Convenient store stand-your-ground shooter charged

[TheGreenHornet]

Here is an example of what could have happened to drejka if he had not killed the thug.................Baltimore officer was killed with his own gun, police say - CNN

 

[Faun]

Here is an example of what could have happened to drejka if he had not killed the thug.................Baltimore officer was killed with his own gun, police say - CNN

Your delusions are noted and dismissed. Meanwhile, the real thug of this crime is now facing 30 years in prison.

Good riddance. The streets will now be safer without him.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Here is an example of what could have happened to drejka if he had not killed the thug.................Baltimore officer was killed with his own gun, police say - CNN

Your delusions are noted and dismissed. Meanwhile, the real thug of this crime is now facing 30 years in prison.

Good riddance. The streets will now be safer without him.

This miscarriage of justice will embolden black thugs to do even more hordrendous things than they are already doing......as usual you got it ass backwards.

This photo supports what I have said....in it you see the white guy running for cover...but McGlocklen the black thug standing defiantly clearly poised for attack.

He certainly was not retreating.

If he saw some weakness in drejka he very likely may have rushed and overwhelmed him taking his gun and killing him with it...note the very short distance between them.

 

[Faun]

Here is an example of what could have happened to drejka if he had not killed the thug.................Baltimore officer was killed with his own gun, police say - CNN

Your delusions are noted and dismissed. Meanwhile, the real thug of this crime is now facing 30 years in prison.

Good riddance. The streets will now be safer without him.

This miscarriage of justice will embolden black thugs to do even more hordrendous things than they are already doing......as usual you got it ass backwards.

This photo supports what I have said....in it you see the white guy running for cover...but McGlocklen the black thug standing defiantly clearly poised for attack.

He certainly was not retreating.

If he saw some weakness in drejka he very likely may have rushed and overwhelmed him taking his gun and killing him with it...note the very short distance between them.

Liar.

He was backing up and turning away, not "standing there definently" nor poising for an attack. And of that "very short distance" you claim, it was actually measured at 12 feet.

That you have to lie about the events which took place that day reveals why your assessment is wrong and why the jury was right.

And now with that thug going away for as much as 30 years, the streets are safer now. Of course, it won't be so safe for Drejka who will be somebody's bitch in prison.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Expert witness in drejka testified that based on analysis of mcglockens body language he was not retreating.

Look at his left foot in the picture pointing towards McGlocken ...evidence according to the witness that he was not in retreat mode. Then look at the white guy who followed mc glocken out of the store and was right behind him but when drejka pulled out his weapon he took off running...actual retreat...and hid behind the cars.

However, McGlocken the black dude remained standing there very close to drejka and yes l2 ft. is close. There have been many cases of someone bradishing a weapon trying to scare off an intruder or attacker and the attacker was able to rush the person with the gun ....take it away and use it to kill the person with his own gun....the black thug in this case from the short distance of l2 ft. could have been on top of drejka in a flash...perhaps drejka could have got off a shot but he could have missed trying to hit a moving target.....irregardless it is very possible and certainly reasonable the thug was still a threat to drejka and thus drejka was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

I have seen a video of a black dude who had broken into a home with a woman inside...she saw him coming grabbed her gun and ordered him to halt at a distance of about 30 ft. instead of halting he rushed her...she managed to get off a couple of shots but missed....he then took her gun and beat her to death with it.

Thugs get very pissed off when someone pulls a gun on them.

If the thug truly meant to retreat he should have run back into the store before he got shot not afterwards.

Now the morons on here and on the jury think they could predict that the black thug was going to retreat...........first of all not understanding that the black guy was hyped up on drugs and had a violent criminal history of assault. The defense was not allowed to expose that in the trial in order to protect the black guy.

Again....impossible to predict with any accuracy what a black with a history of violence and high on drugs will do. He certainly did not run away when he saw the gun....he was not a rational person. Not even to mention no rational person will rush out of a store and attack someone for merely arguing with his wife.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Time and again we have seen black thugs get let off easy. The liberal msm media always takes the tack that blacks are innocent victims of whites. That police are racist and go out hunting black people to kill. That no one should shoot a unarmed black man no matter what he is doing....despite all the cases of blacks beating white people to death with their fists and or feet.

We also see black sports figures get away with outrageous crimes based on their celebrity status. Such as in the flollowing case..

WATCH: Footage Shows Former NBA Player Mateen Cleaves Dragging Half-Naked Woman to His Motel Room | Breitbart

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Expert witness in drejka testified that based on analysis of mcglockens body language he was not retreating.

Look at his left foot in the picture pointing towards McGlocken ...evidence according to the witness that he was not in retreat mode. Then look at the white guy who followed mc glocken out of the store and was right behind him but when drejka pulled out his weapon he took off running...actual retreat...and hid behind the cars.

However, McGlocken the black dude remained standing there very close to drejka and yes l2 ft. is close. There have been many cases of someone bradishing a weapon trying to scare off an intruder or attacker and the attacker was able to rush the person with the gun ....take it away and use it to kill the person with his own gun....the black thug in this case from the short distance of l2 ft. could have been on top of drejka in a flash...perhaps drejka could have got off a shot but he could have missed trying to hit a moving target.....irregardless it is very possible and certainly reasonable the thug was still a threat to drejka and thus drejka was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

I have seen a video of a black dude who had broken into a home with a woman inside...she saw him coming grabbed her gun and ordered him to halt at a distance of about 30 ft. instead of halting he rushed her...she managed to get off a couple of shots but missed....he then took her gun and beat her to death with it.

Thugs get very pissed off when someone pulls a gun on them.

If the thug truly meant to retreat he should have run back into the store before he got shot not afterwards.

Now the morons on here and on the jury think they could predict that the black thug was going to retreat...........first of all not understanding that the black guy was hyped up on drugs and had a violent criminal history of assault. The defense was not allowed to expose that in the trial in order to protect the black guy.

Again....impossible to predict with any accuracy what a black with a history of violence and high on drugs will do. He certainly did not run away when he saw the gun....he was not a rational person. Not even to mention no rational person will rush out of a store and attack someone for merely arguing with his wife.

The defense lawyers are appealing the outrageous decision of this incompetent jury.

Rightully so.

Hopefully at a higher level we will get some legally competent people to review this case.

 

[Synthaholic]

Moron thinks I'm a liberal.

Why? Were you making sense?

 

[TheGreenHornet]

The all important evaluation of Drejka's perception that he was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

As I have said the jury was in error because they did not understand the importance of evaluating Drejka's 'perception' of his being in imminent danger of his life.

As the foreman of the jury has publickly stated now....the deciding factor for him was 'his' perception of the video...this was the main error of the jury...they based their decision to convict on how they perceived the video and not drejkas perception of being in reasonable fear of his life.


Thus there was a terrible miscarriage of justice.


In evaluating whether Drejka reasonably perceived an imminent deadly force threat from McGlockton at the time he fired the shot, it’s important to differentiate between facts and claims that are relevant to that question, and those that are not.

To start, even the video itself is not decisive on the question of whether Drejka was not seeing what the video camera was seeing, if only because of differences in position and angle. Also, the camera had not just been thrown violently to the ground, a physical experience that can affect perception. The reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of a threat is properly judged in the context of a person in his circumstances—that is, was it the reasonable perception of a person who had just been violently thrown to the ground?

It doesn’t’ matter if McGlockton actually presented a deadly force threat to Drejka. Rather, it only matters if Drejka reasonably perceived such a threat.

The prosecution made much of the fact that McGlockton was, in effect, killed for trying to protect his girlfriend and children. Really, it doesn’t matter why McGlockton shoved Drejka. It is irrelevant whether McGlockton’s motivation for shoving Drejka was good (e.g., he was protecting his girlfriend and children) or bad (e.g., he was going to teach this obnoxious stranger a lesson he wouldn’t soon forget!), so long as McGlockton’s use of force was unlawful (which it clearly was). All that matters is whether Drejka could reasonably have perceived that he remained in imminent danger of a deadly force attack at the moment he fired the shot.

The video clearly shows that it was McGlockton who was the initial physical aggressor.

I’ve already mentioned that the reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of the threat must be assessed in the context of a person in his circumstances, specifically that of a person who has just been violently thrown to the ground. If being subject to that physical attack led him to make imperfect use-of-force decisions, the responsibility for those errors is not on Drejka, but on McGlockton who subjected Drejka to that force.

 

[KissMy]

Wannabe cop admits he is an armed vigilante, He takes care of it because police never get there in time & they get away. Drejka says he takes precautions by carrying firearm when confronting someone he feels is breaking the law!

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Wannabe cop admits he is an armed vigilante, He takes care of it because police never get there in time & they get away. Drejka says he takes precautions by carrying firearm when confronting someone he feels is breaking the law!

He actually admitted to that? If so he's admitting that he's getting into confrontations that he otherwise would not if he's not armed, that the gun gives him the confidence to confront people whom he has no lawful authority to confront since he's not law enforcement.

I suspected all along that this was his mindset along with George Zimmerman's. That's why they feel they have the right to confront black people - apparently because if the situation that they instigated gets out of hand, they then can feign self-defense and shoot their victim dead and (hopefully) get away with it.

 

[Faun]

The all important evaluation of Drejka's perception that he was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

As I have said the jury was in error because they did not understand the importance of evaluating Drejka's 'perception' of his being in imminent danger of his life.

As the foreman of the jury has publickly stated now....the deciding factor for him was 'his' perception of the video...this was the main error of the jury...they based their decision to convict on how they perceived the video and not drejkas perception of being in reasonable fear of his life.


Thus there was a terrible miscarriage of justice.


In evaluating whether Drejka reasonably perceived an imminent deadly force threat from McGlockton at the time he fired the shot, it’s important to differentiate between facts and claims that are relevant to that question, and those that are not.

To start, even the video itself is not decisive on the question of whether Drejka was not seeing what the video camera was seeing, if only because of differences in position and angle. Also, the camera had not just been thrown violently to the ground, a physical experience that can affect perception. The reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of a threat is properly judged in the context of a person in his circumstances—that is, was it the reasonable perception of a person who had just been violently thrown to the ground?

It doesn’t’ matter if McGlockton actually presented a deadly force threat to Drejka. Rather, it only matters if Drejka reasonably perceived such a threat.

The prosecution made much of the fact that McGlockton was, in effect, killed for trying to protect his girlfriend and children. Really, it doesn’t matter why McGlockton shoved Drejka. It is irrelevant whether McGlockton’s motivation for shoving Drejka was good (e.g., he was protecting his girlfriend and children) or bad (e.g., he was going to teach this obnoxious stranger a lesson he wouldn’t soon forget!), so long as McGlockton’s use of force was unlawful (which it clearly was). All that matters is whether Drejka could reasonably have perceived that he remained in imminent danger of a deadly force attack at the moment he fired the shot.

The video clearly shows that it was McGlockton who was the initial physical aggressor.

I’ve already mentioned that the reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of the threat must be assessed in the context of a person in his circumstances, specifically that of a person who has just been violently thrown to the ground. If being subject to that physical attack led him to make imperfect use-of-force decisions, the responsibility for those errors is not on Drejka, but on McGlockton who subjected Drejka to that force.

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.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Oh heavens betsy he wanted to be a cop....where have we heard that before?

Anyhow ridiculous claim...he explained he just had a pet peeve about stooopids parking in handicap spots because he had a family member that was handicapped---perfectly understandable and legal for him to inform peeps they should not be parking in places reserved for the handicapped. As has been pointed out lots of folks are concerned about that problem and it is a huge problem....too many with no respect for the law or the handicapped.

Several jurors were disqualified when they under questioning revealed they too had a concern about the situation with handicapped parking.

Also lots of people in Florida carry concealed weapons....it is legal doofus.

When a couple of thugs like trayvon and Mcglocklen get the suprise of their life and get dispatched to taking a dirt nap the world is a better place. Drejka did Clearwater a big favor but due to a incompetent jury will have to pay a big price. This is often the case with heroes---sacrifice their life in order to help others.

We need more like that. Unfortunately in todays political climate he cannot be awarded a medal....I am sure the moral majority will venerate him...as we should.

Now if you dared to tell the truth you would explain this incident gets your liberal panties in a wad simply because one of your darlin darkies was dispatched by a white guy....who though twice his assailants age and with health issues the liberals claim he should have just used his fists to fight off the black thug.

It is a gurantee if the roles had been reversed and drejka was a black guy shooting a white guy none of you peeps would be upset. Likewise, there would have been no political pressure brought to bear on the local officials to indict drejka after he had already been investigated and cleared by the Clearwater police.

Terrible miscarrige of justice which will hopefully be rectified by the appeal process.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

The all important evaluation of Drejka's perception that he was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

As I have said the jury was in error because they did not understand the importance of evaluating Drejka's 'perception' of his being in imminent danger of his life.

As the foreman of the jury has publickly stated now....the deciding factor for him was 'his' perception of the video...this was the main error of the jury...they based their decision to convict on how they perceived the video and not drejkas perception of being in reasonable fear of his life.


Thus there was a terrible miscarriage of justice.


In evaluating whether Drejka reasonably perceived an imminent deadly force threat from McGlockton at the time he fired the shot, it’s important to differentiate between facts and claims that are relevant to that question, and those that are not.

To start, even the video itself is not decisive on the question of whether Drejka was not seeing what the video camera was seeing, if only because of differences in position and angle. Also, the camera had not just been thrown violently to the ground, a physical experience that can affect perception. The reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of a threat is properly judged in the context of a person in his circumstances—that is, was it the reasonable perception of a person who had just been violently thrown to the ground?

It doesn’t’ matter if McGlockton actually presented a deadly force threat to Drejka. Rather, it only matters if Drejka reasonably perceived such a threat.

The prosecution made much of the fact that McGlockton was, in effect, killed for trying to protect his girlfriend and children. Really, it doesn’t matter why McGlockton shoved Drejka. It is irrelevant whether McGlockton’s motivation for shoving Drejka was good (e.g., he was protecting his girlfriend and children) or bad (e.g., he was going to teach this obnoxious stranger a lesson he wouldn’t soon forget!), so long as McGlockton’s use of force was unlawful (which it clearly was). All that matters is whether Drejka could reasonably have perceived that he remained in imminent danger of a deadly force attack at the moment he fired the shot.

The video clearly shows that it was McGlockton who was the initial physical aggressor.

I’ve already mentioned that the reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of the threat must be assessed in the context of a person in his circumstances, specifically that of a person who has just been violently thrown to the ground. If being subject to that physical attack led him to make imperfect use-of-force decisions, the responsibility for those errors is not on Drejka, but on McGlockton who subjected Drejka to that force.

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.

 

[skookerasbil]

Nex thing ya know, anyone that shoves or pushes someone else will be shot. Its bullshit. Dude was a pussy. Dude shoved him and he SHOT HIM. IF the guy was making a move to hurt him further..possibly self defense would come into play. But the guy didn't. He pushed, pansy ass fell down, pulled his gun when dude was backing up, and SHOT HIM.
Fucker needs to be in jail.

Shit dude....hope to God you never have a family.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

The majority think Drejka acted according to the law....but the state somehow manages to find 6 people who have a minority view. What are the odds on that....the jury pool may have been manipulated by officials under pressure to get a conviction.

Something rotten in Denmark for sure.

 

[Faun]

The all important evaluation of Drejka's perception that he was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

As I have said the jury was in error because they did not understand the importance of evaluating Drejka's 'perception' of his being in imminent danger of his life.

As the foreman of the jury has publickly stated now....the deciding factor for him was 'his' perception of the video...this was the main error of the jury...they based their decision to convict on how they perceived the video and not drejkas perception of being in reasonable fear of his life.


Thus there was a terrible miscarriage of justice.


In evaluating whether Drejka reasonably perceived an imminent deadly force threat from McGlockton at the time he fired the shot, it’s important to differentiate between facts and claims that are relevant to that question, and those that are not.

To start, even the video itself is not decisive on the question of whether Drejka was not seeing what the video camera was seeing, if only because of differences in position and angle. Also, the camera had not just been thrown violently to the ground, a physical experience that can affect perception. The reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of a threat is properly judged in the context of a person in his circumstances—that is, was it the reasonable perception of a person who had just been violently thrown to the ground?

It doesn’t’ matter if McGlockton actually presented a deadly force threat to Drejka. Rather, it only matters if Drejka reasonably perceived such a threat.

The prosecution made much of the fact that McGlockton was, in effect, killed for trying to protect his girlfriend and children. Really, it doesn’t matter why McGlockton shoved Drejka. It is irrelevant whether McGlockton’s motivation for shoving Drejka was good (e.g., he was protecting his girlfriend and children) or bad (e.g., he was going to teach this obnoxious stranger a lesson he wouldn’t soon forget!), so long as McGlockton’s use of force was unlawful (which it clearly was). All that matters is whether Drejka could reasonably have perceived that he remained in imminent danger of a deadly force attack at the moment he fired the shot.

The video clearly shows that it was McGlockton who was the initial physical aggressor.

I’ve already mentioned that the reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of the threat must be assessed in the context of a person in his circumstances, specifically that of a person who has just been violently thrown to the ground. If being subject to that physical attack led him to make imperfect use-of-force decisions, the responsibility for those errors is not on Drejka, but on McGlockton who subjected Drejka to that force.

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.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

The all important evaluation of Drejka's perception that he was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

As I have said the jury was in error because they did not understand the importance of evaluating Drejka's 'perception' of his being in imminent danger of his life.

As the foreman of the jury has publickly stated now....the deciding factor for him was 'his' perception of the video...this was the main error of the jury...they based their decision to convict on how they perceived the video and not drejkas perception of being in reasonable fear of his life.


Thus there was a terrible miscarriage of justice.


In evaluating whether Drejka reasonably perceived an imminent deadly force threat from McGlockton at the time he fired the shot, it’s important to differentiate between facts and claims that are relevant to that question, and those that are not.

To start, even the video itself is not decisive on the question of whether Drejka was not seeing what the video camera was seeing, if only because of differences in position and angle. Also, the camera had not just been thrown violently to the ground, a physical experience that can affect perception. The reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of a threat is properly judged in the context of a person in his circumstances—that is, was it the reasonable perception of a person who had just been violently thrown to the ground?

It doesn’t’ matter if McGlockton actually presented a deadly force threat to Drejka. Rather, it only matters if Drejka reasonably perceived such a threat.

The prosecution made much of the fact that McGlockton was, in effect, killed for trying to protect his girlfriend and children. Really, it doesn’t matter why McGlockton shoved Drejka. It is irrelevant whether McGlockton’s motivation for shoving Drejka was good (e.g., he was protecting his girlfriend and children) or bad (e.g., he was going to teach this obnoxious stranger a lesson he wouldn’t soon forget!), so long as McGlockton’s use of force was unlawful (which it clearly was). All that matters is whether Drejka could reasonably have perceived that he remained in imminent danger of a deadly force attack at the moment he fired the shot.

The video clearly shows that it was McGlockton who was the initial physical aggressor.

I’ve already mentioned that the reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of the threat must be assessed in the context of a person in his circumstances, specifically that of a person who has just been violently thrown to the ground. If being subject to that physical attack led him to make imperfect use-of-force decisions, the responsibility for those errors is not on Drejka, but on McGlockton who subjected Drejka to that force.

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 accordingly.

 

[Faun]

The all important evaluation of Drejka's perception that he was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

As I have said the jury was in error because they did not understand the importance of evaluating Drejka's 'perception' of his being in imminent danger of his life.

As the foreman of the jury has publickly stated now....the deciding factor for him was 'his' perception of the video...this was the main error of the jury...they based their decision to convict on how they perceived the video and not drejkas perception of being in reasonable fear of his life.


Thus there was a terrible miscarriage of justice.


In evaluating whether Drejka reasonably perceived an imminent deadly force threat from McGlockton at the time he fired the shot, it’s important to differentiate between facts and claims that are relevant to that question, and those that are not.

To start, even the video itself is not decisive on the question of whether Drejka was not seeing what the video camera was seeing, if only because of differences in position and angle. Also, the camera had not just been thrown violently to the ground, a physical experience that can affect perception. The reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of a threat is properly judged in the context of a person in his circumstances—that is, was it the reasonable perception of a person who had just been violently thrown to the ground?

It doesn’t’ matter if McGlockton actually presented a deadly force threat to Drejka. Rather, it only matters if Drejka reasonably perceived such a threat.

The prosecution made much of the fact that McGlockton was, in effect, killed for trying to protect his girlfriend and children. Really, it doesn’t matter why McGlockton shoved Drejka. It is irrelevant whether McGlockton’s motivation for shoving Drejka was good (e.g., he was protecting his girlfriend and children) or bad (e.g., he was going to teach this obnoxious stranger a lesson he wouldn’t soon forget!), so long as McGlockton’s use of force was unlawful (which it clearly was). All that matters is whether Drejka could reasonably have perceived that he remained in imminent danger of a deadly force attack at the moment he fired the shot.

The video clearly shows that it was McGlockton who was the initial physical aggressor.

I’ve already mentioned that the reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of the threat must be assessed in the context of a person in his circumstances, specifically that of a person who has just been violently thrown to the ground. If being subject to that physical attack led him to make imperfect use-of-force decisions, the responsibility for those errors is not on Drejka, but on McGlockton who subjected Drejka to that force.

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.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

The all important evaluation of Drejka's perception that he was in reasonable fear of his life or of great bodily harm.

As I have said the jury was in error because they did not understand the importance of evaluating Drejka's 'perception' of his being in imminent danger of his life.

As the foreman of the jury has publickly stated now....the deciding factor for him was 'his' perception of the video...this was the main error of the jury...they based their decision to convict on how they perceived the video and not drejkas perception of being in reasonable fear of his life.


Thus there was a terrible miscarriage of justice.


In evaluating whether Drejka reasonably perceived an imminent deadly force threat from McGlockton at the time he fired the shot, it’s important to differentiate between facts and claims that are relevant to that question, and those that are not.

To start, even the video itself is not decisive on the question of whether Drejka was not seeing what the video camera was seeing, if only because of differences in position and angle. Also, the camera had not just been thrown violently to the ground, a physical experience that can affect perception. The reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of a threat is properly judged in the context of a person in his circumstances—that is, was it the reasonable perception of a person who had just been violently thrown to the ground?

It doesn’t’ matter if McGlockton actually presented a deadly force threat to Drejka. Rather, it only matters if Drejka reasonably perceived such a threat.

The prosecution made much of the fact that McGlockton was, in effect, killed for trying to protect his girlfriend and children. Really, it doesn’t matter why McGlockton shoved Drejka. It is irrelevant whether McGlockton’s motivation for shoving Drejka was good (e.g., he was protecting his girlfriend and children) or bad (e.g., he was going to teach this obnoxious stranger a lesson he wouldn’t soon forget!), so long as McGlockton’s use of force was unlawful (which it clearly was). All that matters is whether Drejka could reasonably have perceived that he remained in imminent danger of a deadly force attack at the moment he fired the shot.

The video clearly shows that it was McGlockton who was the initial physical aggressor.

I’ve already mentioned that the reasonableness of Drejka’s perception of the threat must be assessed in the context of a person in his circumstances, specifically that of a person who has just been violently thrown to the ground. If being subject to that physical attack led him to make imperfect use-of-force decisions, the responsibility for those errors is not on Drejka, but on McGlockton who subjected Drejka to that force.

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.