds. It’s a count of 4, no more than 5. It’s a very short amount of time. And what he claims—and you can tell—it’s a violent push to the ground. This isn’t just a shove. He slammed him to the ground.

And he said when he’s on the ground, because he’s in fear, that the next thing that’s gonna happen is he’s gonna be re-attacked by McGlockton, and he felt that he was in peril, and that he needed to shoot to defend himself. McGlockton was still standing there, he was still in front of him, he had the ability, the capability, to do again—or worse, what he’d already done by pushing him to the ground.

As I said there’s no verbalization between either McGlockton or by Drejka during this. And the law on ‘Stand Your Ground’ is clear, and the Florida legislature has spoken on this, and Florida legislature has created a standard, that is a largely subjective standard. This is not an objective ‘what i would do, what you would do, what the public would do, what somebody else would do’. This is more of a subjective standard. And the person’s subjective determination of the circumstance they were in. The fear that they had is relevant to the determination in whether they’re justified in the use of force.

https://www.wfla.com/news/local-new...rges-for-stand-your-ground-shooter/1313540572

SYG in that state is so broad, the prosecution has to prove he wasn't acting in self-defense.

 

[TCassidy]

A perfectly healthy, but entitled man was screaming at a girl about where her car was.

So you consider a severely disabled man "perfectly healthy?"

 

[TCassidy]

If I were on the jury, Not Guilty.

Me too. Not guilty.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

So you consider a severely disabled man "perfectly healthy?"

I was unaware that you were a medical doctor familiar with this man's physical health such that you are expertly capable of labelling him medically as "severely disabled"....

Since you obviously are (given your posts) please explain his medical conditions to us in your expert opinion...…

Don't spare us the details, we're quite interested.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Couple of questions - was this girlfriend/Baby Momma the same person?.

Irrelevant to this case, and says nothing about it...
It says a lot about you personally and your prejudices, but nothing about this case.

and where was the five year old that went into the store with him?

This is less relevant than the appropriate growing season of potatoes in Idaho.

Just so I'm hearing you right, are you calling this sheriff a liar?:

Why not just quote me calling the sheriff a liar and you'd have the answer to your question wouldn't you??

SYG in that state is so broad, the prosecution has to prove he wasn't acting in self-defense.

True...
I think they should try because it doesn't seem he was acting in self defense.

 

[777]

LOL, wrong again - if an individual has a propensity to violence (as McGlockton apparently did, and a couple busts for coke possesion), it has everything but irrelevancy in a case such as this.

It says nothing my personality nor my bias by pointing out his record, but for fairness' sake, here's the shooter's:

09/20/2010
BOATING CITATION: SPEED/RESTRICTED AREA VIOLATION

04/06/2011
OPERATING VEHICLE W/OUT INSUR

04/06/2011
OBED/TRAFFIC/CONTROL/DEVICE

11/15/2013
FAIL/USE/TUN/SIGNAL/CHG/LN

10/08/2014
UNLAWFUL SPEED

that's as irrelevant as the Idaho potatoes here. Five whole seconds at the most, whoop-de-doo . . . one one thousand, two one thousand, three one thousand, four one thousand, BANG!!!

"if" she hadn't have parked there, "if" Drejka hadn't decide to play parking cop, "if" Markeis hadn't stormed out of the store and blindsided him, "if" Drejka wasn't carrying, everything would have been different. But the third action made it SYG. You don't have to sit there and wait for the instigator to assault you again.

 

[TCassidy]

I was unaware that you were a medical doctor familiar with this man's physical health such that you are expertly capable of labelling him medically as "severely disabled".

I'm not, but the State of Florida, which issued him a handicap placard, has determined he meets the State's requirement of being handicapped.

Which explains, to any thinking person, why he was so upset about the woman parking in the Handicapped space without a placard.

 

[Reynolds]

So you consider a severely disabled man "perfectly healthy?"

Yep, disabled enough to need handicapped parking but "perfectly healthy." Liberal logic at its finest.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

LOL, wrong again - if an individual has a propensity to violence (as McGlockton apparently did, and a couple busts for coke possesion), it has everything but irrelevancy in a case such as this.

It says nothing my personality nor my bias by pointing out his record, but for fairness' sake, here's the shooter's:

09/20/2010
BOATING CITATION: SPEED/RESTRICTED AREA VIOLATION

04/06/2011
OPERATING VEHICLE W/OUT INSUR

04/06/2011
OBED/TRAFFIC/CONTROL/DEVICE

11/15/2013
FAIL/USE/TUN/SIGNAL/CHG/LN

10/08/2014
UNLAWFUL SPEED

NICE!!!
So, you are arguing about a known propensity for violence???
Let's break your argument down shall we?
Your argument only works in this case if the shooter is aware of a history of violence with this man for one thing...
Can you provide any evidence that the shooter knew that this man had a violent history???

Where's that evidence?
You have yet to provide it.
But even better, you've provided a LONG criminal history of....and I'm happy to explain:
1.) 09/20/2010

BOATING CITATION: SPEED/RESTRICTED AREA VIOLATION​

Driving a boat too fast (as a Floridian, [and you obviously aren't]) I know what this means...there are many lakes, and rivers and "no-wake" zones, and "manatee" zones and speed restrictions on countless waterways.
They are often too many to count and sometimes absurd, but, nonetheless, they are the law.
You've got him on the "violent crime" of …………
Speeding in a boat (I can only assume you are including this as a known criminal history that the shooter had which caused him to fear for his life)

2.) 04/06/2011

OPERATING VEHICLE W/OUT INSUR​

Driving a vehicle without insurance....
That's a mere traffic citation, and it's more rightly failure to provide proof of insurance, which is not even illegal in some states (and I'd argue they are right for it) But again, a traffic citation which you insist reflects a "violent" past, and which furthermore you are alleging that the shooter knew.

3.) 04/06/2011

OBED/TRAFFIC/CONTROL/DEVICE​

Not entirely sure what this is, it's a seven-year-old traffic citation...which involves speeding more or less.
Should we shoot all speeders in Florida?

4.) 11/15/2013

FAIL/USE/TUN/SIGNAL/CHG/LN​

M'kay…
failure to use a turn signal at a traffic stop....
5 years ago, this hardened and violent man changed lanes without using his turn signal.
Obviously, this is, (according to you) a crime worthy of death and moreover, it's one that no doubt the shooter was aware of, and invariably caused him to fear for his life.

10/08/2014
UNLAWFUL SPEED
Speeding, four years ago, a speeding ticket.​

This menace to society clearly must die.

"if" she hadn't have parked there, "if" Drejka hadn't decide to play parking cop, "if" Markeis hadn't stormed out of the store and blindsided him, "if" Drejka wasn't carrying, everything would have been different.

I'm with you.
I'm with you, but here's where you go wrong!

But the third action made it SYG.

WHAT THIRD ACTION!!!!!!!!!
You just correctly established the chain of events which are provable and invented a "third action" which never took place.

What was the third action?
What was it?

You don't have to sit there and wait for the instigator to assault you again.

True....you don't nor should you have to...
But, what evidence was there that the victim was going to assault him again?

What was this "third action" you allege?
What was the dead man doing?
Was he advancing toward him?
Was he verbally threatening him? <--------(by the way the video you shared of the Pinellas County Sheriff already told us there were no verbal threats on either side so you can't argue that)
So what did the man do which threatened his life?
Parking tickets?
Speeding near "Manatee Zones"??? <------(There's always alleged frikkin manatees here, and we speed through those zones) that's what Floridians do.

 

[TCassidy]

Your argument only works in this case if the shooter is aware of a history of violence with this man for one thing...

He was aware of a history of violence. The guy had just violently knocked him to the ground. That is a pretty good indication of violence.

Can you provide any evidence that the shooter knew that this man had a violent history???

You mean other than the fact he was violently knocked to the ground?

As for the rest. Perhaps you had better go back and read 777's post. The record he posted, which you have correctly dismissed as inconsequential, was the SHOOTER's record! Not the attacker. The SHOOTER!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I'm not, but the State of Florida, which issued him a handicap placard, has determined he meets the State's requirement of being handicapped.

Yeah, I know.
He had a handicapped placard....those are given out like candy of course, but o.k.
That wasn't what I asked.
I asked what made him "SEVERELY DISABLED".


You claim to know that the man was "SEVERELY DISABLED" do you base that argument on the rote fact that he had a handicapped placard??
Please tell me that that is your argument....
I just want to be able to quote you on that every time I disagree with anything you write so as to utterly destroy your credibility.

Which explains, to any thinking person, why he was so upset about the woman parking in the Handicapped space without a placard.

Yes, we know why he was upset.
And no one argued that this man was upset.

You defined him as "severely disabled".
Please give us the medical detail which you, as a medical professional have fleshed out which renders him as appropriately being "severely disabled."
We're looking for details, not "possessing a handicap placard." (<---I am a Floridian, they give them out like candy)
By the way every "Thinking person" knows that that's true in almost any state.
But, in your warped view this helps justify shooting a man.

Gotcha'![/QUOTE]

 

[HeirofSalvation]

He was aware of a history of violence. The guy had just violently knocked him to the ground. That is a pretty good indication of violence.

You mean other than the fact he was violently knocked to the ground?

Yes, that's not "HISTORY"
History refers to prior events not present ones...
So, no, to any elementary school student, being knocked to the ground says nothing about a person's history....
Keep digging your hole deeper.

As for the rest. Perhaps you had better go back and read 777's post.

I did, they were traffic citations.

The record he posted, which you have correctly dismissed as inconsequential, was the SHOOTER's record! Not the attacker. The SHOOTER!

YUP!
PARKING TICKETS!
And that is your argument, [Falsehood edited.]
And what is the evidence you have that this shooter was aware of this dead man's(clearly violent) moving violations?

Keep digging, keep arguing.

 

[TCassidy]

If you want to see the record of the deceased he has a propensity for violence. (By the way. The first one is a Second Degree Felony.)

Charge Number: 1
Agency Report Number: CW08058915
Offense Description: AGGRAVATED BATTERY DOMESTIC
Statute: 784.045(1)(B)/F
Court Case Number: CRC0813904CFANO
Bond Assessed:
Bond Amount Due:
Charge Status: RELEASED
Arrest Type: ON VIEW
OBTS: 5206030214

Charge Number: 2
Agency Report Number: CW08058915
Offense Description: RESISTING ARREST W/VIOLENCE
Statute: 843.01/F
Court Case Number: CRC0813903CFANO
Bond Assessed: $2500.00
Bond Amount Due: $0.00
Charge Status: BONDED OUT
Arrest Type: ON VIEW
OBTS: 5206030214

Charge Number: 3
Agency Report Number: CW08058915
Offense Description: DISORDERLY CONDUCT
Statute: 877.03/M
Court Case Number: CTC0818081MMANO
Bond Assessed:
Bond Amount Due:
Charge Status: RELEASED
Arrest Type: ON VIEW
OBTS: 5206030214

 

[TCassidy]

History refers to prior events

Yes. Prior to being shot he committed the violent crime of Battery.

YUP!
PARKING TICKETS!

Yes. The SHOOTER's! Not the guy who was the violent felon.

 

[777]

I'm out of here after this one but when I said:

"if" she hadn't have parked there, "if" Drejka hadn't decide to play parking cop, "if" Markeis hadn't stormed out of the store and blindsided him, "if" Drejka wasn't carrying, everything would have been different.

the third action, what follows the third if - parking there was wrong, making a big deal out of it was wrong, but storming out of the store proved deadly to Markeis because Drejka was carrying.

I really don't care, this is not my state and I just posted both records for contrast/comparison reasons. The records don't even factor in in this case, because it's SYG - he was assaulted and had reasonable reason to use deadly force. If you don't like it, get your own laws changed. Buh-bye!!! /ignore

 

[TCassidy]

And what is the evidence you have that this shooter was aware of this dead man's(clearly violent) moving violations?

Okay. One more time. I will type this r e a l s l o w so you can keep up.

The traffic citations were NOT the dead man's. For the 3rd time, the traffic citations were the SHOOTER's record.

Got it now? The SHOOTER. Not the DEAD GUY. The SHOOTER.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

If you want to see the record of the deceased

I don't....
Only [Name calling edited] thinks it's even relevant, or could plausibly believe that the shooter was aware of it.

he has a propensity for violence. (By the way. The first one is a Second Degree Felony.)

And I suppose you are arguing that the shooter looked this up online during the confrontation and cited it as a reason for why he feared for his life?
Is that your argument?

Charge Number: 1
Agency Report Number: CW08058915
Offense Description: AGGRAVATED BATTERY DOMESTIC
Statute: 784.045(1)(B)/F
Court Case Number: CRC0813904CFANO
Bond Assessed:
Bond Amount Due:
Charge Status: RELEASED
Arrest Type: ON VIEW
OBTS: 5206030214

Charge Number: 2
Agency Report Number: CW08058915
Offense Description: RESISTING ARREST W/VIOLENCE
Statute: 843.01/F
Court Case Number: CRC0813903CFANO
Bond Assessed: $2500.00
Bond Amount Due: $0.00
Charge Status: BONDED OUT
Arrest Type: ON VIEW
OBTS: 5206030214

k....gotcha'
The shooter knew this no doubt?

BTW...
There's no reason to argue a "history of violence"....
The dead man already committed an illegal and criminal act of violence at the confrontation...
That is not at issue.
He committed an assault on the shooter, Cassidy, why not argue the relevant charge????

Oh, because the relevant charge doesn't justify deadly force, that's why.....silly me.
None of those are convictions, and the first charge could merely be a domestic disturbance which in Florida demands an arrest, whether there's any crime or not by law, and thus it proves nothing. Every domestic disturbance requires an arrest in Florida.