Golfers defend selves from mugging; get arrested

[Rogue 9]

Source

Golfers arrested after fighting off gang attempting to steal clubs

A group of golfers have been arrested on assault charges after allegedly fighting off a gang who attempted to steal their clubs.

Eight people were arrested following the incident at Sundridge Park Golf Course on Sunday. Two youths, aged 17 and 13 were also taken to south London hospitals with head injuries. The 17-year-old is in stable condition in hospital while the 13-year-old was later discharged and subsequently arrested.

According to reports, the players were about to tee off on the fourth hole of the course in Bromley, Kent, when they were confronted by a group of teenagers brandishing planks of wood.

Despite the group threatening to attack them if they did not hand over their golfing equipment, the golfers apparently fought back. An eyewitness, who did not wish to be named, said: "Everyone had a weapon and they were just trading blows.

"The golfers stood their ground, though.

"I guess because they had their clubs as protection."

As well as the 13-year-old, two other teenagers were arrested, including a 15-year-old boy from Downham and a 16-year-old boy from St Mary Cray on suspicion of affray.

A 33-year-old woman, from Downham, and a 49-year-old man, from Plaistow, have been arrested on the affray charges.

Officers also arrested a 53-year-old man, from Hayes, on suspicion of causing actual bodily harm and a 48-year-old man, from Keston, on suspicion of causing GBH, while a 39-year-old man, from Plaistow, was arrested on suspicion of disorderly conduct.

Robert Walden, Sundridge Park general manager, said there will be a full inquiry about what happened.

Mr Walden said: "I cannot say who was at fault and who was not at fault yesterday.

"We just do not know what happened.

"We will be dealing with the matter in full with a full inquiry when information is available."

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said: "We can confirm there was an incident at Sundridge Park Golf Course on Sunday, May 10 at 17:00 hrs

"Several youths descended on the golf course and allegedly started being abusive and threatening golfers.

"There were several altercations between them and golfers. At one stage a large group of people, thought to be relatives of the youths, arrived at the golf course and joined in the altercation.

"Police and ambulance attended. Two youths were taken to south London hospitals with head injuries.

"A 17-year-old was in a stable condition in hospital today and a 13-year-old male was treated, but later discharged.

"Eight arrests have been made. Seven at the scene and one this morning at a home address. All arrested are still in custody. Further arrests are expected."

Okay, what kind of fucked-up shit is this? Defending yourself against armed fucking robbery is a crime now?

[Anguirus]

Is this an example of anything other than the system working? Eight people got in a fight, the police showed up and arrested all of them. If the golfers had been convicted you might have a more justified case of moral outrage.

For all we know, these guys could have gone overboard beating up one of their assailants and that's why the kid's in hospital.

[Mr Bean]

I think it's more to the point of simple police backside covering. Here you have an entire group of people going at it with crude clubs, so the arrest everyone and sit on them until they have the full story.

On another note, planks of wood, how cute, your going to rob me with planks of wood? Not even a pointed stick?

[VF5SS]

Mostly likely it is because they put of those kids in the hospital. There is self defense and then there is hitting someone with enough force to cause a head injury. The kids were stupid that's for sure. Trying to threaten people with planks of wood is a bad idea to begin with. Arguably the golf clubs are more dangerous since they are design for swinging and impact.

[Uraniun235]

Trying to hit someone hard enough to cause pain but not hard enough to cause injury sounds like a good opportunity to have your weapon wrested out of your hands.

[Lancer]

Mostly likely it is because they put of those kids in the hospital. There is self defense and then there is hitting someone with enough force to cause a head injury. The kids were stupid that's for sure. Trying to threaten people with planks of wood is a bad idea to begin with. Arguably the golf clubs are more dangerous since they are design for swinging and impact.

How would you defend yourself from assault without using enough force to cause injury? You're going to have to stop or incapacitate your assailant somehow.

[VF5SS]

It's one of the more gray areas separating self defense from unnecessary retaliation. If the guy with the golf clubs aimed for the kids head or a little too high then it can be construed as excess. It's like high sticking in Hockey. Wacking someone hard enough in the arm or leg is probably preferable. Yeah it would still hurt (and you might break a bone) but you don't want to cause permanent damage to someone. The OP is kind of vague but if the man and woman were laying down a beating American History X style then yeah that's going a bit far.

[Broomstick]

Mostly likely it is because they put of those kids in the hospital. There is self defense and then there is hitting someone with enough force to cause a head injury.

The problem is that golf clubs have enough heft to seriously injure someone without the wielder necessarily intending to do so. They are also narrow enough to cause impalement.

I can't speak for British law, but here in the US if you injure someone you will have to account for yourself, whether or not it was self-defense. It's common practice that if the police show up and there's a brawl they arrest everyone present, whether participating in the violence or not, and let the lawyers/courts sort it out later. A friend of mine last winter was almost robbed last winter by two men bodily attempting to drag him out of his vehicle and who were clearly threatening him, all of which was caught on videotape. But because he hit one of the guys over the head with a piece of pipe (which resulted in one assailant on the ground unconscious and the other running away at high speed) and wound up in the hospital he still had to appear for a hearing. It was a short hearing, since showing the video tape exonerated him, but it had to be done in a formal context. If someone gets hurt there has to be some scrutiny.

I read this as the police arresting everyone involved in the fight, but no one has been convicted yet. It is right and proper that the authorities investigate this. While you are permitted to defend yourself (well, at at least in the US) you are not permitted to use unnecessary force, nor are you permitted to keep beating on someone after they're done on the ground and no longer a threat. If one of the golfers hit one of these young toughs to fend him off and that one whack was hard enough to cause a severe injury but at that point stopped hitting him that's one thing - if the golfer kept whacking away at the multiple times, or hit him after he was on the ground, that's no longer self-defense.

Can't help but think the police dislike these sorts of situations - no matter what the public regards them as the bad guys, but they very well may be doing their job and properly upholding the law.

[FSTargetDrone]

It's one of the more gray areas separating self defense from unnecessary retaliation.

This brings to mind an incident that happened in Oklahoma, USA last month. A pharmacist was robbed at gunpoint, he defended himself with a firearm and was charged with first degree murder when he repeadedly shot one of the robbers (who had been incapacitated from a shot to the back of the head) as the robber was on the ground, unconscious:

Druggist Jerome Ersland released after supporter arranges bail

RELEASE PHARMACIST IS BARRED FROM GUN ACCESS, DESPITE REQUEST

BY NOLAN CLAY

Published: May 29, 2009

A pharmacist charged with first-degree murder was barred Thursday from any access to guns, knives or other weapons while out on $100,000 bail.

Jerome Jay Ersland, 57, of Chickasha was released from the Oklahoma County jail Thursday afternoon after a supporter arranged for the bail, defense attorney Irven Box said.

District Judge Tammy Bass-LeSure set the bail amount. Most defendants charged with first-degree murder in Oklahoma County are denied bail, but prosecutors did not object to Ersland being freed.

The judge ordered the weapons restriction after she watched a video of the pharmacist shooting robbery suspect Antwun Parker, 16, on May 19 at Reliable Discount Pharmacy in south Oklahoma City.

In a twist in the already unusual case, District Attorney David Prater asked the judge to allow Ersland to have access to a gun at work in case the pharmacy is robbed again. The prosecutor said his position "sounds crazy” but he insisted that under the law Ersland has the right to defend himself and others at the pharmacy. At one point, spectators in the courtroom clapped in support of his statements.

The district attorney said he worried crooks now will know it is "open season” at the pharmacy if Ersland is there. He also said Ersland could be fired.

Prater said the pharmacist would not be in court if the two robbers had not come into the drugstore. The judge said, "Then, why did you charge him, Mr. Prater?” The district attorney replied that Ersland went too far.

A clearly irritated Prater also told the judge, "I’m the one who filed the charge so my butt’s on the line.”

The judge, though, refused to change the restriction, saying Ersland could get another job.

"I am going to limit his access to guns,” the judge said. "If someone wants to be around him, they are not going to have access to guns.”

Prater told her, "That’s wrong.” After the hearing, the district attorney said to Ersland, "I want you to be treated fairly.”

The pharmacist was charged Wednesday with first-degree murder for shooting the suspect five more times in the abdomen after the suspect allegedly was incapacitated from a shot to the head. Prosecutors said Parker was unarmed and unconscious on his back when he was shot the last five times. Ersland contends he acted in self-defense when the suspect tried to get up.

A police detective said Ersland lied to the police and news reporters about the shooting. Ersland, for instance, said the robbers shot at him. "Fortunately, God made them miss me, except for this minor scratch,” he told The Oklahoman. "I was able to return fire and protect the girls’ lives. God was helping me.” Prosecutors say there is no evidence anyone but Ersland fired inside the store.

Two of Parker’s aunts attended the bail hearing Thursday.

"We’re not mad. We’re trying to understand,” said one aunt, Sharon Jennings of Oklahoma City. "We don’t understand none of it. He’s not that type of kid. ... He was scared of guns. He was scared of the dark. ... I think it was peer pressure. Somebody talked him into it.”

Ersland is restricted to his home except for trips to work, church, court, his attorney’s office, the grocery store, restaurants and the doctor’s office. Ersland is recovering from recent back surgery and wears a brace. His attorney said he is on morphine. Ersland has said he is a veteran who was wounded during the first war in Iraq.

Ersland is getting support from gun-rights advocates, veterans and others. Mike Manning, a Vietnam veteran who came to court Thursday, said, "We feel this individual is being railroaded.”

Unreasonable retaliation? Or a justified response? To me it looks like he went too far, given the details in the story.

[White Haven]

FIRST degree murder? I could see second, or some flavor of manslaughter, but how in is that premeditated? That'd be a pretty arcane way of plotting to kill someone, 'Alright, I'll get a gun, employ myself as a pharmacist, then wait until that fucking asshole Antwun gets around to robbing my store, then I'm gonna blow him away.'

[Stark]

It depends on the way the law works; sometimes just walking away for a moment, then DECIDING to go back is enough for 'premeditated'. Look at that case; he shot the guy, and when he tried to get up later, the guy BLEW HIM THE FUCK AWAY WITH THE OTHER 5 SHOTS. In many areas it'd be trivial to sell this as 'premeditated', and he coudl have just... y'know... not done anything as the guy was seriously injured and unarmed.

[Darth Wong]

Trying to hit someone hard enough to cause pain but not hard enough to cause injury sounds like a good opportunity to have your weapon wrested out of your hands.

That sounds like a matter for the courts to decide in this case, rather than the cop making the call on the spot and refusing to arrest one half of what appeared to be a public brawl.

Blasting them because they don't just let them off scot-free based solely on their version of what happened is unreasonable. If they get railroaded in court without adequate evidence, then we can start ranting about what a bunch of assholes the authorities are in this case.

[Stark]

Yeah; the idea that it's a hideous miscarriage of justice that some guys who beat the shit out of some kids were arrested is asinine. Were the cops supposed to think 'well we KNOW they beat the kids up, but they SAID it was self-defence... so... won't bother investigating?'

[FSTargetDrone]

It depends on the way the law works; sometimes just walking away for a moment, then DECIDING to go back is enough for 'premeditated'. Look at that case; he shot the guy, and when he tried to get up later, the guy BLEW HIM THE FUCK AWAY WITH THE OTHER 5 SHOTS. In many areas it'd be trivial to sell this as 'premeditated', and he coudl have just... y'know... not done anything as the guy was seriously injured and unarmed.

Just to clarify, the pharmacist says he shot the robber again when the robber apparently attempted to get up . The prosecution says the robber was on the floor and unconscious when he was shot again. Also, the story says the pharmacist lied to the police about the details of the shooting.

[Uraniun235]

Trying to hit someone hard enough to cause pain but not hard enough to cause injury sounds like a good opportunity to have your weapon wrested out of your hands.

That sounds like a matter for the courts to decide in this case, rather than the cop making the call on the spot and refusing to arrest one half of what appeared to be a public brawl.

Blasting them because they don't just let them off scot-free based solely on their version of what happened is unreasonable. If they get railroaded in court without adequate evidence, then we can start ranting about what a bunch of assholes the authorities are in this case.

I'm inclined to agree - it is important to remember that arrest does not mean conviction. I was responding to VF5SS's suggestion that the golfers were arrested because they used excessive force.

[RedImperator]

Survalence video of the robbery. Antwun Parker and another teenager burst into the pharmacy. The other teenager is holding a gun. Ersland, the pharmacist, draws a gun and fires; Parker falls, the other teenager runs away. Ersland chases the other suspect, then returns to the pharmacy. Parker is still down, lying off camera. Ersland goes to the back of the store, grabs a different gun, crouches beside Parker, and then shoots him five times.

So, yeah. Murder one, without question. That wasn't him pulling the trigger more than he should in the heat of the moment, that was an execution. The only thing that's surprising is how well Ersland is being treated. We have an open-and-shut capital murder in a death penalty state, and not only is Ersland out on a ludicrously low bail, but the district attorney is arguing that Ersland should be allowed access to firearms while he's on bail. I honestly can't figure out why in the world....


Antwun Parker

Oh. That explains it.

[Stark]

Yeah, selling that as 'heat of the moment' or 'reasonable force' is pretty hard. There is a clear break between the confrontation and initial shooting and the later killing - that's more than enough to spin it as murder one. That video is pretty damning.

[Phantasee]

If they weren't arrested, you'd have other people saying that the rich white men at the country club golf course get to beat the poor kids all they want, if they call it self-defence, and donate to the police retirement fund, etc. Basically accusations of double-standards and corruption. I'd prefer they arrest everyone until the truth comes out (as in, truth determined by the court, not by a police officer deciding which story to believe).

[aerius]

So, yeah. Murder one, without question. That wasn't him pulling the trigger more than he should in the heat of the moment, that was an execution. The only thing that's surprising is how well Ersland is being treated. We have an open-and-shut capital murder in a death penalty state, and not only is Ersland out on a ludicrously low bail, but the district attorney is arguing that Ersland should be allowed access to firearms while he's on bail. I honestly can't figure out why in the world....

What's even more fun is this. AP link
Excerpt:

A security video shows two men bursting into the pharmacy May 19 and one of them, 16-year-old Antwun Parker, is shot. Pharmacist Jerome Ersland then is seen chasing the second man outside before he walks past Parker to get a second gun, returns to Parker and opens fire.

"dang, my first gun ran dry, I'm gonna git my other gun and shoot'im some more"

[Glocksman]

Unreasonable retaliation? Or a justified response? To me it looks like he went too far, given the details in the story.

Going by the description of the video (I didn't watch it myself), murder one.
Though a clever lawyer might convince a sympathetic jury to convict of a lesser charge or even vote 'not guilty' if they don't have the option of convicting of a lesser charge.

Speaking for myself, if I were on that jury, I'd hold out for murder one because if he went back to get a second gun and then shot the guy laying on the ground, that's premeditation enough for me.

'Heat of the moment' can only cover so much, and shooting a helpless person lying on the ground crosses that line.

I'm all for self defense and (where appropriate) resistance to robbery attempts, but this goes beyond resistance to murder.

[Glocksman]

Clarification and addendum:

To clarify, if the defendant had sufficient time to think instead of merely reacting (as the description of the incident implies), it's murder one.

Addendum: The paranoid side of me is wondering if the DA is deliberately 'overcharging' the pharmacist and hoping that a sympathetic jury will refuse to convict him of a premeditated murder charge.

[RedImperator]

Clarification and addendum:

To clarify, if the defendant had sufficient time to think instead of merely reacting (as the description of the incident implies), it's murder one.

On the video, he fires on the robbers the first time at the 15 second mark. He leaves to chase the other robber, returns at around the 30 second mark (note that the video consists of footage from two cameras edited together, so he may have been gone longer), and shoots Parker again at the 47 second mark. So he had at least thirty seconds to think about it. Even only counting the time on the interior camera, there's a full 20 seconds of footage between the first time he shoots Parker and the second.

[Straha]

Survalence video of the robbery. Antwun Parker and another teenager burst into the pharmacy. The other teenager is holding a gun. Ersland, the pharmacist, draws a gun and fires; Parker falls, the other teenager runs away. Ersland chases the other suspect, then returns to the pharmacy. Parker is still down, lying off camera. Ersland goes to the back of the store, grabs a different gun, crouches beside Parker, and then shoots him five times.

And only then does the fucker go to the phone and call the cops. He should be sent off to jail for the rest of his life.

So, yeah. Murder one, without question. That wasn't him pulling the trigger more than he should in the heat of the moment, that was an execution. The only thing that's surprising is how well Ersland is being treated. We have an open-and-shut capital murder in a death penalty state, and not only is Ersland out on a ludicrously low bail, but the district attorney is arguing that Ersland should be allowed access to firearms while he's on bail. I honestly can't figure out why in the world....

Something doesn't add up here though. This is Oklahoma, if the DA went to court on a charge of manslaughter or Murder 2 nobody would bat an eyelash. Except he goes into court and charges Ersland with the most heinous crime on the books, but then says he should be let out on bail and should be allowed near guns. The inconsistency doesn't make any damn sense to me.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Survalence video of the robbery. Antwun Parker and another teenager burst into the pharmacy. The other teenager is holding a gun. Ersland, the pharmacist, draws a gun and fires; Parker falls, the other teenager runs away. Ersland chases the other suspect, then returns to the pharmacy. Parker is still down, lying off camera. Ersland goes to the back of the store, grabs a different gun, crouches beside Parker, and then shoots him five times.

So, yeah. Murder one, without question. That wasn't him pulling the trigger more than he should in the heat of the moment, that was an execution. The only thing that's surprising is how well Ersland is being treated. We have an open-and-shut capital murder in a death penalty state, and not only is Ersland out on a ludicrously low bail, but the district attorney is arguing that Ersland should be allowed access to firearms while he's on bail. I honestly can't figure out why in the world....

<snip picture>
Antwun Parker

Oh. That explains it.

You might be jumping the gun on the racism card. Another possibility is the fact that the kid was participating in an armed robbery that got Ersland sympathy from the DA. Unless you can show a history of this DA discriminating against african americans I don't see why it's reasonable to throw the race card out just because a minority was involved in a significant way.

[MKSheppard]

Oh. That explains it.

Not to exactly derail the thread; but I've been looking up the news articuls on this; and in the typical sob story interview of the bereaved mother it had this nice tidbit:

He was known as "Speedy,” a jokester who liked to do back flips when he danced and hoped to make his mother rich by playing basketball.

From the time Antwun Parker was 3, he carried a backpack with his basketball shoes in it so he could practice on the spur of the moment, his mother, Cleta Jennings, said Friday. He was wearing the backpack when he was shot to death last week in a pharmacy hold-up attempt.

We really do have MENSA material here...no wait; I think we can't use that anymore -- not after the Holocaust Museum Shooting.