|
|
Post by purr on Jul 31, 2018 23:41:40 GMT
Last Thursday 26 July Michael Dreijka went and stood next to a car belonging to Markeis McGlockton and his girlfriend Britany Jacobs, the couple travelling with a 5-year old son. The situation as reported has mr. McGlockton and his boy gone into the Circle A Food Store to get some things, while leaving the car with Britany inside parked in a handicapped-accessible spot of that store's parking area. Michael Dreijka in the vid is seen remaining standing at some distance to the vehicle, facing its side doors, making a step back, as reported entering into an argument with Britany Jacobs over taking the handicapped spot.
Witnesses told police that McGlockton then came outside, walked over to Dreijka and "forcibly pushed" causing him to fall, as is shown in the video.
Based on the apparent forcefulness of the push I am watching in the video, I'd expect Dreijka and his lawyer, in the event he has to go before the court, to appeal to right to Self Defense, possibly Stand Your Ground, where under unique Floridan law if you come under assault you need not retreat before resorting to deadly force defending yourself. I understand this law in 2018 has further evolved to REVERSE the burden of proof, once a defendant opts to appeal to the Stand Your Ground right, to the state attorney who now has to show clear and convincing evidence that the defendant/shooter is not entitled to the "stand your ground" immunity.
At this point viewing and reviewing only the security cam evidence the argument Dreika had with Britany Jacobs appears irrelevant, only the powerful shove by McGlockton taking down Michael Dreijka, and the PERCEPTION of the latter, especially regarding the likelyhood of further bodily harm to be done to him by McGlockton has relevance. The question, with Florida's SYG law in mind, is whether Dreijka was being physically assaulted, and if he entertained a reasonable expectation of such assault to continue threatening him with bodily harm.
If the answer to both questions is Yes, he must be entitled to SYG immunity, that is Dreijka engaged in legal self defense under the laws of Florida.
If such legal self defense were the outcome, it does not follow this equals 'fair' or 'just', because however 'legal', my worry is that we see a man out with his fam, possibly parking where he shouldn't have, getting shot to death over a (big) shove. Also, the Law is here (as is proper) color blind, but this is America, and the question may be asked if race somehow or other played a role. Don't know. I'm just asking...
purr
|
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Aug 1, 2018 15:44:03 GMT
A Letter to the Editor, Tallahassee Democrat
‘Stand your ground’ is a license to kill
by Ben Crump
August 1, 2018
As has happened before in Florida, “stand your ground” is being appropriately scrutinized in the aftermath of the shocking shooting death of Markeis McGlockton, an unarmed black man who was gunned down for trying to protect his family — including his young children — in a dispute over a handicapped parking space.
The local sheriff concluded that shooter Michael Drejka pulled the trigger because he was in fear, and therefore stand your ground applied. Somehow, according to this inexplicable interpretation of the law, Drejka needed to defend himself from a man who had pushed him but who was backing away from the confrontation.
Originally, Florida’s stand your ground law emerged as an outgrowth of the traditional “castle doctrine,” which allowed individuals to defend their home with whatever force was necessary. Somehow that concept has been warped into a virtual get-out-ofjail- free card that is essentially a license to kill.
Too often in today’s society, people act first and think later. The most common place for this is on social media. In the real world, this mentality is leaving corpses in its wake.
Twisted individuals believe they can be judge, jury and executioner without suffering consequences for their actions. Unfortunately, thanks to misguided ideas like stand your ground, these individuals turn out to be correct. Let’s call them what they are: murderers — self-appointed “wannabe cops” abusing lousy legislation.
This outrageous situation cries out for justice. Five members of Congress, including three U.S. senators, have called for the Department of Justice to investigate why stand-your-ground immunity was extended to a man carrying a concealed weapon who angrily approached a car — with young children inside — and created a confrontation.
Had McGlockton been the one to pull out a gun, there is no way stand your ground would have been extended to him, a man of color. He would have been charged with murdering a white man.
What has happened in this case is inexcusable. But it is only part of the much broader problem that is the stand-your-ground law itself.
The Journal of the American Medical Association has reported a signifi- cant increase in unlawful homicides since stand your ground was enacted in Florida in 2005.
These deaths are often people of color who will
never get to share their side of the story. Being black in America entails constant, underlying fear because at any moment, you could become the next target.
Apart from being immoral on principle, stand your ground automatically applies to the last one standing — regardless of how the conflict began. In this case, it’s being applied to the wrong person. A law that allows someone to pick a fight he can win only by pulling a trigger is facilitating reprehensible behavior. It’s time for America to consider what it feels like to be on the other end of the gun.
There is a difference between protecting your own castle and attacking someone else’s. The disturbing reality is that stand your ground perpetuates the cycle of African-American men taking bullets from self-appointed vigilantes.
The law did not extend to a black man attempting to protect his castle. Instead, it’s now being used to justify a sheriff deciding to let a killer walk the streets with no punishment.
Stand your ground represents a serious lapse in judgment by the state of Florida. It sets the clock back years to a time when black men were routinely killed in America with virtually no explanation needed. Well now, someone has to take responsibility.
Enough is enough.
Ben Crump is a nationally known civil rights attorney and advocate, and is the founder and principal of Ben Crump Law. Crump, of Tallahassee, is representing the McGlockton family.
SOURCE: Tallahassee Democrat
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2018 15:57:12 GMT
I don’t think the problem is with the law, rather it’s the interpretation that’s the problem. Clearly McGlockton was not a threat after the shove.
|
|
|
|
Post by purr on Aug 2, 2018 16:58:43 GMT
Thanks Swamprat and Mrgort! Gort, well even from living 5 meters below sea level I can see Florida law is slanted, tilted, weighted toward what the 'successful' user of deadly force will be claiming under self defense/SYG statutes about his personal PERCEPTION of the 'aggressor's or 'assailant's threat to cause further injury or death. Mr Kreijka merely by positioning himself, with help of counsel, as appealing to legal self defense and Stand Your Ground law may reverse the burden of proof to the Prosecution, who then have to show evidence that SYG immunity as defined in those laws does not apply to him. I've copied three of the statutes (colored yellow) below in post. Swamp, your linked article poses a fair ethical question (How can it be right for a guy who takes his family out to the store, parks wrong, and shoves away a stranger giving his lady lip over it, to get shot in the chest and die fleeing into same store?), and a legal one: is Florida's SYG an UNJUST law, to the point it opens to folks using it with malicious intent, as a so called license to commit murder? I do not know, but it is reasonable to ask. Imo fair criticism in your posts. On the positive side I believe 2nd Amendment rights can be used for good in the case of responsible gun owners (does Kraijka's history show he repeatedly went looking for trouble while carrying?), and even the Floridan version peculiarly favoring citizens's use of deadly force works as good IF THE DEFENDER HAS GOOD INTENTIONS. Let's see if there are signs this shooter had bad ones, or SYG law is especially vulnerable to folks looking to get away with murder. Here's a look at some of the relevant SYG laws: The 2018 Florida Statutes
CHAPTER 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.012 Use or threatened use of force in defense of person.—
(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
776.041 Use or threatened use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use or threatened use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force or threat of force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use or threatened use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use or threatened use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use or threatened use of force.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use or threatened use of force.—
(1) A person who uses or threatens to use force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in such conduct and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use or threatened use of such force by the person, personal representative, or heirs of the person against whom the force was used or threatened, unless the person against whom force was used or threatened is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using or threatening to use force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(4) In a criminal prosecution, once a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity from criminal prosecution has been raised by the defendant at a pretrial immunity hearing, the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence is on the party seeking to overcome the immunity from criminal prosecution provided in subsection (1).
And here's why it feels as if SYG laws are somehow slanted toward the use(r) of deadly force. Statute 776.012 (2) (top paragraph in yellow) gives weight to what mr Kraijka (and defendants/suspects like him) 'reasonably believes' about the threat to his person, and the necessity to defend himself by discharging his weapon. What else to expect from a man whose life and freedom are on the line, all law-yurd up and all (to help with the "reasonable" part), but a highly subjective & CONVINCING tale how he BELIEVED himself in imminent and mortal danger. Worse, SYG's emphasis on the belief of a deadly shooter might just might work as incentive to aim center of body mass, so there's no one to oppose the shooter's believable tale...
Didn't the Apostle Paul admonish 'When in Florida, do as the Floridans do'? Statute 776.041 (2) (shown as the middle yellow paragraph above) warns when in Florida you shove someone hard enough to provoke them into drawing a firearm, you the shover have no legal justification/immunity unless you the shover reasonably can believe the shoved person is threatening you with imminent death / great bodily harm. Problem 1: the video / witnesses (so far) do not indicate Michael Kreijka posed a physical threat. Problem 2 (big one  ): dead people can't testify. Simply: statute 776.041 appears to a priory deny SYG immunity to McGlockton due to him initiating a physical assault. It seems prudent 'when in Florida' to be fully cognizant and aware that state laws leave you unprotected if you go up to someone and give'em a hearty shove (or punch whatever), even if your victim is then "provoked" into using deadly force. Finally not to leave anything hanging up in the air, 776.032 (excerpted) (third and lowest yellow paragraph) deals with immunizing those who defended themselves using (up to) deadly force justified under Statute 776.012: if Kraijka's actions are deemed falling within the SYG statutes he is immune / protected by the State from criminal / civil prosecution, while the burden of proof such immunity should be withheld from him lies with the party (say a Special Prosecutor and/or the McGlockton family) bringing a case against him.
purr |
|
|
|
Post by purr on Aug 4, 2018 11:11:02 GMT
To update and coming back to MrGort's point about Florida's SYG being interpreted wrong here (rather than the law itself being flawed): so far I'm not hearing anything like County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri being challenged by the DoJ over his on site 'immunization' of Michael Dreijka based on SYG law, specifically Dreika's stated appeal to self defense and his belief/fear he was under imminent threat from further attack by Markeis McGlockton.
In threadstarter I asserted that a court under Florida law could well deliberate they'd come to the same finding, in no small part due to the extraordinary emphasis SYG puts on a deadly shooter's testimony about what he BELIEVED about the threat to his person. Such emphasis risks imo misuse of the law to get away with (premeditated?) murder.
And with SYG in mind (and his expectation of the court's handling of the case) the sheriff headed off all the court's deliberations by granting Dreijka immunity, letting him go a free man.
MrGort, I get a sense this sheriff is carrying out his duty to enforce the law (as it is on the books + as he understands it will apply in court). Guy IS interpreting law bigtime, using the full power of his office, but imho not doing it wrongly: the moment mr. Dreijka opened his mouth claiming self defense and fear of imminent attack Florida SYG went into play (and this is how it plays!). The Sheriff is simply doing his job.
This doesn't mean all is well with the world (or Florida) (or anyone over there getting shot at by a legal gun owner). I omitted in error that McGlockton's girlfriend Britany Jacobs had several young children with her in the car. This goes to a man's natural instinct to act protectively towards his mate and offspring if another male appears to threaten them in some way. THERE WAS SOMETHING INNATELY GOOD IN THAT SHOVE (guy standing up for his woman and kids), at the same time it put him in great legal jeopardy, even justifying the use of deadly force against him. Harsh to say it, but while in Florida Markeis McGlockton should have known what the law was, idiotic to initiate a hard shove (=assault) like that. 'Cause over there it can get you killed.
Some curious observations to be made from the embedded vid in starter post. Dreijka is seen walking towards Britany seated in the car, going around it supposedly to check for a handicapped permit, then he settles in front of her door (and reportedly the argument ensues, Dreijka gesturing at Britany, then pointing to the regular parking spaces). Throughout he stays at more than arm length distance, even seen making an additional small step back while presumably the conversation heats up. This precise action exempts him from any possible charge of having initiated a physical assault under SYG.
So, at that point had Michael Dreijka set a deadly trap for anyone threatening/assaulting him? Or was he being a gentleman, making sure not to pose an actual physical threat to a female?
The problem with Florida's SYG law as it stands is that by showing favor to users of deadly force, to their stated beliefs, to their appeal to SYG, allowing on the spot immunization by law enforcement, finally reversing the burden of proof  , we may never know which of the two intentions was in Dreijka's heart and mind.
Premeditated murder? Or some version of Citizen trying to be a force for good.
purr
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 11:46:06 GMT
It looked to me like Dreijka was looking for trouble. His history/background should be thoroughly checked to see if he had a propensity to instigate a fight and his legal right to own a gun. He seemed confrontational to me. If his real concern was the parking space he should have called the police or at least taken a cell phone picture of the license plate and the car parked in the invalid parking spot.
|
|
|
|
Post by purr on Aug 4, 2018 14:10:19 GMT
It looked to me like Dreijka was looking for trouble. His history/background should be thoroughly checked to see if he had a propensity to instigate a fight and his legal right to own a gun. He seemed confrontational to me. If his real concern was the parking space he should have called the police or at least taken a cell phone picture of the license plate and the car parked in the invalid parking spot. Yes that's a fair perspective Mrgort. Say you were a gun owner: would you go out of your way to get into the face of a mom parked wrong, her young uns right behind her, knowing her man was coming out of the store shortly? I guess I wouldn't (imagining myself in the carry and conceal gun culture of Florida for an instant). Does appear like looking for trouble, especially in the SYG legal environment!
But we do not know. And with immunity granted to mr. Dreijka, I fear we will never know...
purr
|
|
|
|
Post by skizicks on Aug 7, 2018 18:52:52 GMT
if memory serves the man pushed to the ground was standing and talking to the woman about why she would take a handicap spot when other spots were available. The store clerk pointed out that the taking those spots was a pet peeve of the ELDERLY man.
He was simply pointing out that the woman should not have parked there. There is no indication that he threatened her or even got hostile but he was upset that she parked ILLEGALLY.
In the video the younger black man came out of the store and as he walked forward is shown PULLING up his pants as if expecting trouble. He made the last couple steps rapidly and there doesn't seem to be many if any words exchanged. He just stepped to the older man and pushed him hard enough to shove him several feet and knock him to the ground. He then adjusts his pants again and keeps walking toward the older man.
The younger man had no reason to lay hands on the older man. He had no reason to advance after pushing the man down. He has all the body language of a young man about the beat the tar out of someone.
The older man at that point had every right to defend himself. Which he did.
Stand your ground laws are being put in place to stop those bullies who take advantage of their own strength to abuse people. I am sorry it upsets people that a man died but he ATTACKED first without warning and that is not a polite thing to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Aug 7, 2018 21:28:06 GMT
He's only 48, Skizicks, not exactly elderly. Plus, past behavior seems to indicate he has issues.....Stand Your Ground: Who is Michael Drejka?
By: Mark Douglas
Updated: Jul 30, 2018
CLEARWATER, Fla. (WFLA) - What makes Michael Drejka tick?
Suddenly, the psychology of the man who pulled the trigger and fatally wounded Markeis McGlockton in a convenience store parking lot dispute over a handicap space is a national obsession. In some ways, Drejka is a walking contradiction.
The owner of the convenience store knows Drejka as a frequent customer and for the most part, a regular guy.
“He's a quiet guy. he comes in, he buys his drink, 'hi how you doing,' and he leaves,” said Ali Salous.
But a truck driver, who says two months ago he got into a dispute over the same handicap space that lead to Thursday’s fatal shooting, saw a hateful side of Drejka.
“He was basically threatening to shoot me that day,” said Richard Kelly. “But I didn't think nothing of it. I mean like he called me the 'n' word and stuff like that.”
Public records show Drejka, age 48, was born in Delaware and moved to Pinellas County about eight years ago where he got married.
It’s not clear if he currently lives with his wife but does share a tidy looking rental home with at least two dogs on the outskirts of Dunedin. His landlord lives next door.
Despite his apparent zero tolerance for handicap parking violations, Drejka has a number of violations on his own driving record for speeding, running red lights, driving without insurance or a motorcycle endorsement.
Kelly says during his dispute, Drejka gave a hint of why he’s so obsessed with handicap violations.
“He was like, 'you need to move out of the handicap. My mom's handicap,'” Kelly said.
Despite Salous’ perception of Drejka as a quiet man, he’s had documented fits of temper before.
Seven years ago a sheriff’s report included allegations by two teenagers that Drejka flashed a handgun at them during a road rage incident. Deputies found a gun in Drejka’s car, but he flatly denied brandishing it at the teens.
Pinellas prosecutors will soon decide whether Drejka acted out of anger or fear when he shot McGlockton, a decision that could free him from the threat of criminal charges or possibly send him to prison for life.
Much of that decision hangs on the video that shows McGlockton shoving Drejka to the ground and Drejka taking aim and shooting McGlockton seconds later.
Prosecutors also say the words they exchanged will also play a role in the determination of whether this is a valid Stand Your Ground Case.
Meanwhile, countless people who have seen the shooting video are already weighing in with their own thoughts in the court of public opinion.
“I think he's a hothead looking for a fight. That's my opinion,” said Charla Chop, who frequents the convenience store where the shooting occurred.
“Sometimes it doesn’t take much to get people to the red line,” said another customer, Mary Duffy.
“Kids shove each other on the playground that is not an excuse to shoot somebody, that's insane.”
www.wfla.com/8-on-your-side/investigations/stand-your-ground-convenience-store-shooting-why-did-he-pull-the-trigger-/1320956372
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2018 21:43:25 GMT
We don’t know all the information from the video, but from news articles and the video itself apparently McGlockton's girlfriend parked in a handicapped spot. From the video it appears that at that time plenty of other car spaces were available. We don’t know if the girlfriend even knew she was in a handicap spot. It could be poorly marked. Sometimes these areas are not painted often enough for a clear view. It is apparent however that Michael Drejka could merely have said or advised the girl that she was in a handicap spot and that she should not park there especially when other spots are available and leave it at that. But apparently, he continued at length to the point where the husband may have thought his wife was being harassed or herself to become a victim. Possibly he saw the gun and his first inclination was to get the man away from his wife. Of course, we will never know because he’s dead. So, you have to ask yourself how does a push or shove equate to a death. If McGlockton were truly interested in pursuing the matter he would’ve gone over to the fallen Drejka and possibly continued with kicks or punches. But he didn’t; it looked to me like he was waiting to see if Drejka was going to continue the argument/harassment. But instead he pulls a gun, and again, it does not look to me like he (Drejka) was in any immediate danger. The mere sight of the pistol should have been a deterrent by itself without the need to pull the trigger. This idea that if one thinks one is going to be attacked or one is fearful he can kill someone, well what about somebody who gives you a dirty look if you’re fearful does that give you the right to kill the person?
|
|
|
|
Post by purr on Aug 9, 2018 19:52:24 GMT
if memory serves the man pushed to the ground was standing and talking to the woman about why she would take a handicap spot when other spots were available. The store clerk pointed out that the taking those spots was a pet peeve of the ELDERLY man. He was simply pointing out that the woman should not have parked there. There is no indication that he threatened her or even got hostile but he was upset that she parked ILLEGALLY. In the video the younger black man came out of the store and as he walked forward is shown PULLING up his pants as if expecting trouble. He made the last couple steps rapidly and there doesn't seem to be many if any words exchanged. He just stepped to the older man and pushed him hard enough to shove him several feet and knock him to the ground. He then adjusts his pants again and keeps walking toward the older man. The younger man had no reason to lay hands on the older man. He had no reason to advance after pushing the man down. He has all the body language of a young man about the beat the tar out of someone. The older man at that point had every right to defend himself. Which he did. Stand your ground laws are being put in place to stop those bullies who take advantage of their own strength to abuse people. I am sorry it upsets people that a man died but he ATTACKED first without warning and that is not a polite thing to do. Well spotted Skizicks concerning mr. McGlockton adjusting his pants, and after going back to the vid I agree HE DID SO TWICE. Imo important (as you allude) because it's like his 'tell' before making the first push (or aggressive move) and once Dreijka is taken down (at which point the older man may reasonably be expected to assess the imminent threat level to his person) McGlockton repeats that identical adjustment, using the exact same motion of his arms, suggesting he's about to follow up the push with more violence. If I were Dreijka down on my painful bud looking up at my assailant (and making the call  ) it's probable I'd instinctively have read the 'danger' signs we are studying at leisure here: McGlockton wasn't done yet. Personally I don't mind how polite/impolite the shown shove on Dreijka was. What matters is that the recorded action of McGlockton puts him in terrible danger of being met with SYG deadly force, meaning: getting legally killed, leaving his family's recourse to the law largely dependent on Michael Dreijka's statement to the sheriff indicating his sense of being under imminent threat. Moral: best not to resort to physical violence in Florida (unless you leave them dead). purr
|
|
|
|
Post by skizicks on Aug 9, 2018 21:05:23 GMT
This law and others like it grew out of the lack of justice for victims of assault and other crimes. How many times has the attacker gotten off because he had some excuse? In parts of New York and Chicago just looking at someone's face is a sign of disrespect and can get you a beating if not worse. Stand your ground is intended to teach society that an act of violence can be met with greater violence.
Anyone with any common sense would think twice and perhaps start with asking what was going on, and not by assaulting someone.
Bullies of any age do not deserve sympathy when the tables turn against them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2018 14:37:15 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 18:27:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Aug 13, 2018 19:06:32 GMT
Yep.White man charged with fatally shooting black man in Florida
The Associated Press Published 12:27 p.m. ET Aug. 13, 2018 |
FORT LAUDERDALE — Prosecutors charged a white man with manslaughter Monday in the death of an unarmed black man whose videotaped shooting in a store parking lot has revived debate over Florida's "stand your ground" law.
Michael Drejka, 47, has been charged with the July 19 death of Markeis McGlockton outside a Clearwater convenience store, Pinellas County State Attorney Bernie McCabe said. Drejka was being held at the county jail on $100,000 bail. It is unknown if he has an attorney.
McCabe declined further comment, referring reporters to court records that were not immediately available.
McGlockton's girlfriend, Britany Jacobs, who was seated in the couple's car with two of their children, ages 3 years and 4 months, said Drejka confronted her for being parked in a handicapped-accessible space. McGlockton, 28, had gone into the store with their 5-year-old son. Jacobs said Drejka was cursing at her. Video shows McGlockton exited the store and shoved Drejka to the ground. Seconds later, Drejka pulled a handgun and shot McGlockton as he backed away.
McGlockton family attorney Benjamin Crump — who gained national prominence representing the family of Trayvon Martin after the black teen's fatal shooting by a Hispanic man in 2012 — said in a statement Monday "it's about time" Drejka was arrested. The family, civil rights groups and others had been holding protests demanding he be charged.
"This self-appointed wannabe cop attempted to hide behind 'Stand Your Ground' to defend his indefensible actions, but the truth has finally cut through the noise," Crump said. "I have full faith that this truth will prevail to punish this cold-blooded killer who angrily created the altercation that led to Markeis' needless death."
Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri originally declined to charge Drejka, saying one day after the shooting that the man was protected by Florida's stand-your-ground law. The sheriff passed the case to prosecutors for a final decision. The law says people can use deadly force if they believe they are in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and have no obligation to retreat. Under a change made by the Legislature last year, if a suspect raises a stand-your-ground defense, prosecutors must prove the law doesn't apply.
"I support the State Attorney's decision and will have no further comment as the case continues to work its way through the criminal justice system," Gualtieri said in a statement Monday.
The soundless store security video shows the confrontation began about a minute after Jacobs pulled into a handicapped-accessible spot in the parking lot. Jacobs told reporters last week McGlockton had just picked her up from her job as a nursing assistant, the parking lot was busy and they were only stopping for a minute. McGlockton and his oldest son got out and entered the store.
Drejka pulled up in his SUV seconds later, parking perpendicular to Jacobs, according to the woman's account. She said Drejka got out, walked to the back of Jacobs' car, looked at the license plate, and then went to the front, apparently looking for a handicapped sticker there. He appears to say something to Jacobs and points to two empty spaces nearby.
The video shows he then walked to Jacobs' window. He is speaking from about a foot (0.3 meters) away and gesturing with his hands. A man entering the store about 15 feet (5 meters) away stops to look and a woman glances over.
McGlockton then exits the store, walks toward Drejka and — just as Jacobs gets out of the car — shoves Drejka with both hands. Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him. Drejka sits up, pulls his gun from his right front pocket and points it at McGlockton, who takes three steps back, his arms at his side. Drejka fires, hitting McGlockton, who runs back into the store clutching his chest. Witnesses said he collapsed in front of his son, waiting inside.
Michael McGlockton, the dead man's father, told reporters at a news conference days later that his son was protecting his family when he shoved Drejka.
www.tallahassee.com/story/news/crime/2018/08/13/white-man-charged-fatally-shooting-black-man-florida/37458641/
|
|
): dead people can't testify. Simply: statute 776.041 appears to a priory deny SYG immunity to McGlockton due to him initiating a physical assault. It seems prudent 'when in Florida' to be fully cognizant and aware that state laws leave you unprotected if you go up to someone and give'em a hearty shove (or punch whatever), even if your victim is then "provoked" into using deadly force.
, we may never know which of the two intentions was in Dreijka's heart and mind.
) it's probable I'd instinctively have read the 'danger' signs we are studying at leisure here: McGlockton wasn't done yet.