Convenient store stand-your-ground shooter charged

[Faun]

Still wrong. Drejka's fear of imminent death or great bodily harm stemmed from his perception that McGlockton was coming at him when he shot him. The video proves McGlockton was actually backing away, rendering Drejka's fear unreasonable.

As pointed out intelligent people have disagreed regarding whether or not the thug was retreating. As posted the expert witness who is adept in understanding body language testified that the black guy was not retreating based on his body language...if you look at the photo posted you will note the blacks left foot pointed towards drejka just one of the indicators that he was not in real retreat.....otherwise his foot would not have been pointed towards drejka.

As pointed out previously also the black thug with a history of assaulting others(did you see his mug shot)was simply in a 'reflex mode' like if one touches a hot stove your body reacts without even thinking. He thus in his reflex mode took a few halting steps back and slightly turned his body. Is this actually retreating? Certainly not. If you want to see someone retreating watch the white guy hot on the heels of the black dude as they came out of the store When he sees the weapon coming out he runs and hides behind some cars....that is retreting.....but the black guy did not leave the scene....recoiled bac a few steps and stood there...still very close to drejka, still a threat.

If the black crazy had wanted to retreat he would have taken off running like any normal person would if they see someone pointing a pistol at them.

But this thug was not a reasonable person...this black thug was irrational from the gitgo...storming out of the store and attacking drejka for no reason...other than the mere fact that a white man dared to argue with his wife...no sensible person would be so upset over that as to committ criminal assault.

Yet a black racist obviously would. Also...as previously pointed out--if his fate had not been determined already...he could be facing a hate crime charge. Too many black folks hate whites....they learn this in the public schools...aka.....dat white folk holding dem down. dat cuz dey great,great,great, grandfathe might have been a slave they are entitled to assault a white man arguing with their wife.

Not to forget the drugs--- when a black thug pre-disposed for violence, has a history of violence and is high on drugs, a very high level of an illegal drug in his system....then it is quite impossible to predict with accuracy what he might do.

Yet, all those who want to condemn drejka for defending his life want to believe they could perceive that the black thug was no threat...well, of course easy for them to do--their life was not on the line.

You can argue till you're blue in the face whether or not McGlockton was retreating. What there is no question about is that he was not still advancing on Drejka when he was shot -- which is what Drejka thought and why he said he shot him. Now that we see he was totally wrong about that, his excuse for shooting McGlockton goes out the window.

Ridiculous....drejka was not lying....in his altered mental state due to being violently assaulted to raise up and see a black thug hovering over him....he was certainly within a reasonable fear of life....and thus impaired by the trauma of the threat, being slightly dazed, disoriented and in a mild state of shock did not percieve what some percieve when they watch the video in slow motion....drejka was in fear of his life and acted according.

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

As pointed out intelligent people have disagreed regarding whether or not the thug was retreating. As posted the expert witness who is adept in understanding body language testified that the black guy was not retreating based on his body language...if you look at the photo posted you will note the blacks left foot pointed towards drejka just one of the indicators that he was not in real retreat.....otherwise his foot would not have been pointed towards drejka.

As pointed out previously also the black thug with a history of assaulting others(did you see his mug shot)was simply in a 'reflex mode' like if one touches a hot stove your body reacts without even thinking. He thus in his reflex mode took a few halting steps back and slightly turned his body. Is this actually retreating? Certainly not. If you want to see someone retreating watch the white guy hot on the heels of the black dude as they came out of the store When he sees the weapon coming out he runs and hides behind some cars....that is retreting.....but the black guy did not leave the scene....recoiled bac a few steps and stood there...still very close to drejka, still a threat.

If the black crazy had wanted to retreat he would have taken off running like any normal person would if they see someone pointing a pistol at them.

But this thug was not a reasonable person...this black thug was irrational from the gitgo...storming out of the store and attacking drejka for no reason...other than the mere fact that a white man dared to argue with his wife...no sensible person would be so upset over that as to committ criminal assault.

Yet a black racist obviously would. Also...as previously pointed out--if his fate had not been determined already...he could be facing a hate crime charge. Too many black folks hate whites....they learn this in the public schools...aka.....dat white folk holding dem down. dat cuz dey great,great,great, grandfathe might have been a slave they are entitled to assault a white man arguing with their wife.

Not to forget the drugs--- when a black thug pre-disposed for violence, has a history of violence and is high on drugs, a very high level of an illegal drug in his system....then it is quite impossible to predict with accuracy what he might do.

Yet, all those who want to condemn drejka for defending his life want to believe they could perceive that the black thug was no threat...well, of course easy for them to do--their life was not on the line.

You can argue till you're blue in the face whether or not McGlockton was retreating. What there is no question about is that he was not still advancing on Drejka when he was shot -- which is what Drejka thought and why he said he shot him. Now that we see he was totally wrong about that, his excuse for shooting McGlockton goes out the window.

Ridiculous....drejka was not lying....in his altered mental state due to being violently assaulted to raise up and see a black thug hovering over him....he was certainly within a reasonable fear of life....and thus impaired by the trauma of the threat, being slightly dazed, disoriented and in a mild state of shock did not percieve what some percieve when they watch the video in slow motion....drejka was in fear of his life and acted according.

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

 

[Faun]

You can argue till you're blue in the face whether or not McGlockton was retreating. What there is no question about is that he was not still advancing on Drejka when he was shot -- which is what Drejka thought and why he said he shot him. Now that we see he was totally wrong about that, his excuse for shooting McGlockton goes out the window.

Ridiculous....drejka was not lying....in his altered mental state due to being violently assaulted to raise up and see a black thug hovering over him....he was certainly within a reasonable fear of life....and thus impaired by the trauma of the threat, being slightly dazed, disoriented and in a mild state of shock did not percieve what some percieve when they watch the video in slow motion....drejka was in fear of his life and acted according.

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

"According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?"

It has to be a reasonable fear. It's not a reasonable fear if you see something that isn't there. Drejka claims he saw McGlockton approaching him so he shot him. If that were true, it would be a reasonable fear. But it wasn't true, so it wasn't reasonable. And even with a skewed state of mind after being shoved to the ground, that does not excuse Drejka for shooting someone based on his own erroneous perception.

If that's how the law operated, then I could legally shoot an unarmed person walking innocently past me, who accidentally bumps into me because they're busy looking at their phone; and then I could claim self defense for shooting them because I thought they had a gun and was attacking me, even though that was my own erroneous perception.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Ridiculous....drejka was not lying....in his altered mental state due to being violently assaulted to raise up and see a black thug hovering over him....he was certainly within a reasonable fear of life....and thus impaired by the trauma of the threat, being slightly dazed, disoriented and in a mild state of shock did not percieve what some percieve when they watch the video in slow motion....drejka was in fear of his life and acted according.

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

"According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?"

It has to be a reasonable fear. It's not a reasonable fear if you see something that isn't there. Drejka claims he saw McGlockton approaching him so he shot him. If that were true, it would be a reasonable fear. But it wasn't true, so it wasn't reasonable. And even with a skewed state of mind after being shoved to the ground, that does not excuse Drejka for shooting someone based on his own erroneous perception.

If that's how the law operated, then I could legally shoot an unarmed person walking innocently past me, who accidentally bumps into me because they're busy looking at their phone; and then I could claim self defense for shooting them because I thought they had a gun and was attacking me, even though that was my own erroneous perception.[/QUOTE

It is the duty and the legal obligation of the jury to follow the law.

The law on self defense says that to justifiably use lethal force in self defense one must be in REASONABLE fear of their life or of great bodily harm

'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his belief that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?

In order to determine if Drejka was in fact in reasonable fear of his life they would need to examine all the probable or possible facts and reasons that drejka was in fear of his life.

I have presented them before and the truth is the jury neglected to do its legal duty it essentially ignored all the reasons regarding why drejka could have believed his life was in jeopardy.

Instead, at the insistence to the point of demanding -- the aggrfessive and arrogant prosecutor over over kept saying watch the video, watch the video..with his voiced raised to a level of booming off the rafters ..obviously intimidating this incompetent and timid jury which was led by a jury foreman who demonstrates in his interview feminine qualities and the fact that he based drejkas belief on how he the jury foreman viewed the video...not comprehending that the way he saw the incident on a slow motion video and with the benefit of hindsight should not, I say again should not nessacarily be the same as .....drejka's. The defendant had been assaulted, violently slammed to the ground, a black thug was hovering over him etc.etc.etc. all reasons why drejkas perception was different from that of the jury.....they failed to understand....completely failed to understand why drejka could have been in fear of his life because they looked at the video as being the sole determination of how drejka should have responded. Huge error.


Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill’s Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

 

[Faun]

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

"According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?"

It has to be a reasonable fear. It's not a reasonable fear if you see something that isn't there. Drejka claims he saw McGlockton approaching him so he shot him. If that were true, it would be a reasonable fear. But it wasn't true, so it wasn't reasonable. And even with a skewed state of mind after being shoved to the ground, that does not excuse Drejka for shooting someone based on his own erroneous perception.

If that's how the law operated, then I could legally shoot an unarmed person walking innocently past me, who accidentally bumps into me because they're busy looking at their phone; and then I could claim self defense for shooting them because I thought they had a gun and was attacking me, even though that was my own erroneous perception.

It is the duty and the legal obligation to follow the law.

The law on self defense says that to justifiably use lethal force in self defense one must be in REASONABLE fear of their life or of great bodily harm

'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?

In order to determine if Drejka was in fact in reasonable fear of his life they would need to examine all the probable or possible facts and reasons that drejka was in fear of his life.

I have presented them before and the truth is the jury neglected to do its legal duty it essentially ignored all the reasons regarding why drejka believed his life was in jeopardy. Instead, at the insistence to the point of demanding -- the overly demand and arrogant prosecutor over over kept saying watch the video, watch the video..with his voiced raised to a level of booming off the rafters ..obviously intimidating this incompetent and timid jury which was led by a jury foreman who demonstrates in his interview feminine qualities and the fact that he based drejkas belief on how he the jury foreman viewed the video...not comprehending that the way he saw the incident on a slow motion video and with the benefit of hindsight should not, I say again should not nessacarily be the same as his .....drejka had been assaulted, violently slammed to the ground, a black thug was hover over him etc.etc.etc. all reasons why drejkas perception was different from that of the jury.....they failed to understand....completely failed to understand why drejka could have been in fear of his life because they looked at the video as being the sole determination of how drejka should have responded.


Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill’s Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

"'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?"

Because Drejka's claim of reasonable fear was predicated on something which didn't occur.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

"According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?"

It has to be a reasonable fear. It's not a reasonable fear if you see something that isn't there. Drejka claims he saw McGlockton approaching him so he shot him. If that were true, it would be a reasonable fear. But it wasn't true, so it wasn't reasonable. And even with a skewed state of mind after being shoved to the ground, that does not excuse Drejka for shooting someone based on his own erroneous perception.

If that's how the law operated, then I could legally shoot an unarmed person walking innocently past me, who accidentally bumps into me because they're busy looking at their phone; and then I could claim self defense for shooting them because I thought they had a gun and was attacking me, even though that was my own erroneous perception.

It is the duty and the legal obligation to follow the law.

The law on self defense says that to justifiably use lethal force in self defense one must be in REASONABLE fear of their life or of great bodily harm

'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?

In order to determine if Drejka was in fact in reasonable fear of his life they would need to examine all the probable or possible facts and reasons that drejka was in fear of his life.

I have presented them before and the truth is the jury neglected to do its legal duty it essentially ignored all the reasons regarding why drejka believed his life was in jeopardy. Instead, at the insistence to the point of demanding -- the overly demand and arrogant prosecutor over over kept saying watch the video, watch the video..with his voiced raised to a level of booming off the rafters ..obviously intimidating this incompetent and timid jury which was led by a jury foreman who demonstrates in his interview feminine qualities and the fact that he based drejkas belief on how he the jury foreman viewed the video...not comprehending that the way he saw the incident on a slow motion video and with the benefit of hindsight should not, I say again should not nessacarily be the same as his .....drejka had been assaulted, violently slammed to the ground, a black thug was hover over him etc.etc.etc. all reasons why drejkas perception was different from that of the jury.....they failed to understand....completely failed to understand why drejka could have been in fear of his life because they looked at the video as being the sole determination of how drejka should have responded.


Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill’s Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

"'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?"

Because Drejka's claim of reasonable fear was predicated on something which didn't occur.

Nonsense.....you like the jury do not want to anaylyze all the possible reasons drejka could have been in fear of his life.

Try and put yourself in drejka's boots....which the jury should have also but did not.

All they did was to use their 'perception' of the video that indicated to them despite all the expert opinions that the thug was retreating.

To understand the likeliehood or possibility that drejka was in reasonable fear of his life...they would have had to 'put themselves in his position' and thus when you look at it from the defendants position....things change big time.

Again....they....the jury erroneously concluded that drejka should have had the same perspective as they.....which is outrageously stupid.

Drejka was not comfortably situated in some safe place watching a slow motion video of someone else being assaulted. He was that person....the jury simply did not consider all the things that were or could have been running through dreja's mind that made him believe that his life was in real danger.

Also they the jury were under no time constraints.....hey had hours to go over and over the video in slow motion. And they took several hrs. to come up with the verdict.

Drejka had from 4 to 6 seconds at most to make a life or death decision. Thus it was unreasonable for the jury to conclude that drejka in a few short seconds should have been able to conclusively determine his life was not in danger ....we still must consider the fact and it has been pointed out several times.....is it possible to accurately predict what someone with a history of violence and assault under the influence of drugs will do?

No matter what the thug could do or no matter what he may have actually done....it would not be relevant to the safety of the jury.....their lives were not on the line or endangered in any way or shape or form....yet they want to think that just because they perceived the perpetrator from stumbliing backwards for a few steps that the defendants life was no longer in danger.....that he the defendant should have taken the risk that the perp no longer posed a danger...whilst they the jury were never at any risk whatsoever.. Essentially saying the defendant was required to gamble with his life when no one could possibly predict with certainly what the black thug might actually have done next.

One thing we know for sure ...he was still close enough to the defendant to pose a threat.

As pointed previously and for several time already....the white dude that was hot on the heels of the black thug as he rushed out of the store....instantly retreated when he saw the weapon come out....you see him on the video running to hide behind behind some cars whilst the black thug remains facing his victim and in a position to launch another attack according to a expert witness who testified that his left foot pointed towards his victim is just one indicator he was not retreating.

Again the jury failed in its duty to adequately examine all the factors in this case....especially the reasons that drejka could have been in reasonable fear of his life.

The jury foreman has revealed now that it was almost a hung jury...that 2 jurors did believe the black thug did pose a continued danger to drejka....but unfortunately as is often the case they gave in eventually to the pressure of the majority....and it being a friday evening they all were eager to get home for the week-end and not be cooped up by the state.

Thus outrageouosly making it possible for the defendant to spend the rest of his life (most likely)

cooped up by the state.

When Seeking True Justice.

Making casual decision,
Needs some thought and revision;

Consider all sides,
Take your time in strides.............a poem by freepower 34.

 

[Faun]

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

"According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?"

It has to be a reasonable fear. It's not a reasonable fear if you see something that isn't there. Drejka claims he saw McGlockton approaching him so he shot him. If that were true, it would be a reasonable fear. But it wasn't true, so it wasn't reasonable. And even with a skewed state of mind after being shoved to the ground, that does not excuse Drejka for shooting someone based on his own erroneous perception.

If that's how the law operated, then I could legally shoot an unarmed person walking innocently past me, who accidentally bumps into me because they're busy looking at their phone; and then I could claim self defense for shooting them because I thought they had a gun and was attacking me, even though that was my own erroneous perception.

It is the duty and the legal obligation to follow the law.

The law on self defense says that to justifiably use lethal force in self defense one must be in REASONABLE fear of their life or of great bodily harm

'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?

In order to determine if Drejka was in fact in reasonable fear of his life they would need to examine all the probable or possible facts and reasons that drejka was in fear of his life.

I have presented them before and the truth is the jury neglected to do its legal duty it essentially ignored all the reasons regarding why drejka believed his life was in jeopardy. Instead, at the insistence to the point of demanding -- the overly demand and arrogant prosecutor over over kept saying watch the video, watch the video..with his voiced raised to a level of booming off the rafters ..obviously intimidating this incompetent and timid jury which was led by a jury foreman who demonstrates in his interview feminine qualities and the fact that he based drejkas belief on how he the jury foreman viewed the video...not comprehending that the way he saw the incident on a slow motion video and with the benefit of hindsight should not, I say again should not nessacarily be the same as his .....drejka had been assaulted, violently slammed to the ground, a black thug was hover over him etc.etc.etc. all reasons why drejkas perception was different from that of the jury.....they failed to understand....completely failed to understand why drejka could have been in fear of his life because they looked at the video as being the sole determination of how drejka should have responded.


Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill’s Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

"'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?"

Because Drejka's claim of reasonable fear was predicated on something which didn't occur.

Nonsense.....you like the jury do not want to anaylyze all the possible reasons drejka could have been in fear of his life.

Try and put yourself in drejka's boots....which the jury should have also but did not.

All they did was to use their 'perception' of the video that indicated to them despite all the expert opinions that the thug was retreating.

To understand the likeliehood or possibility that drejka was in reasonable fear of his life...they would have had to 'put themselves in his position' and thus when you look at it from the defendants position....things change big time.

Again....they....the jury erroneously concluded that drejka should have had the same perspective as they.....which is outrageously stupid.

Drejka was not comfortably situated in some safe place watching a slow motion video of someone else being assaulted. He was that person....the jury simply did not consider all the things that were or could have been running through dreja's mind that made him believe that his life was in real danger.

Also they the jury were under no time constraints.....hey had hours to go over and over the video in slow motion. And they took several hrs. to come up with the verdict.

Drejka had from 4 to 6 seconds at most to make a life or death decision. Thus it was unreasonable for the jury to conclude that drejka in a few short seconds should have been able to conclusively determine his life was not in danger ....we still must consider the fact and it has been pointed out several times.....is it possible to accurately predict what someone with a history of violence and assault under the influence of drugs will do?

No matter what the thug could do or no matter what he may have actually done....it would not be relevant to the safety of the jury.....their lives were not on the line or endangered in any way or shape or form....yet they want to think that just because they perceived the perpetrator from stumbliing backwards for a few steps that the defendants life was no longer in danger.....that he the defendant should have taken the risk that the perp no longer posed a danger...whilst they the jury were never at any risk whatsoever.. Essentially saying the defendant was required to gamble with his life when no one could possibly predict with certainly what the black thug might actually have done next.

One thing we know for sure ...he was still close enough to the defendant to pose a threat.

As pointed previously and for several time already....the white dude that was hot on the heels of the black thug as he rushed out of the store....instantly retreated when he saw the weapon come out....you see him on the video running to hide behind behind some cars whilst the black thug remains facing his victim and in a position to launch another attack according to a expert witness who testified that his left foot pointed towards his victim is just one indicator he was not retreating.

Again the jury failed in its duty to adequately examine all the factors in this case....especially the reasons that drejka could have been in reasonable fear of his life.

The jury foreman has revealed now that it was almost a hung jury...that 2 jurors did believe the black thug did pose a continued danger to drejka....but unfortunately as is often the case they gave in eventually to the pressure of the majority....and it being a friday evening they all were eager to get home for the week-end and not be cooped up by the state.

Thus outrageouosly making it possible for the defendant to spend the rest of his life (most likely)

cooped up by the state.

When Seeking True Justice.

Making casual decision,
Needs some thought and revision;

Consider all sides,
Take your time in strides.............a poem by freepower 34.

Drejka's perception was delusional. McGlockton was not coming at him when he shot him. It's vengeance, not self defense .

 

[TheGreenHornet]

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

"According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?"

It has to be a reasonable fear. It's not a reasonable fear if you see something that isn't there. Drejka claims he saw McGlockton approaching him so he shot him. If that were true, it would be a reasonable fear. But it wasn't true, so it wasn't reasonable. And even with a skewed state of mind after being shoved to the ground, that does not excuse Drejka for shooting someone based on his own erroneous perception.

If that's how the law operated, then I could legally shoot an unarmed person walking innocently past me, who accidentally bumps into me because they're busy looking at their phone; and then I could claim self defense for shooting them because I thought they had a gun and was attacking me, even though that was my own erroneous perception.

It is the duty and the legal obligation to follow the law.

The law on self defense says that to justifiably use lethal force in self defense one must be in REASONABLE fear of their life or of great bodily harm

'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?

In order to determine if Drejka was in fact in reasonable fear of his life they would need to examine all the probable or possible facts and reasons that drejka was in fear of his life.

I have presented them before and the truth is the jury neglected to do its legal duty it essentially ignored all the reasons regarding why drejka believed his life was in jeopardy. Instead, at the insistence to the point of demanding -- the overly demand and arrogant prosecutor over over kept saying watch the video, watch the video..with his voiced raised to a level of booming off the rafters ..obviously intimidating this incompetent and timid jury which was led by a jury foreman who demonstrates in his interview feminine qualities and the fact that he based drejkas belief on how he the jury foreman viewed the video...not comprehending that the way he saw the incident on a slow motion video and with the benefit of hindsight should not, I say again should not nessacarily be the same as his .....drejka had been assaulted, violently slammed to the ground, a black thug was hover over him etc.etc.etc. all reasons why drejkas perception was different from that of the jury.....they failed to understand....completely failed to understand why drejka could have been in fear of his life because they looked at the video as being the sole determination of how drejka should have responded.


Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill’s Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

"'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?"

Because Drejka's claim of reasonable fear was predicated on something which didn't occur.

Nonsense.....you like the jury do not want to anaylyze all the possible reasons drejka could have been in fear of his life.

Try and put yourself in drejka's boots....which the jury should have also but did not.

All they did was to use their 'perception' of the video that indicated to them despite all the expert opinions that the thug was retreating.

To understand the likeliehood or possibility that drejka was in reasonable fear of his life...they would have had to 'put themselves in his position' and thus when you look at it from the defendants position....things change big time.

Again....they....the jury erroneously concluded that drejka should have had the same perspective as they.....which is outrageously stupid.

Drejka was not comfortably situated in some safe place watching a slow motion video of someone else being assaulted. He was that person....the jury simply did not consider all the things that were or could have been running through dreja's mind that made him believe that his life was in real danger.

Also they the jury were under no time constraints.....hey had hours to go over and over the video in slow motion. And they took several hrs. to come up with the verdict.

Drejka had from 4 to 6 seconds at most to make a life or death decision. Thus it was unreasonable for the jury to conclude that drejka in a few short seconds should have been able to conclusively determine his life was not in danger ....we still must consider the fact and it has been pointed out several times.....is it possible to accurately predict what someone with a history of violence and assault under the influence of drugs will do?

No matter what the thug could do or no matter what he may have actually done....it would not be relevant to the safety of the jury.....their lives were not on the line or endangered in any way or shape or form....yet they want to think that just because they perceived the perpetrator from stumbliing backwards for a few steps that the defendants life was no longer in danger.....that he the defendant should have taken the risk that the perp no longer posed a danger...whilst they the jury were never at any risk whatsoever.. Essentially saying the defendant was required to gamble with his life when no one could possibly predict with certainly what the black thug might actually have done next.

One thing we know for sure ...he was still close enough to the defendant to pose a threat.

As pointed previously and for several time already....the white dude that was hot on the heels of the black thug as he rushed out of the store....instantly retreated when he saw the weapon come out....you see him on the video running to hide behind behind some cars whilst the black thug remains facing his victim and in a position to launch another attack according to a expert witness who testified that his left foot pointed towards his victim is just one indicator he was not retreating.

Again the jury failed in its duty to adequately examine all the factors in this case....especially the reasons that drejka could have been in reasonable fear of his life.

The jury foreman has revealed now that it was almost a hung jury...that 2 jurors did believe the black thug did pose a continued danger to drejka....but unfortunately as is often the case they gave in eventually to the pressure of the majority....and it being a friday evening they all were eager to get home for the week-end and not be cooped up by the state.

Thus outrageouosly making it possible for the defendant to spend the rest of his life (most likely)

cooped up by the state.

When Seeking True Justice.

Making casual decision,
Needs some thought and revision;

Consider all sides,
Take your time in strides.............a poem by freepower 34.

Drejka's perception was delusional. McGlockton was not coming at him when he shot him. It's vengeance, not self defense .

Still don't get the law no matter how many times it has been explained ....got attention deficient syndrome or sumptin?

Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury.

Now all you have or anyone else who wants to believe drejka is guilty---- is to claim he was not in reasonable fear of his life. In order to do that you must ignore or reject all the reasons he was in fear of his life as any reasonable person would be.

What you and the jury have done is to use your perception of the video to say in essence that drejka should have had the same percepton as you---.outrageous to the extreme to think that.

Neither you nor the jury experienced the trauma that was inflicted on the defendant. Neither you nor the jury were placed in a position where you could have been killed. Neither you nor the jury had been threatened and violently slammed to the ground. Neither you nor the jury had only approx. 4-6 seconds to determine whether or not your life was in danger.

The jury took hours to decide that there was no reasonable danger....yet they expected someone that is dazed, disoriented and in some degree of shock to determine in 4-6 seconds what they took hours to determine? Get real.

 

[westwall]

You can argue till you're blue in the face whether or not McGlockton was retreating. What there is no question about is that he was not still advancing on Drejka when he was shot -- which is what Drejka thought and why he said he shot him. Now that we see he was totally wrong about that, his excuse for shooting McGlockton goes out the window.

Ridiculous....drejka was not lying....in his altered mental state due to being violently assaulted to raise up and see a black thug hovering over him....he was certainly within a reasonable fear of life....and thus impaired by the trauma of the threat, being slightly dazed, disoriented and in a mild state of shock did not percieve what some percieve when they watch the video in slow motion....drejka was in fear of his life and acted according.

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

I have viewed the video many times, there is no reasonable person who would believe that drejka was in fear for his life. The victim was clearly holding his hands up, and moving AWAY from drejka when drejka shot him.

Drejka allowed his hatred for handicapped parking violators to alter his judgement. He belongs in prison.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Ridiculous....drejka was not lying....in his altered mental state due to being violently assaulted to raise up and see a black thug hovering over him....he was certainly within a reasonable fear of life....and thus impaired by the trauma of the threat, being slightly dazed, disoriented and in a mild state of shock did not percieve what some percieve when they watch the video in slow motion....drejka was in fear of his life and acted according.

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

I have viewed the video many times, there is no reasonable person who would believe that drejka was in fear for his life. The victim was clearly holding his hands up, and moving AWAY from drejka when drejka shot him.

Drejka allowed his hatred for handicapped parking violators to alter his judgement. He belongs in prison.

Absolute bullshite and must be a moron to believe all that. Get outta here....too many dummies on this thread already.

 

[westwall]

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

I have viewed the video many times, there is no reasonable person who would believe that drejka was in fear for his life. The victim was clearly holding his hands up, and moving AWAY from drejka when drejka shot him.

Drejka allowed his hatred for handicapped parking violators to alter his judgement. He belongs in prison.

Absolute bullshite and must be a moron to believe all that. Get outta here....too many dummies on this thread already.

No, it is factual. Drejka had no legitimate claim of fear for his life, you can actually see him think for half a second before he pulls the trigger. He knew he was shooting the guy out of hatred, and nothing else.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Like all tards you got a movie running in your head.

You come on here without bothering to keep up and make a ridiculous statement about your personal opinion....a waste of time.


Drejka should never have been charged with a crime.

Pinellas County sheriff Bob Gualtieri initially, and correctly, concluded that Drejka’s actions were protected under the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law. The charge was only filed after a calculated public relations campaign to create a “public outcry” based on political issues of gun rights and racial injustice.

Let’s review the facts:

McGlockton physically attacked Drejka, blind-siding him and taking him by surprise, driving him to his knees in a parking lot with no plausible place to flee (even if Drejka had been obligated to attempt to do so), then loomed aggressively over him as a second potential assailant (McGlockton’s girlfriend) moved to Drejka’s right. Drejka drew his weapon and shot McGlockton. All of this transpired in a matter of about five seconds.

Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law required a reasonable belief on Drejka’s part that firing his weapon was “necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.”

Jury foreman Timothy Kleinman admits that “Markeis Mcglockton unnecessarily provoked Mr. Drejka by pushing him,” but claims that “[a]t the same time, using the gun wasn’t needed. … He had time to think, ‘Do I really need to kill this man?'”

Forgive me if that statement causes me to doubt that Kleinman or any of the other jurors have ever found themselves in a situation where they were required to make “a kill or possibly be killed” decision over a of span of five seconds or less.

Speaking of doubt, let’s talk about the jury’s obligation. Their job was to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Drejka acted maliciously or negligently rather than in legitimate self-defense. Based on the key piece of evidence — surveillance video from the store — such a conclusion borders on the impossible.

Even Kleinman admits that Drejka was acting in self-defense up to the instant he pulled the trigger: “I think simply drawing the gun would have been enough.” Kleinman had as long to think about that as he cared to take in the comparative safety of the jury room. Drejka had seconds to think about it, on his knees, in a parking lot, during a violent physical assault that took him by surprise.

So why are we here? Because some politicians and political activists found a “lightning rod” case to push their agendas with. That’s a bad reason, an inherently corrupt purpose, for charging a man with a crime.

McGlockton assaulted drejka....... That bad decision cost Markeis McGlockton his life. It shouldn’t cost Michael Drejka his freedom.




Read more at Michael Drejka is a Political Prisoner | The William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism

 

[Faun]

"According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?"

It has to be a reasonable fear. It's not a reasonable fear if you see something that isn't there. Drejka claims he saw McGlockton approaching him so he shot him. If that were true, it would be a reasonable fear. But it wasn't true, so it wasn't reasonable. And even with a skewed state of mind after being shoved to the ground, that does not excuse Drejka for shooting someone based on his own erroneous perception.

If that's how the law operated, then I could legally shoot an unarmed person walking innocently past me, who accidentally bumps into me because they're busy looking at their phone; and then I could claim self defense for shooting them because I thought they had a gun and was attacking me, even though that was my own erroneous perception.

It is the duty and the legal obligation to follow the law.

The law on self defense says that to justifiably use lethal force in self defense one must be in REASONABLE fear of their life or of great bodily harm

'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?

In order to determine if Drejka was in fact in reasonable fear of his life they would need to examine all the probable or possible facts and reasons that drejka was in fear of his life.

I have presented them before and the truth is the jury neglected to do its legal duty it essentially ignored all the reasons regarding why drejka believed his life was in jeopardy. Instead, at the insistence to the point of demanding -- the overly demand and arrogant prosecutor over over kept saying watch the video, watch the video..with his voiced raised to a level of booming off the rafters ..obviously intimidating this incompetent and timid jury which was led by a jury foreman who demonstrates in his interview feminine qualities and the fact that he based drejkas belief on how he the jury foreman viewed the video...not comprehending that the way he saw the incident on a slow motion video and with the benefit of hindsight should not, I say again should not nessacarily be the same as his .....drejka had been assaulted, violently slammed to the ground, a black thug was hover over him etc.etc.etc. all reasons why drejkas perception was different from that of the jury.....they failed to understand....completely failed to understand why drejka could have been in fear of his life because they looked at the video as being the sole determination of how drejka should have responded.


Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill’s Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

"'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?"

Because Drejka's claim of reasonable fear was predicated on something which didn't occur.

Nonsense.....you like the jury do not want to anaylyze all the possible reasons drejka could have been in fear of his life.

Try and put yourself in drejka's boots....which the jury should have also but did not.

All they did was to use their 'perception' of the video that indicated to them despite all the expert opinions that the thug was retreating.

To understand the likeliehood or possibility that drejka was in reasonable fear of his life...they would have had to 'put themselves in his position' and thus when you look at it from the defendants position....things change big time.

Again....they....the jury erroneously concluded that drejka should have had the same perspective as they.....which is outrageously stupid.

Drejka was not comfortably situated in some safe place watching a slow motion video of someone else being assaulted. He was that person....the jury simply did not consider all the things that were or could have been running through dreja's mind that made him believe that his life was in real danger.

Also they the jury were under no time constraints.....hey had hours to go over and over the video in slow motion. And they took several hrs. to come up with the verdict.

Drejka had from 4 to 6 seconds at most to make a life or death decision. Thus it was unreasonable for the jury to conclude that drejka in a few short seconds should have been able to conclusively determine his life was not in danger ....we still must consider the fact and it has been pointed out several times.....is it possible to accurately predict what someone with a history of violence and assault under the influence of drugs will do?

No matter what the thug could do or no matter what he may have actually done....it would not be relevant to the safety of the jury.....their lives were not on the line or endangered in any way or shape or form....yet they want to think that just because they perceived the perpetrator from stumbliing backwards for a few steps that the defendants life was no longer in danger.....that he the defendant should have taken the risk that the perp no longer posed a danger...whilst they the jury were never at any risk whatsoever.. Essentially saying the defendant was required to gamble with his life when no one could possibly predict with certainly what the black thug might actually have done next.

One thing we know for sure ...he was still close enough to the defendant to pose a threat.

As pointed previously and for several time already....the white dude that was hot on the heels of the black thug as he rushed out of the store....instantly retreated when he saw the weapon come out....you see him on the video running to hide behind behind some cars whilst the black thug remains facing his victim and in a position to launch another attack according to a expert witness who testified that his left foot pointed towards his victim is just one indicator he was not retreating.

Again the jury failed in its duty to adequately examine all the factors in this case....especially the reasons that drejka could have been in reasonable fear of his life.

The jury foreman has revealed now that it was almost a hung jury...that 2 jurors did believe the black thug did pose a continued danger to drejka....but unfortunately as is often the case they gave in eventually to the pressure of the majority....and it being a friday evening they all were eager to get home for the week-end and not be cooped up by the state.

Thus outrageouosly making it possible for the defendant to spend the rest of his life (most likely)

cooped up by the state.

When Seeking True Justice.

Making casual decision,
Needs some thought and revision;

Consider all sides,
Take your time in strides.............a poem by freepower 34.

Drejka's perception was delusional. McGlockton was not coming at him when he shot him. It's vengeance, not self defense .

Still don't get the law no matter how many times it has been explained ....got attention deficient syndrome or sumptin?

Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury.

Now all you have or anyone else who wants to believe drejka is guilty---- is to claim he was not in reasonable fear of his life. In order to do that you must ignore or reject all the reasons he was in fear of his life as any reasonable person would be.

What you and the jury have done is to use your perception of the video to say in essence that drejka should have had the same percepton as you---.outrageous to the extreme to think that.

Neither you nor the jury experienced the trauma that was inflicted on the defendant. Neither you nor the jury were placed in a position where you could have been killed. Neither you nor the jury had been threatened and violently slammed to the ground. Neither you nor the jury had only approx. 4-6 seconds to determine whether or not your life was in danger.

The jury took hours to decide that there was no reasonable danger....yet they expected someone that is dazed, disoriented and in some degree of shock to determine in 4-6 seconds what they took hours to determine? Get real.

"Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury."

Nutjob... it matters because Drejka's reason for being in fear was because he believed McGlockton was coming at him. Drejka even said he wouldn't have shit him had he not been coming at him.

Turns out, Drejka was hallucinating -- McGlockton wasn't coming at him.

A self-induced hallucination is not a reasonable fear to justify lethal force in self defense. Everyone gets that but you.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

It is the duty and the legal obligation to follow the law.

The law on self defense says that to justifiably use lethal force in self defense one must be in REASONABLE fear of their life or of great bodily harm

'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?

In order to determine if Drejka was in fact in reasonable fear of his life they would need to examine all the probable or possible facts and reasons that drejka was in fear of his life.

I have presented them before and the truth is the jury neglected to do its legal duty it essentially ignored all the reasons regarding why drejka believed his life was in jeopardy. Instead, at the insistence to the point of demanding -- the overly demand and arrogant prosecutor over over kept saying watch the video, watch the video..with his voiced raised to a level of booming off the rafters ..obviously intimidating this incompetent and timid jury which was led by a jury foreman who demonstrates in his interview feminine qualities and the fact that he based drejkas belief on how he the jury foreman viewed the video...not comprehending that the way he saw the incident on a slow motion video and with the benefit of hindsight should not, I say again should not nessacarily be the same as his .....drejka had been assaulted, violently slammed to the ground, a black thug was hover over him etc.etc.etc. all reasons why drejkas perception was different from that of the jury.....they failed to understand....completely failed to understand why drejka could have been in fear of his life because they looked at the video as being the sole determination of how drejka should have responded.


Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill’s Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

"'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?"

Because Drejka's claim of reasonable fear was predicated on something which didn't occur.

Nonsense.....you like the jury do not want to anaylyze all the possible reasons drejka could have been in fear of his life.

Try and put yourself in drejka's boots....which the jury should have also but did not.

All they did was to use their 'perception' of the video that indicated to them despite all the expert opinions that the thug was retreating.

To understand the likeliehood or possibility that drejka was in reasonable fear of his life...they would have had to 'put themselves in his position' and thus when you look at it from the defendants position....things change big time.

Again....they....the jury erroneously concluded that drejka should have had the same perspective as they.....which is outrageously stupid.

Drejka was not comfortably situated in some safe place watching a slow motion video of someone else being assaulted. He was that person....the jury simply did not consider all the things that were or could have been running through dreja's mind that made him believe that his life was in real danger.

Also they the jury were under no time constraints.....hey had hours to go over and over the video in slow motion. And they took several hrs. to come up with the verdict.

Drejka had from 4 to 6 seconds at most to make a life or death decision. Thus it was unreasonable for the jury to conclude that drejka in a few short seconds should have been able to conclusively determine his life was not in danger ....we still must consider the fact and it has been pointed out several times.....is it possible to accurately predict what someone with a history of violence and assault under the influence of drugs will do?

No matter what the thug could do or no matter what he may have actually done....it would not be relevant to the safety of the jury.....their lives were not on the line or endangered in any way or shape or form....yet they want to think that just because they perceived the perpetrator from stumbliing backwards for a few steps that the defendants life was no longer in danger.....that he the defendant should have taken the risk that the perp no longer posed a danger...whilst they the jury were never at any risk whatsoever.. Essentially saying the defendant was required to gamble with his life when no one could possibly predict with certainly what the black thug might actually have done next.

One thing we know for sure ...he was still close enough to the defendant to pose a threat.

As pointed previously and for several time already....the white dude that was hot on the heels of the black thug as he rushed out of the store....instantly retreated when he saw the weapon come out....you see him on the video running to hide behind behind some cars whilst the black thug remains facing his victim and in a position to launch another attack according to a expert witness who testified that his left foot pointed towards his victim is just one indicator he was not retreating.

Again the jury failed in its duty to adequately examine all the factors in this case....especially the reasons that drejka could have been in reasonable fear of his life.

The jury foreman has revealed now that it was almost a hung jury...that 2 jurors did believe the black thug did pose a continued danger to drejka....but unfortunately as is often the case they gave in eventually to the pressure of the majority....and it being a friday evening they all were eager to get home for the week-end and not be cooped up by the state.

Thus outrageouosly making it possible for the defendant to spend the rest of his life (most likely)

cooped up by the state.

When Seeking True Justice.

Making casual decision,
Needs some thought and revision;

Consider all sides,
Take your time in strides.............a poem by freepower 34.

Drejka's perception was delusional. McGlockton was not coming at him when he shot him. It's vengeance, not self defense .

Still don't get the law no matter how many times it has been explained ....got attention deficient syndrome or sumptin?

Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury.

Now all you have or anyone else who wants to believe drejka is guilty---- is to claim he was not in reasonable fear of his life. In order to do that you must ignore or reject all the reasons he was in fear of his life as any reasonable person would be.

What you and the jury have done is to use your perception of the video to say in essence that drejka should have had the same percepton as you---.outrageous to the extreme to think that.

Neither you nor the jury experienced the trauma that was inflicted on the defendant. Neither you nor the jury were placed in a position where you could have been killed. Neither you nor the jury had been threatened and violently slammed to the ground. Neither you nor the jury had only approx. 4-6 seconds to determine whether or not your life was in danger.

The jury took hours to decide that there was no reasonable danger....yet they expected someone that is dazed, disoriented and in some degree of shock to determine in 4-6 seconds what they took hours to determine? Get real.

"Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury."

Nutjob... it matters because Drejka's reason for being in fear was because he believed McGlockton was coming at him. Drejka even said he wouldn't have shit him had he not been coming at him.

Turns out, Drejka was hallucinating -- McGlockton wasn't coming at him.

A self-induced hallucination is not a reasonable fear to justify lethal force in self defense. Everyone gets that but you.

What you do not get is that statement from drejka was elicited from Drejka in a 6 hr. interrogation right after the event and drjjka was very tired still somewhat dazed not to mention confused and probably still in some degree of shock.....and it certainly wasnt self induced as you claim...obviously his mental state was the result of the thug viciously attacking him.

As explained earlier......it is the policy of police depts. not to interview a police officer involved in a deadly shooting directly after the event but to waiit a few days and let him get over the trauma and clear his head.

In his mental condition with his memory no doubt being jangled and not in the best form it is very possible that drejka in this confused state,--- may have mixed up how the event un-folded. Since he had been blindsided--- he probably did not have a firm grip on what even happened.

All he really knew was that he had been slammed to the ground and when he looked up he saw a black thug hovering over him and still advancing ---until he was able to get his pistol out--- and this scary memory is very likely what caused him to say he was coming after me.

Anyhow, those who have been in similar situations know the perp might stand back for a moment assess the situation and attack again.....if Mcglocken actually wanted to retreat he would have did like the guy behind him..........run to a place of safety. .

Yet, it is also possible the black guy did not believe drejka would actually pull the trigger...might have been looking for an opening to renew his attack.

In his drugged condition he was certainly not rational...and no one can predict what he might have done with any accuracy which has now been pointed out several times.

The drugs very possibly could have given him a sense of being invulnurable.


The best way to understand how the jury was in error is to realize that they were essentially spectators watching a video in slow motion in complete safety with the benefit of hindsight and hours to study the video and make up their minds.

Drejka on the other hand was not in a place of safety, had been violently assaulted, slammed to the ground and when he looked up he saw this black thug looming over him.

The jury simply could not place themselves in drejkas shoes....in fact did not even try to understand where he was coming from.

Again....they expected him to analyze the scenario the same way they did although he was operating in real life and real time....of which he had very little. He had to make the decision to shoot or not to shoot in a few short seconds whilst being traumatized and confused.

The jury made no leeway for his condition...which was inflicted on him by his attacker. They were in grave error.

After being indoctrinated by the prosecutor the jury obviously thought all they really had to do was to examine the video and make their determination....after all that is what the prosecutor told them to do over and over he--- hammered on that in a very loud voice--an exceedingly loud voice--watch the video, watch the video.....he kept repeating that like he was trying to hypnotize the jury....maybe he did.

At any rate the prosecutor controlled that timid jury and the ****** foreman's admission of just using the video to make the call proves he was in error of the law.

A terrible miscarriage of justice for sure.

 

[Faun]

"'Reasonable' being the key word. Now how could this jury determine if drejka was in fact 'reasonable' in his beliefe that his life was in danger or that he might suffer grievious bodily harm?"

Because Drejka's claim of reasonable fear was predicated on something which didn't occur.

Nonsense.....you like the jury do not want to anaylyze all the possible reasons drejka could have been in fear of his life.

Try and put yourself in drejka's boots....which the jury should have also but did not.

All they did was to use their 'perception' of the video that indicated to them despite all the expert opinions that the thug was retreating.

To understand the likeliehood or possibility that drejka was in reasonable fear of his life...they would have had to 'put themselves in his position' and thus when you look at it from the defendants position....things change big time.

Again....they....the jury erroneously concluded that drejka should have had the same perspective as they.....which is outrageously stupid.

Drejka was not comfortably situated in some safe place watching a slow motion video of someone else being assaulted. He was that person....the jury simply did not consider all the things that were or could have been running through dreja's mind that made him believe that his life was in real danger.

Also they the jury were under no time constraints.....hey had hours to go over and over the video in slow motion. And they took several hrs. to come up with the verdict.

Drejka had from 4 to 6 seconds at most to make a life or death decision. Thus it was unreasonable for the jury to conclude that drejka in a few short seconds should have been able to conclusively determine his life was not in danger ....we still must consider the fact and it has been pointed out several times.....is it possible to accurately predict what someone with a history of violence and assault under the influence of drugs will do?

No matter what the thug could do or no matter what he may have actually done....it would not be relevant to the safety of the jury.....their lives were not on the line or endangered in any way or shape or form....yet they want to think that just because they perceived the perpetrator from stumbliing backwards for a few steps that the defendants life was no longer in danger.....that he the defendant should have taken the risk that the perp no longer posed a danger...whilst they the jury were never at any risk whatsoever.. Essentially saying the defendant was required to gamble with his life when no one could possibly predict with certainly what the black thug might actually have done next.

One thing we know for sure ...he was still close enough to the defendant to pose a threat.

As pointed previously and for several time already....the white dude that was hot on the heels of the black thug as he rushed out of the store....instantly retreated when he saw the weapon come out....you see him on the video running to hide behind behind some cars whilst the black thug remains facing his victim and in a position to launch another attack according to a expert witness who testified that his left foot pointed towards his victim is just one indicator he was not retreating.

Again the jury failed in its duty to adequately examine all the factors in this case....especially the reasons that drejka could have been in reasonable fear of his life.

The jury foreman has revealed now that it was almost a hung jury...that 2 jurors did believe the black thug did pose a continued danger to drejka....but unfortunately as is often the case they gave in eventually to the pressure of the majority....and it being a friday evening they all were eager to get home for the week-end and not be cooped up by the state.

Thus outrageouosly making it possible for the defendant to spend the rest of his life (most likely)

cooped up by the state.

When Seeking True Justice.

Making casual decision,
Needs some thought and revision;

Consider all sides,
Take your time in strides.............a poem by freepower 34.

Drejka's perception was delusional. McGlockton was not coming at him when he shot him. It's vengeance, not self defense .

Still don't get the law no matter how many times it has been explained ....got attention deficient syndrome or sumptin?

Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury.

Now all you have or anyone else who wants to believe drejka is guilty---- is to claim he was not in reasonable fear of his life. In order to do that you must ignore or reject all the reasons he was in fear of his life as any reasonable person would be.

What you and the jury have done is to use your perception of the video to say in essence that drejka should have had the same percepton as you---.outrageous to the extreme to think that.

Neither you nor the jury experienced the trauma that was inflicted on the defendant. Neither you nor the jury were placed in a position where you could have been killed. Neither you nor the jury had been threatened and violently slammed to the ground. Neither you nor the jury had only approx. 4-6 seconds to determine whether or not your life was in danger.

The jury took hours to decide that there was no reasonable danger....yet they expected someone that is dazed, disoriented and in some degree of shock to determine in 4-6 seconds what they took hours to determine? Get real.

"Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury."

Nutjob... it matters because Drejka's reason for being in fear was because he believed McGlockton was coming at him. Drejka even said he wouldn't have shit him had he not been coming at him.

Turns out, Drejka was hallucinating -- McGlockton wasn't coming at him.

A self-induced hallucination is not a reasonable fear to justify lethal force in self defense. Everyone gets that but you.

What you do not get is that statement from drejka was elicited from Drejka in a 6 hr. interrogation right after the event and drjjka was very tired still somewhat dazed not to mention confused and probably still in some degree of shock.....and it certainly wasnt self induced as you claim...obviously his mental state was the result of the thug viciously attacking him.

As explained earlier......it is the policy of police depts. not to interview a police officer involved in a deadly shooting directly after the event but to waiit a few days and let him get over the trauma and clear his head.

In his mental condition with his memory no doubt being jangled and not in the best form it is very possible that drejka in this confused state,--- may have mixed up how the event un-folded. Since he had been blindsided--- he probably did not have a firm grip on what even happened.

All he really knew was that he had been slammed to the ground and when he looked up he saw a black thug hovering over him and still advancing ---until he was able to get his pistol out--- and this scary memory is very likely what caused him to say he was coming after me.

Anyhow, those who have been in similar situations know the perp might stand back for a moment assess the situation and attack again.....if Mcglocken actually wanted to retreat he would have did like the guy behind him..........run to a place of safety. .

Yet, it is also possible the black guy did not believe drejka would actually pull the trigger...might have been looking for an opening to renew his attack.

In his drugged condition he was certainly not rational...and no one can predict what he might have done with any accuracy which has now been pointed out several times.

The drugs very possibly could have given him a sense of being invulnurable.


The best way to understand how the jury was in error is to realize that they were essentially spectators watching a video in slow motion in complete safety with the benefit of hindsight and hours to study the video and make up their minds.

Drejka on the other hand was not in a place of safety, had been violently assaulted, slammed to the ground and when he looked up he saw this black thug looming over him.

The jury simply could not place themselves in drejkas shoes....in fact did not even try to understand where he was coming from.

Again....they expected him to analyze the scenario the same way they did although he was operating in real life and real time....of which he had very little. He had to make the decision to shoot or not to shoot in a few short seconds whilst being traumatized and confused.

The jury made no leeway for his condition...which was inflicted on him by his attacker. They were in grave error.

After being indoctrinated by the prosecutor the jury obviously thought all they really had to do was to examine the video and make their determination....after all that is what the prosecutor told them to do over and over he--- hammered on that in a very loud voice--an exceedingly loud voice--watch the video, watch the video.....he kept repeating that like he was trying to hypnotize the jury....maybe he did.

At any rate the prosecutor controlled that timid jury and the ****** foreman's admission of just using the video to make the call proves he was in error of the law.

A terrible miscarriage of justice for sure.

"What you do not get is that statement from drejka was elicited from Drejka in a 6 hr. interrogation right after the event and drjjka was very tired still somewhat dazed not to mention confused and probably still in some degree of shock"

None of that matters. He said what he believed before getting advice from a lawyer on what to say and what not to say. And what he said was that he shot McGlockton because McGlockton was still advancing on him and that he would not have shot McGlockton otherwise.

Turns out, McGlockton wasn't advancing on him when he was shot. In fact, he was backing away.

Guilty as charged. See ya, Drejka. Have fun in prison!

 

[PredFan]

Moron thinks I'm a liberal.

Why? Were you making sense?

I always make sense.

 

[Yarddog]

You can argue till you're blue in the face whether or not McGlockton was retreating. What there is no question about is that he was not still advancing on Drejka when he was shot -- which is what Drejka thought and why he said he shot him. Now that we see he was totally wrong about that, his excuse for shooting McGlockton goes out the window.

Ridiculous....drejka was not lying....in his altered mental state due to being violently assaulted to raise up and see a black thug hovering over him....he was certainly within a reasonable fear of life....and thus impaired by the trauma of the threat, being slightly dazed, disoriented and in a mild state of shock did not percieve what some percieve when they watch the video in slow motion....drejka was in fear of his life and acted according.

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

No, after watching the video, It wasnt justified. the shooter was knocked to the ground after having words with a mans girlfriend. McGlockton wasnt continuing any attack. Sometimes fights happen, sometimes you get your ass handed to you, but In my book, thats not a right to kill someone. The shooter was either a coward or full of hate for some reason.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Nonsense.....you like the jury do not want to anaylyze all the possible reasons drejka could have been in fear of his life.

Try and put yourself in drejka's boots....which the jury should have also but did not.

All they did was to use their 'perception' of the video that indicated to them despite all the expert opinions that the thug was retreating.

To understand the likeliehood or possibility that drejka was in reasonable fear of his life...they would have had to 'put themselves in his position' and thus when you look at it from the defendants position....things change big time.

Again....they....the jury erroneously concluded that drejka should have had the same perspective as they.....which is outrageously stupid.

Drejka was not comfortably situated in some safe place watching a slow motion video of someone else being assaulted. He was that person....the jury simply did not consider all the things that were or could have been running through dreja's mind that made him believe that his life was in real danger.

Also they the jury were under no time constraints.....hey had hours to go over and over the video in slow motion. And they took several hrs. to come up with the verdict.

Drejka had from 4 to 6 seconds at most to make a life or death decision. Thus it was unreasonable for the jury to conclude that drejka in a few short seconds should have been able to conclusively determine his life was not in danger ....we still must consider the fact and it has been pointed out several times.....is it possible to accurately predict what someone with a history of violence and assault under the influence of drugs will do?

No matter what the thug could do or no matter what he may have actually done....it would not be relevant to the safety of the jury.....their lives were not on the line or endangered in any way or shape or form....yet they want to think that just because they perceived the perpetrator from stumbliing backwards for a few steps that the defendants life was no longer in danger.....that he the defendant should have taken the risk that the perp no longer posed a danger...whilst they the jury were never at any risk whatsoever.. Essentially saying the defendant was required to gamble with his life when no one could possibly predict with certainly what the black thug might actually have done next.

One thing we know for sure ...he was still close enough to the defendant to pose a threat.

As pointed previously and for several time already....the white dude that was hot on the heels of the black thug as he rushed out of the store....instantly retreated when he saw the weapon come out....you see him on the video running to hide behind behind some cars whilst the black thug remains facing his victim and in a position to launch another attack according to a expert witness who testified that his left foot pointed towards his victim is just one indicator he was not retreating.

Again the jury failed in its duty to adequately examine all the factors in this case....especially the reasons that drejka could have been in reasonable fear of his life.

The jury foreman has revealed now that it was almost a hung jury...that 2 jurors did believe the black thug did pose a continued danger to drejka....but unfortunately as is often the case they gave in eventually to the pressure of the majority....and it being a friday evening they all were eager to get home for the week-end and not be cooped up by the state.

Thus outrageouosly making it possible for the defendant to spend the rest of his life (most likely)

cooped up by the state.

When Seeking True Justice.

Making casual decision,
Needs some thought and revision;

Consider all sides,
Take your time in strides.............a poem by freepower 34.

Drejka's perception was delusional. McGlockton was not coming at him when he shot him. It's vengeance, not self defense .

Still don't get the law no matter how many times it has been explained ....got attention deficient syndrome or sumptin?

Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury.

Now all you have or anyone else who wants to believe drejka is guilty---- is to claim he was not in reasonable fear of his life. In order to do that you must ignore or reject all the reasons he was in fear of his life as any reasonable person would be.

What you and the jury have done is to use your perception of the video to say in essence that drejka should have had the same percepton as you---.outrageous to the extreme to think that.

Neither you nor the jury experienced the trauma that was inflicted on the defendant. Neither you nor the jury were placed in a position where you could have been killed. Neither you nor the jury had been threatened and violently slammed to the ground. Neither you nor the jury had only approx. 4-6 seconds to determine whether or not your life was in danger.

The jury took hours to decide that there was no reasonable danger....yet they expected someone that is dazed, disoriented and in some degree of shock to determine in 4-6 seconds what they took hours to determine? Get real.

"Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury."

Nutjob... it matters because Drejka's reason for being in fear was because he believed McGlockton was coming at him. Drejka even said he wouldn't have shit him had he not been coming at him.

Turns out, Drejka was hallucinating -- McGlockton wasn't coming at him.

A self-induced hallucination is not a reasonable fear to justify lethal force in self defense. Everyone gets that but you.

What you do not get is that statement from drejka was elicited from Drejka in a 6 hr. interrogation right after the event and drjjka was very tired still somewhat dazed not to mention confused and probably still in some degree of shock.....and it certainly wasnt self induced as you claim...obviously his mental state was the result of the thug viciously attacking him.

As explained earlier......it is the policy of police depts. not to interview a police officer involved in a deadly shooting directly after the event but to waiit a few days and let him get over the trauma and clear his head.

In his mental condition with his memory no doubt being jangled and not in the best form it is very possible that drejka in this confused state,--- may have mixed up how the event un-folded. Since he had been blindsided--- he probably did not have a firm grip on what even happened.

All he really knew was that he had been slammed to the ground and when he looked up he saw a black thug hovering over him and still advancing ---until he was able to get his pistol out--- and this scary memory is very likely what caused him to say he was coming after me.

Anyhow, those who have been in similar situations know the perp might stand back for a moment assess the situation and attack again.....if Mcglocken actually wanted to retreat he would have did like the guy behind him..........run to a place of safety. .

Yet, it is also possible the black guy did not believe drejka would actually pull the trigger...might have been looking for an opening to renew his attack.

In his drugged condition he was certainly not rational...and no one can predict what he might have done with any accuracy which has now been pointed out several times.

The drugs very possibly could have given him a sense of being invulnurable.


The best way to understand how the jury was in error is to realize that they were essentially spectators watching a video in slow motion in complete safety with the benefit of hindsight and hours to study the video and make up their minds.

Drejka on the other hand was not in a place of safety, had been violently assaulted, slammed to the ground and when he looked up he saw this black thug looming over him.

The jury simply could not place themselves in drejkas shoes....in fact did not even try to understand where he was coming from.

Again....they expected him to analyze the scenario the same way they did although he was operating in real life and real time....of which he had very little. He had to make the decision to shoot or not to shoot in a few short seconds whilst being traumatized and confused.

The jury made no leeway for his condition...which was inflicted on him by his attacker. They were in grave error.

After being indoctrinated by the prosecutor the jury obviously thought all they really had to do was to examine the video and make their determination....after all that is what the prosecutor told them to do over and over he--- hammered on that in a very loud voice--an exceedingly loud voice--watch the video, watch the video.....he kept repeating that like he was trying to hypnotize the jury....maybe he did.

At any rate the prosecutor controlled that timid jury and the ****** foreman's admission of just using the video to make the call proves he was in error of the law.

A terrible miscarriage of justice for sure.

"What you do not get is that statement from drejka was elicited from Drejka in a 6 hr. interrogation right after the event and drjjka was very tired still somewhat dazed not to mention confused and probably still in some degree of shock"

None of that matters. He said what he believed before getting advice from a lawyer on what to say and what not to say. And what he said was that he shot McGlockton because McGlockton was still advancing on him and that he would not have shot McGlockton otherwise.

Turns out, McGlockton wasn't advancing on him when he was shot. In fact, he was backing away.

Guilty as charged. See ya, Drejka. Have fun in prison!

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Nonsense.....you like the jury do not want to anaylyze all the possible reasons drejka could have been in fear of his life.

Try and put yourself in drejka's boots....which the jury should have also but did not.

All they did was to use their 'perception' of the video that indicated to them despite all the expert opinions that the thug was retreating.

To understand the likeliehood or possibility that drejka was in reasonable fear of his life...they would have had to 'put themselves in his position' and thus when you look at it from the defendants position....things change big time.

Again....they....the jury erroneously concluded that drejka should have had the same perspective as they.....which is outrageously stupid.

Drejka was not comfortably situated in some safe place watching a slow motion video of someone else being assaulted. He was that person....the jury simply did not consider all the things that were or could have been running through dreja's mind that made him believe that his life was in real danger.

Also they the jury were under no time constraints.....hey had hours to go over and over the video in slow motion. And they took several hrs. to come up with the verdict.

Drejka had from 4 to 6 seconds at most to make a life or death decision. Thus it was unreasonable for the jury to conclude that drejka in a few short seconds should have been able to conclusively determine his life was not in danger ....we still must consider the fact and it has been pointed out several times.....is it possible to accurately predict what someone with a history of violence and assault under the influence of drugs will do?

No matter what the thug could do or no matter what he may have actually done....it would not be relevant to the safety of the jury.....their lives were not on the line or endangered in any way or shape or form....yet they want to think that just because they perceived the perpetrator from stumbliing backwards for a few steps that the defendants life was no longer in danger.....that he the defendant should have taken the risk that the perp no longer posed a danger...whilst they the jury were never at any risk whatsoever.. Essentially saying the defendant was required to gamble with his life when no one could possibly predict with certainly what the black thug might actually have done next.

One thing we know for sure ...he was still close enough to the defendant to pose a threat.

As pointed previously and for several time already....the white dude that was hot on the heels of the black thug as he rushed out of the store....instantly retreated when he saw the weapon come out....you see him on the video running to hide behind behind some cars whilst the black thug remains facing his victim and in a position to launch another attack according to a expert witness who testified that his left foot pointed towards his victim is just one indicator he was not retreating.

Again the jury failed in its duty to adequately examine all the factors in this case....especially the reasons that drejka could have been in reasonable fear of his life.

The jury foreman has revealed now that it was almost a hung jury...that 2 jurors did believe the black thug did pose a continued danger to drejka....but unfortunately as is often the case they gave in eventually to the pressure of the majority....and it being a friday evening they all were eager to get home for the week-end and not be cooped up by the state.

Thus outrageouosly making it possible for the defendant to spend the rest of his life (most likely)

cooped up by the state.

When Seeking True Justice.

Making casual decision,
Needs some thought and revision;

Consider all sides,
Take your time in strides.............a poem by freepower 34.

Drejka's perception was delusional. McGlockton was not coming at him when he shot him. It's vengeance, not self defense .

Still don't get the law no matter how many times it has been explained ....got attention deficient syndrome or sumptin?

Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury.

Now all you have or anyone else who wants to believe drejka is guilty---- is to claim he was not in reasonable fear of his life. In order to do that you must ignore or reject all the reasons he was in fear of his life as any reasonable person would be.

What you and the jury have done is to use your perception of the video to say in essence that drejka should have had the same percepton as you---.outrageous to the extreme to think that.

Neither you nor the jury experienced the trauma that was inflicted on the defendant. Neither you nor the jury were placed in a position where you could have been killed. Neither you nor the jury had been threatened and violently slammed to the ground. Neither you nor the jury had only approx. 4-6 seconds to determine whether or not your life was in danger.

The jury took hours to decide that there was no reasonable danger....yet they expected someone that is dazed, disoriented and in some degree of shock to determine in 4-6 seconds what they took hours to determine? Get real.

"Under the law it does not matter whether or not the thug was actually coming at drejka when he shot ..what matters under the law of self-defense --he must be in reasonable fear of his life or serious bodily injury."

Nutjob... it matters because Drejka's reason for being in fear was because he believed McGlockton was coming at him. Drejka even said he wouldn't have shit him had he not been coming at him.

Turns out, Drejka was hallucinating -- McGlockton wasn't coming at him.

A self-induced hallucination is not a reasonable fear to justify lethal force in self defense. Everyone gets that but you.

What you do not get is that statement from drejka was elicited from Drejka in a 6 hr. interrogation right after the event and drjjka was very tired still somewhat dazed not to mention confused and probably still in some degree of shock.....and it certainly wasnt self induced as you claim...obviously his mental state was the result of the thug viciously attacking him.

As explained earlier......it is the policy of police depts. not to interview a police officer involved in a deadly shooting directly after the event but to waiit a few days and let him get over the trauma and clear his head.

In his mental condition with his memory no doubt being jangled and not in the best form it is very possible that drejka in this confused state,--- may have mixed up how the event un-folded. Since he had been blindsided--- he probably did not have a firm grip on what even happened.

All he really knew was that he had been slammed to the ground and when he looked up he saw a black thug hovering over him and still advancing ---until he was able to get his pistol out--- and this scary memory is very likely what caused him to say he was coming after me.

Anyhow, those who have been in similar situations know the perp might stand back for a moment assess the situation and attack again.....if Mcglocken actually wanted to retreat he would have did like the guy behind him..........run to a place of safety. .

Yet, it is also possible the black guy did not believe drejka would actually pull the trigger...might have been looking for an opening to renew his attack.

In his drugged condition he was certainly not rational...and no one can predict what he might have done with any accuracy which has now been pointed out several times.

The drugs very possibly could have given him a sense of being invulnurable.


The best way to understand how the jury was in error is to realize that they were essentially spectators watching a video in slow motion in complete safety with the benefit of hindsight and hours to study the video and make up their minds.

Drejka on the other hand was not in a place of safety, had been violently assaulted, slammed to the ground and when he looked up he saw this black thug looming over him.

The jury simply could not place themselves in drejkas shoes....in fact did not even try to understand where he was coming from.

Again....they expected him to analyze the scenario the same way they did although he was operating in real life and real time....of which he had very little. He had to make the decision to shoot or not to shoot in a few short seconds whilst being traumatized and confused.

The jury made no leeway for his condition...which was inflicted on him by his attacker. They were in grave error.

After being indoctrinated by the prosecutor the jury obviously thought all they really had to do was to examine the video and make their determination....after all that is what the prosecutor told them to do over and over he--- hammered on that in a very loud voice--an exceedingly loud voice--watch the video, watch the video.....he kept repeating that like he was trying to hypnotize the jury....maybe he did.

At any rate the prosecutor controlled that timid jury and the ****** foreman's admission of just using the video to make the call proves he was in error of the law.

A terrible miscarriage of justice for sure.

"What you do not get is that statement from drejka was elicited from Drejka in a 6 hr. interrogation right after the event and drjjka was very tired still somewhat dazed not to mention confused and probably still in some degree of shock"

None of that matters. He said what he believed before getting advice from a lawyer on what to say and what not to say. And what he said was that he shot McGlockton because McGlockton was still advancing on him and that he would not have shot McGlockton otherwise.

Turns out, McGlockton wasn't advancing on him when he was shot. In fact, he was backing away.

Guilty as charged. See ya, Drejka. Have fun in prison! [/QUOTE

Drejka waived his miranda rights making the same mistake a lot of innocent people make. They think that just because they are innocent they have nothing to fear.

Huge mistake and he did not consult any attorney before the interrogation.

If you do not understand how someone can get rattled, disoriented, truamatized and thus be in some degree of shock after such a violent attack then I suggest you try it sometime. Take a stroll down any street named MLK around midnight and report back to us if you are able.

It is highly unfair to expect someone who has been through all that drejka had been through ....... not even to mention that he had just killed someone..... to not be in a state of confusion and shock thus impaired in his ability to recollect every event in the whole mess in a completely accurate mannner.

That is why (also pointed out several times.)... the police dept. policy is to not interview any officer right after a deadly shooting....they wait a few days until his head is clear and the shock has subsided.

Have you ever killed anyone? Do you not have any idea how that can affect someone?

Thus when you combine all that drejka had been through it is highly outrageous to expect him to be hitting on all 8 cylinders.

Thus the jury by not considering what drejka had been through and the effect on him were in error. No doubt about that.

I knew there were a lot of stupid people on this board but I did not fully recognize the extent of it.

This thread has made it very clear to me....either there are lots of really stupid folks on here or they may just not have any analytical ability or much life experience.

And unfortunately the jury had the same problems....obviously.

Again....a huge miscarriage of justice. Undeniable

Also for the umpteenth time..............the jury took hours of watching a slow motion video and frame by frame to come to their conclusion that the black guy was retreating and thus no threat to drejka......yet the jury expected drejka to come to that same conclusion despite all he had suffered and when he in real life and time.....only had a couple of seconds to come to such a determination.

Not even to mention that he was already in fear of his life from the moment he was slammed down and looked up to see a black thug hovering over him.

Any person with just a tad of common sense would have been in reasonable fear of their life. This is irrefutable.

Even the lame ass feminized jury foreman with 0 understanding of the law said that Drejka was in the right to ;pull out his pistol....but that he should not have fired.....Oh Really? Of course his life was not on the line....thus easy for him to say that.

It is common knowledge that the police academies tell their cadets if you pull your weapon you better use it.

It is not uncommon for someone (usually a woman) to brandish a pistol to try and scare off an intruder or some kind of violent person but to only get it taken from them and used against them because they did not have what it takes to pull the trigger....lots of folks just do not have what it takes to kill someone...even to protect their own life. I think a lot of the posters on here attacking drejka may fit into that category.

In veitnam it was common practice for a combat unit to force a newby to fire into a dead viet cong body to acclimate them to firing at a fellow human being....too many newbys would freeze up when under attack and refuse to fire their weapons.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Ridiculous....drejka was not lying....in his altered mental state due to being violently assaulted to raise up and see a black thug hovering over him....he was certainly within a reasonable fear of life....and thus impaired by the trauma of the threat, being slightly dazed, disoriented and in a mild state of shock did not percieve what some percieve when they watch the video in slow motion....drejka was in fear of his life and acted according.

Putz, I didn't say he "lied." I said he was "wrong." He even admitted had McGlockton not been coming at him, there would have been no reason to shoot him.

He literally surrendered his own claim of self defense.

One has to remember drejka was interrogated a very short time after the incident....he waived his miranda rights because he was convinced he was innocent and thus had nothing to fear. A lot of innocent peeps have made that mistake ---not contacting a lawyer and have him present ...instead... talking on and on and then have their words spun and twisted to use against them later.

It is police dept policy not to interview aka interrogate a policeman who has been involved in a deadly shooting right after the event. They give him a few days to let him get over the trauma of the incident before the interview. But not drejka....they hauled him down to a interrogation room and grilled him for 6 hrs right after the event whilst he was still in state of shock.


Any sane, objective and intelligent person cannot reasonably conclude that drejka was not in fear of his life an in such a state --what he was focusing on was how to eliminate the threat to his life. He focused on getting his gun out and getting it ready to fire, focusing in on the thugs body mass and aiming his weapon and then pulling the trigger....he did not notice drejka had stumbled backward for a few steps...he was still close, still looking at him and thus undeniably a threat...within l2 ft is very close....the thug could have covered that distance in one quick leap been on top of drejka...snatched the weapon and then used it to kill drejka with his own gun...not like that it has not happened before and very well may have happened in this case if Drejka had not managed to get his weapon out and fire. A very reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

All those who want to condemn drejka make the same mistake....with hindsight and after watching the video in slow motion it is their perception that the thug is in retreat...certainly not according to some experts....but it is their perception of the video not being versed in body language and its significance that contributes to their wrongful perception.


Also they lack a good understanding of the law of self defense in Florida....very few have ever read it...even though it is posted on here. People are to
lazy to do the legal research.

Under the law of self defense it is the 'perception of the defendant that is critical....aka was he in reasonable fear of his life....and the reasons he should have been in fear of his life have been listed on here....unfortunately the jury was so focused on their interpetation of the video they did not give serious consideration to the perception and state of mind of the defendant.

Thus they decided to send a innocent man to jail....quite tragic.

The perception of the shooter is critical. And Drejka's perception was horribly skewed. Poor perception is not a reasonable excuse for self defense.

:
That is your view using hindsight and a slow motion video...neither of which was available to the man with his life hanging in the balance.

Anyhow it is not relevant that his perception may have been skewed.

According to the law on self defense which you obviously do not understand....the most important and the critical question being in order to follow the law being.... was drejka in reasonable fear of his life'?

Let us do a quick review....drejka in the process of legally checking out whether or not a vehicle was authorized to park in a handcap spot was verbally assaulted and threatened by the black woman.

Then 'her man' rushed out of the store with no clue as to what was going on and not even to mention in a state of impairment due to 2 illegal drugs in his system, violently assaulted drejka.

No rational reason why he would do that. Even the foreman of the jury admitted that was not needed. Aka no legal or rational reason for the black thug to assault drejka.

Thus the question...why? Why did he assault drejka?

Possible motive....he was high on drugs and had a pre-disposition and a history of violence and assault...thus his violent nature and the effects of the drugs triggered him to attack a white man who dared argue with his wife.

The race of drejka being a critical factor here no doubt--the thug would never have attacked a fellow black without trying to figure out what was going down.

Thus his attack very likely being of a racist nature--- if he had lived he could have been charged with a hate crime.

Immediately upon being assaulted drejka should have been and was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily harm. Just plain common sense. As pointed out over and over we have all seen some of the videos that circulate on the internet showing black thugs knocking down and then beating their victim to death and or kicking him to death.

Most likely drjeka had seen such videos which if he had would even add to his legitimate and reasonable perception that he was in fear of his life or of grievious bodily injury.....which justifies the use of lethal defense under the florida law on self defense.

Now of course the liberals believe that lethal force should never be used by whites against blacks....that is just their hypocritical nature. You do not see them getting upset over all the mayhem in Chicago. They only get concerned when a white guy kills one of their darlin lil darkies.

Anyhow after the violent assault drejka looks up and sees the black thug hovering over him...from that moment his concentration and motivation was to do what he could to insure his life....getting his weapon out, clicking the safety off, raising the weapon and due to his injured right arm he had to use his left hand to support the weapon--then he had to sight the weapon on the center of the thugs body mass...which is what drejka was looking at...not looking at the thugs feet, not even noticing the thug had taken a few halting backward steps...his concentration was on the center mass of the thug ...and as soon as he was able he pulled the trigger. Certainly a reasonable thing to do for anyone interested in preserving their life.

No, after watching the video, It wasnt justified. the shooter was knocked to the ground after having words with a mans girlfriend. McGlockton wasnt continuing any attack. Sometimes fights happen, sometimes you get your ass handed to you, but In my book, thats not a right to kill someone. The shooter was either a coward or full of hate for some reason.

Even if your stupid statement was correct. You would still be wrong.

Under the law someone can be a coward and full of hate and still be able to use lethal force to defend their life if they are in reasonable fear of their life.

There was more than enough evidence for a competent jury to have understood drejka was in fact...in reasonable fear of his life or great bodily injury.