Convicted of Manslaughter

[flagman1776]

by a Florida jury. Shooter initially claimed Stand-Your-Ground, later claimed Self Defense.

"Moffett pressed him, asking if he was concerned about prompting a violent confrontation when he previously complained about people parking in handicap spaces.
Drejka answered, "That's why I take precautions. I'm a very careful person. I have a [concealed weapon] permit."

source: Florida 'stand your ground' shooter found guilty of manslaughter

This brings front and center our recent thread... as a Concealed Carry Weapons permittee, do not to do things you wouldn't do if you weren't armed.

 

[Sistema1927]

Good outcome. This guy was a time bomb waiting to go off. Unfortunately, that is exactly what he did.

 

[stansdds]

Good outcome. This guy was a time bomb waiting to go off. Unfortunately, that is exactly what he did.

I agree. The perp had retreated, there was no reason for discharging the firearm.

 

[SMSgt]

The defendant is lucky the charge was only manslaughter.

 

[ColbyBruce]

The shooter earned his conviction.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

I would only add that the incidence of concealed carry permit holders committing any crime is infinitesimally small, compared to the general population or even compared to active police officers.

From what I have read about this case the jury made a sound decision based upon the facts and evidence.

 

[Ziggy2525]

I would only add that the incidence of concealed carry permit holders committing any crime is infinitesimally small, compared to the general population or even compared to active police officers.

From what I have read about this case the jury made a sound decision based upon the facts and evidence.

For me, it's one of the challenges of constitutional carry. Every one legally able to should be able to carry, but not everyone legally able to should carry.

 

[686-380]

It's unfortunate on so many levels. I hate it when lazy fools park in handicapped parking spaces too.
The deceased's actions contributed to the tragic conclusion.
The shooter's faulty recollection/lie perhaps sealed his fate with the jury.

The only silver lining is the lesson this incident can teach us.

 

[Rastoff]

I too think this guy was an unjustified shooting waiting to happen and did. This whole situation bothers me.

Here is how I teach it:

Universal Justification
You are universally justified in the necessary use of deadly force when there is a reasonable fear of immediate or otherwise unavoidable danger of death or serious bodily injury to the innocent

There is a longer discussion about this statement, but one of the most important aspects is the last word; innocent.

In this particular case, no one was innocent. You don't get to start a fight and then claim self-defense. There is no doubt in my mind that Drejka started this argument which means he wasn't innocent. Neither was McGlockton innocent, he did make the first physical move.

George Zimmerman is lucky he isn't in prison. The only difference is there was no video of Zimmerman/Martin that clearly showed how the fight escalated. In that case, the jury believed Zimmerman.

It's unfortunate on so many levels. I hate it when lazy fools park in handicapped parking spaces too.
The deceased's actions contributed to the tragic conclusion.
The shooter's faulty recollection/lie perhaps sealed his date with the jury.

The only silver lining is the lesson this incident can teach us.

This is exactly right. I too despise those who are so selfish that they take spots that might be needed by someone with an actual disability.

Here in CA we have a process to deal with these fools. The DMV has a reporting process. You can take the license number and report it to the DMV. They clearly state that not all complaints will be investigated. However, if you submit a picture of the violation, I'll bet they ticket the violator.

 

[AlHunt]

The shooter confronted a woman sitting in her car with several children. He has a history of provoking such arguments. The boyfriend came out of the store and pushed the aggressor away from his family.

Manslaughter wasn't a severe enough charge.

 

[ColbyBruce]

"Manslaughter wasn't a severe enough charge."

Perhaps, but it was argue able, realistic, convince able, and convict able. Florida law may be written in such a way that some form of a murder charge would not stick, and the defendant would go free. Like George Zimmerman did.

This case has a respectable outcome.

 

[NYlakesider]

The shooter confronted a woman sitting in her car with several children. He has a history of provoking such arguments. The boyfriend came out of the store and pushed the aggressor away from his family.

Manslaughter wasn't a severe enough charge.

I do sort of agree with the verdict but also say there was wrong on both sides. The person shot did not have to be so aggressive, he realy escalated the bad enough situation. Just a simple get the hell out of here should have been his opening gambit not physical force. That could have come later if still needed!

The shooter once he pulled his gun with the "pusher" backing away should have stood down. Of course if he was smart A- he would not have started that Charlie Foxtrot to begin with B- he would not have pulled his gun, even on the ground as the first push was not followed through!

If I was on his jury I would have said guilty if the charge was higher than just mere Manslaughter!

 

[ColbyBruce]

This might help

Florida First Degree Murder Laws - FindLaw


The link defines the various charges related to a loss of life situation.

 

[GaryS]

Was the charge only Manslaughter or was that the "lesser included, crime" that the jury upon which the jury settled?

I couldn't figure it out from the news coverage.

Drejka made two mistakes. One, he went to the police station without an attorney. Two, he talked to the media.

Essentially he handed the case to the state before it even went to trial.

The defendant is lucky the charge was only manslaughter.

 

[Hithev]

by a Florida jury. Shooter initially claimed Stand-Your-Ground, later claimed Self Defense.

source: Florida 'stand your ground' shooter found guilty of manslaughter

This brings front and center our recent thread... as a Concealed Carry Weapons permittee, do not to do things you wouldn't do if you weren't armed.

I fully agree with you. Not only I think none should engage in some action he wouldn't undertake if unarmed, but even more I think that holding power carries the responsibility of strictly avoid any argument and de-escalate any potentially dangerous event one is involved in spite of his will. Smile, shrug, go away.

 

[Rpg]

This guy was a yahoo from the get-go.

For most reasonable folks, carrying a gun tends to suppress their tendency to confront other folks and suppresses ther impulse to engage in or initiate conflict.

For other folks, carrying a gun makes them feel like the Lone Ranger: searching out and confronting wrongs they perceive.

Simply put, these folks are eager for opportunities to use their guns. They're looking for trouble.

We occasionally see some of this attitude from a few of our members in 'what would you do if...' threads here.

This guy now faces up to 30 years in prison for 'protecting' the world from miscreants guilty of a parking violation.

To paraphrase Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid: he brought a gun to a $30 parking infraction.

Good riddance to this guy.

 

[SMSgt]

"Manslaughter wasn't a severe enough charge."

Perhaps, but it was argue able, realistic, convince able, and convict able. Florida law may be written in such a way that some form of a murder charge would not stick, and the defendant would go free. Like George Zimmerman did.

This case has a respectable outcome.

Was the charge only Manslaughter or was that the "lesser included, crime" that the jury upon which the jury settled?

I couldn't figure it out from the news coverage.

Drejka made two mistakes. One, he went to the police station without an attorney. Two, he talked to the media.

Essentially he handed the case to the state before it even went to trial.

I believe the initial charge was manslaughter. That charge is easier to prove than a murder of a high degree. Had he been charged with murder and the jury not fully convinced of that level of charge and acquitted him, he would have walked. There have been other cases where defendants walked because the jury was not convinced of "murder," yet would have voted for manslaughter had that charge been presented.

 

[6518John]

They're looking for trouble.

I bet he finds plenty of fellows willing to oblige him in the big house.

 

[oink]

I think the verdict was correct. Yeah, all concerned should have acted differently.

I find little correlation between this case and the Zimmerman incident. IMHO Zimmerman got screwed over.

While still working I took CCW permits on two occasions and returned them to the State along with an explanation letter and a copy of the detailed incident report, even when I made no arrests. I documented such that further action could be taken if it became necessary. In one case the other party wasn't happy I made no arrest but it was more a road rage incident and the "brandishing", while not justified in my opinion, was heading that way. Idiots all around. He reportedly was going to go to the States Attorney direct. I guess that didn't go well for him. I never heard anything back from either former CCW holder, so I'm guessing my taking their permits wasn't contested??? Some may argue it was a taking of rights without due process of law but I was prepared to go that route if that's what they wanted.

I sill feel a citizen has a duty to act to save others, if absolutely necessary, and after immediate family is made safe, if that an issue.

 

[ColbyBruce]

"I find little correlation between this case and the Zimmerman incident. IMHO Zimmerman got screwed over."

Two armed men separately initiate a conflict with unknown individuals for acts that are truly none of the aggressor's business; and both conflicts end in the death of the second party.