Other State Stand your ground shooting Florida

[Ura-Ki]

I have a good friend who got both legs blown off, he has a parking permit, but chooses to park across the lot and then roll his chair to the front door and makes a point of informing management of the lack of parking and the folks that can walk just fine! I'm gonna pizz in the soup here, but i'm a firm believer that those parking permits should only be issued to those who have a legit reason to need one, like my buddy with no legs! Just because you have a slightly inconvenient issue dosnt automatically qualify you for special status

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

My speculation based on the facts on hand:

The shooter Drejka, was the self appointed parking lot patrol who had pestered store customers over the parking spot in the past. Drejka starts a verbal altercation with McGlockton's girlfriend, Britany Jacobs over the parking spot. I am guessing that Britany texted her boyfriend inside the store to "OMG come save me from this crazy man".

McGlockton leaves his five year old son inside the store to go White Knight for Britany. McGlockton without saying anything commits Simple Battery on Drejka by pushing him which knocks Drejka to the ground. As the guys with tacticool beards and arm tattoos like to say Drejka has been knocked off his OODA loop.

From the ground Drejka pulls his pistol fairly quickly and McGlockton steps back. You can imagine the little hamster running on a wheel turning gears inside of Drejka's head as he is deciding if pulling the trigger is justified or not. During this time McGlockton steps back again and is just standing there with his hands at his side. From our prospective it does not look like Drejka is in immediate danger of a second attack by McGlockton. However in the two seconds that have passed the little hamster has finished running and the pain from the fall registers in Drejka's brain signalling fear and an OK to shoot response well after the threat has stopped.

Drejka 1) Started the verbal altercation 2) was the victim of non-deadly harm Simple Battery and 3) decided to use deadly force after the threat has passed.

McGlockton 1) started the physical altercation 2) then stopped his attack and stepped back. So the question is did McGlockton regain his innocents in those two seconds after Drejka pulled his gun? I say NO since McGlockton did not signal surrender by raising his hands.

Was Drejka justified to shoot? That depends on Florida law. If the Stand Your Ground Law uses a "reasonable person" standard then NO. If the State has to disprove that Drejka was in fear for his life at the time he shot, then YES he would be justified under the law because that little hamster was terrified.

 

[Cavedweller]

Just because you have a slightly inconvenient issue dosnt automatically qualify you for special status

Not to mention the abuse that occurs when vehicle (and pass) sharing allows the non-disabled to park more conveniently. But this is off-topic, I suppose.

 

[American123]

It's interesting how many forum members have faulted the shooter for his involvement in this. Some even stating, 'if he didn't make a big deal about the parking space this wouldn't have hapoened' But apparently the guy who comes out of the store and very violently shoved the shooter gets a free pass for initiating the physicality of the event.

The concept of fighting in this country is strange, because humans are in many ways extremely fragile and can be very easily killed bare handed when the right amount of pressure/force is applied in the right area/direction. Saying something to the effect of, 'he only pushed him' ignores the frailty of the human body. Had old man landed head first into the pavement he could have easily been dead or 'vegetabled,'

If as a young man I desired to do lethal bodily harm bare handed to an older person it wouldn't be incredibly difficult, and if I committed to such action the old person didn't preempt that assault before it started, there wouldn't be much they could do to stop it before being rendered incapacitated.

This seems to have fallen into the category of, 'don't mess with old men, they are too weak to physically defend themselves and will just shoot you' because as an old person, to lose a physical fight could very easily mean death.

Some people seem to forget that violence exists on a sliding spectrum and once you choose to get on the slide, you aren't always in control of how far you'll end up on the spectrum.

 

[OldBroad44]

My speculation based on the facts on hand:

The shooter Drejka, was the self appointed parking lot patrol who had pestered store customers over the parking spot in the past. Drejka starts a verbal altercation with McGlockton's girlfriend, Britany Jacobs over the parking spot. I am guessing that Britany texted her boyfriend inside the store to "OMG come save me from this crazy man".

McGlockton leaves his five year old son inside the store to go White Knight for Britany. McGlockton without saying anything commits Simple Battery on Drejka by pushing him which knocks Drejka to the ground. As the guys with tacticool beards and arm tattoos like to say Drejka has been knocked off his OODA loop.

From the ground Drejka pulls his pistol fairly quickly and McGlockton steps back. You can imagine the little hamster running on a wheel turning gears inside of Drejka's head as he is deciding if pulling the trigger is justified or not. During this time McGlockton steps back again and is just standing there with his hands at his side. From our prospective it does not look like Drejka is in immediate danger of a second attack by McGlockton. However in the two seconds that have passed the little hamster has finished running and the pain from the fall registers in Drejka's brain signalling fear and an OK to shoot response well after the threat has stopped.

Drejka 1) Started the verbal altercation 2) was the victim of non-deadly harm Simple Battery and 3) decided to use deadly force after the threat has passed.

McGlockton 1) started the physical altercation 2) then stopped his attack and stepped back. So the question is did McGlockton regain his innocents in those two seconds after Drejka pulled his gun? I say NO since McGlockton did not signal surrender by raising his hands.

Was Drejka justified to shoot? That depends on Florida law. If the Stand Your Ground Law uses a "reasonable person" standard then NO. If the State has to disprove that Drejka was in fear for his life at the time he shot, then YES he would be justified under the law because that little hamster was terrified.

Excellent analysis. I think in Oregon the success of a self defense argument would be in doubt even if Mcglocklan had followed up the shove with drawing a gun and making it unambiguous that Drejkan was in danger of his life. My understanding is that in Oregon, to be reasonably assured of a successful self defense plea, you have to be completely innocent. And if you started a verbal altercation that escalated, you are not considered completely innocent of responsibility for the outcome, whoever did the escalating. Drejkan not only started the verbal altercation while carrying a gun, but was in the habit of doing that. Sooner or later someone was going to try to kick his butt. And in Oregon, you don't get to start altercations while CC, then shoot somebody if things escalate.

 

[OldBroad44]

Not being there to see exactly what happened, I can't pass judgement on anyone, but from the video it sure looks like he was a bit quick on the trigger. I don't even see where "Stand Your Ground" is terribly relevant here. Was he in imminent fear for his life? I don't know. Yes, he was assaulted by a hotheaded bully, but it sure looks to me like there was no imminent danger at the moment the shot was fired.

What got me about the video was the defense of the attacker: "He was just trying to defend his woman". BS. He was PO'd at a stranger for mouthing off at his woman for illegal parking, and decided to commit bodily assault over it.

Lots of stupid here:
1. Stupid to park in a handicap spot when you're not handicapped. Leave those for people who need them. Simple respect- don't be a jerk.
2. Stupid and dangerous to call out a stranger for their parking. Let the police give them a ticket. You never know when someone has a short fuse, like this guy.
3. Stupid and criminal to assault someone because they "offended your woman". The attacker should have been arrested and spent a little time in jail.
4. Really stupid to pull the trigger when the attacker is backing away. Keep the gun on him and call the police to report the assault, but don't blow him away because you're mad that he pushed you down.

Again, that's just my take from watching a grainy silent video. I don't claim to be any kind of legal expert or fully understand all the particulars of what happened.

I agree. An additional element of stupidity. Why was the woman getting out of the car? The safer and de-escalating thing would be to stay in the car and roll up the window. The woman was actually escalating, putting herself in position for going physical. Did she call her boyfriend and then get out of the car, putting herself in apparent physical danger from the point of view of the boyfriend, so as to provoke her boyfriend into kicking Dejkan's bubblegum? Did she get her boyfriend killed?

 

[American123]

Excellent analysis. I think in Oregon the success of a self defense argument would be in doubt even if Mcglocklan had followed up the shove with drawing a gun and making it unambiguous that Drejkan was in danger of his life. My understanding is that in Oregon, to be reasonably assured of a successful self defense plea, you have to be completely innocent. And if you started a verbal altercation that escalated, you are not considered completely innocent of responsibility for the outcome, whoever did the escalating. Drejkan not only started the verbal altercation while carrying a gun, but was in the habit of doing that. Sooner or later someone was going to try to kick his butt. And in Oregon, you don't get to start altercations while CC, then shoot somebody if things escalate.

Potential Oregon crazyness aside, how does verbal confrontation escalated to physical confrontation make it the fault of someone talking? It would appear our entire society is built upon the idea that someone can effectively say whatever they want to eachother and it be considered harmless in the eyes of the law but making physically aggressive actions is where the crimes starts to take place.

 

[OldBroad44]

Potential Oregon crazyness aside, how does verbal confrontation escalated to physical confrontation make it the fault of someone talking? It would appear our entire society is built upon the idea that someone can effectively say whatever they want to eachother and it be considered harmless in the eyes of the law but making physically aggressive actions is where the crimes starts to take place.

This is a good point. I think you are right that Oregon's attitude about starting a verbal altercation causing you enough blame to threaten a case for self defense isn't consistent with the total distinction that's usually made between verbal and physical attacks. I don't know whether there are any explicit laws to that effect. It might just be a summary of how self defense cases have come out in Oregon. Either way, it's definitely an inconsistency. I hadnt noticed that, either. Interesting.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

It's interesting how many forum members have faulted the shooter for his involvement in this. Some even stating, 'if he didn't make a big deal about the parking space this wouldn't have hapoened' But apparently the guy who comes out of the store and very violently shoved the shooter gets a free pass for initiating the physicality of the event.

What is the first thing we are taught in CHL class? When carrying a gun, be the nicest, most polite and gracious person in the room. The second nugget of wisdom imparted is every fight your are in is a gun fight when you are carrying.

With that being said, I have reviewed several recordings of the incident and it looks like there was only One and a Quarter Seconds between when Drejka pointed the muzzle at McGlockton and the shot. Considering that it takes about 0.20 seconds between the thought of shooting and physically completing the pull of the trigger, that gave Drejka only a second to decide shoot or no shoot.

Deadly force can only be used to prevent an attack, so the question is was the attack over? If it was then the shot is retribution instead of prevention. I did some research and found that the Florida the standard of defensive use of deadly force is what is reasonable in the shooter mind. So while the shot may not have appeared to be justified from a third party perspective, without a clear retreat or signal of surrender by McGlockton, Drejka could have feared that his attacker was winding up for a second attack such as a powerful kick. Note that even after McGlockton was shot through the heart, due to their close proximity and the fact that Drejka was still on the ground, McGlockton still had 6+ seconds to inflict grave bodily harm on Drejka.

So why not just arrest Drejka and let the courts sort it out? Florida's Stand Your Ground Law? First off the media has really bastardized the definition of Stand Your Ground. It is not a license to commit murder outside of your home if you feel threatened. Like Castle Laws for inside your home, Stand Your Ground simply removes your Duty to Retreat from an encounter in public before using force. The relevant law in this case is Self Defense Immunity. Last year Florida shifted the burden to the prosecution to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that the shooter acted in self defense. Florida Places the Burden of Proof on the State in Stand Your Ground Immunity Hearings

The relevant sections found here Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine also states that the Sheriff would be Civilly libel for the unlawful arrest, which is why this Sheriff declined to since the burden of proof on the prosecution is so high.

 

[OldBroad44]

As a 72-year-old woman, if someone gave me such a powerful two-arm shove that it swept me off my feet and sent me flying, to land on the pavement any which way, possibly cracking my skull or breaking my neck--as far as I'm concerned this is lethal force. Even a broken hip is often lethal for women my age. The woman becomes bedridden and doesn't heal, and dies after a bit, never recovering her mobility or independence.

If I had been shoved like that, I would be going for my edc as fast as possible. And firing a gun with one hand while supporting myself with the other from a lying position as if knocked down or surprised in bed--that's something I've practiced. I think I would have put about four bullets in the guy before he took that backward step. I'd be expecting him to follow the potentially lethal shove with an also potentially lethal kick to my head, ribs, or hip, and would be intending to incapacitate him before he did. I certainly wouldn't be waiting to see what he was going to do next.

However if the guy managed to back away before I got my gun out, no way would I shoot as long as he made no motions toward me, and didn't make any sudden motions with his hands as if going for a weapon.

Of course, no way would I be engaging in any altercations with anyone while carrying. I'm assuming an unprovoked attack out of the blue.

I once had a related experience. I was in my back yard in St. Paul, Minnesota. I was about 30. The back yards on both sides were separated by fences about four feet high, and the back yards of the houses on the next street were up against our back yards. Broad daylight. A guy carrying a large object covered with a quilt and a burlap bag full of something ran from the side of my neighbors house into their back yard, reached across my fence, and set the object down. The quilt came ajar from one corner, and I could see the object was a tv. I started yelling "Thief! Thief! Somebody call the cops!"

The guy scrambled over the fence and charged me. He started from about 30 feet away. My edc, a Colt .357mag, was suddenly in my hands aimed right at him. I had practiced drawing it, but this time it was so fast it was like the gun was just instantly in my hands, without being drawn at all. The guy was screaming "Lady! Be cool with that gun!" while trying desperately to stop. I was quiet, motionless. I would start firing at absolutely the last possible moment. And that last possible moment was just before he could get his hands on me...as long as he had no gun or knife in his hands. I had to watch the guys hands. Harder than you might think when someone is that close. The guy managed to come to halt, his arms up, a mere 8 feet from me. Then he immediately began backing away, both of us silent. When the guy got about 15 feet away, I lowered the gun. The guy got back to where he had left the tv. He looked at me a moment, assessing. The gun stayed pointed at the ground. The guy lifted the tv and bag back across the fence and took them into the back yard of the house on the next street and vanished.

The thief, by the way, was no huge monster. He was a little shorter than me, but stockier. Probably about my weight. Furthermore, he was basically a kid. I'd guess him at about 16. 18 at the most. Did any of this change how I dealt with the situation? No. Plenty of women have been killed by teenagers or by males their own size or smaller. But I was glad I didn't have to kill him.

I reported it and gave a complete description of the thief. The LEO came back a couple hours later and told me they had found the tv, quilt, and the bag, which was stolen tools, in the back of a neighbors pick up. The neighbor said he knew nothing about it. But he was likely the fence. 'Now that we know that, we'll start watching him'. They never caught the kid, but they did catch the fence and put him away for a while.

 

[bbbass]

There was plenty of parking in that lot. Why choose the handicapped spot? They could have parked closer to the entrance, even. Their actions state "I don't care about others - me first, and to hell with the law."

And the gunman, who appointed him parking monitor? Just who was inconvenienced by the inconsiderate actions of those above? Was it worth a confrontation? I've got one of those handicapped passes, but I think I would have taken the door spot..

I too have a handicapped vehicle card... It just annoys me when healthy people take up a space at Wallyworld that another handicapped person could have used instead of having to walk the extra steps. But I've never said anything (would you believe) for fear of just such a confrontation. People are scary today.

 

[bbbass]

I have a good friend who got both legs blown off, he has a parking permit, but chooses to park across the lot and then roll his chair to the front door and makes a point of informing management of the lack of parking and the folks that can walk just fine! I'm gonna pizz in the soup here, but i'm a firm believer that those parking permits should only be issued to those who have a legit reason to need one, like my buddy with no legs! Just because you have a slightly inconvenient issue dosnt automatically qualify you for special status

So, are you saying wheelchair status only? I wouldn't mind. But for many people, they hurt badly or get out of breath easily and it's not so apparent to others.

 

[bbbass]

Was Drejka justified to shoot? That depends on Florida law. If the Stand Your Ground Law uses a "reasonable person" standard then NO. If the State has to disprove that Drejka was in fear for his life at the time he shot, then YES he would be justified under the law because that little hamster was terrified.

Instead of the legal aspects of this shoot, I'm thinking of the ethical considerations. When I first saw the vid, I was shocked at how violent that push was. To me, it seemed like a linebacker shot, or an MMA move. Then, the guy on the ground was soooo quick to draw and shoot. I don't think there was any decision making for the shooter. He was pissed, not afraid.

Putting myself in the shooters position, had I been the little weasel that loves to harass people, I would have been so shocked that my first reaction may not have been to draw on the big guy. Of course, had he come back at me that would have quickly changed. Regardless, even if I had drawn, I would not have been in fear for my life at that point with the big ape not moving. My conclusion is that even azzbites don't deserve to be killed. Now if you're in my house at night in the dark, different deal.

Did she get her boyfriend killed?

I certainly think she shares some responsibility. Was the text literally these words: "come save me from this crazy man"? Yah, she may have wanted to think that thru knowing that the boytoy was a great big ape. I've met some of this low culture type... they do manage to get themselves in trouble a lot. Getting shot is not that unusual anymore. Silly posturing with drastic outcomes.

 

[bbbass]

What is the first thing we are taught in CHL class? When carrying a gun, be the nicest, most polite and gracious person in the room. The second nugget of wisdom imparted is every fight your are in is a gun fight when you are carrying.

^^^ This. Martial arts used to teach the same. Don't know with the advent of MMA if that is still the case. People that used deadly hands skills in an unjustified situation were often prosecuted, or so the story goes.

 

[Argonaut]

I might have shot him as he was pushing me down (during the attack). I think the shot was a little late as it appears from the angle of the video that the perp was moving away. But no sympathy for the thug.

 

[pharmseller]

The guy managed to come to halt, his arms up, a mere 8 feet from me. Then he immediately began backing away, both of us silent. When the guy got about 15 feet away, I lowered the gun.

I'm glad it worked out.

If he had changed his mind and jumped you from 8 feet away, unless it was a CNS hit, you wouldn't be here today. And lowering the gun at 15 feet goes against training as well.

But again, it worked out.




P

 

[pharmseller]

I might have shot him as he was pushing me down (during the attack). I think the shot was a little late as it appears from the angle of the video that the perp was moving away. But no sympathy for the thug.

Blindside attack, the shooter didn't even see him.

You'd have to be QuickDraw McGraw to pull and shoot while in the air.




P

 

[Argonaut]

Blindside attack, the shooter didn't even see him.

You'd have to be QuickDraw McGraw to pull and shoot while in the air.




P

Yes....I agree, but shooting after the attack when the POS apparently had stoped and turned to walk away is questionable. Having your gun out and at the ready in case he turns back and continues the attack is fine and at that point would remove any question about the ethic of the shooting...........hard to be afraid for your life as the guy walks away..........I too am pleased the guy isn't going to be criminally prosecuted but he did buy a civil wrongful death law suit I am sure.

 

[bbbass]

I might have shot him as he was pushing me down (during the attack)

I heard you were fast! Prolly not in the way yor thinkin tho.

 

[pharmseller]

Yes....I agree, but shooting after the attack when the POS apparently had stoped and turned to walk away is questionable. Having your gun out and at the ready in case he turns back and continues the attack is fine and at that point would remove any question about the ethic of the shooting...........hard to be afraid for your life as the guy walks away..........I too am pleased the guy isn't going to be criminally prosecuted but he did buy a civil wrongful death law suit I am sure.

The attacker was what, 8 feet away? He had already shown a willingness to commit an act of violence, and be advised that nearly 700 people are killed in the US annually by "personal weapons" such as hands and feet.

If the attacker had decided, from 8 feet away, to mess the shooter up, he could have. Easy. Was the attack over, or just a pause between violent acts? Who knows? The shooter didn't, but apparently he wasn't willing to bet his life on the question.





P