Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

looked like he was. The parking lot was empty. After he drew the weapon he was never in any danger. In fact I'm not sure he was ever in any real danger.

It will be interesting to see if charges are eventually filed against Drejka.  I would certainly like to see more details about the incident than what is available to the public at this time. Since there seems to be a disinterested bystander that witnessed some of the altercation, we may get a better picture of what transpired, particularly what was said between the two parties. I really don't see a reason why Drejka felt a need to shoot. McGlockton had already taken four steps bawkward before being shot. However, I also do not see any reason why McGlockton felt a need to push Drejka down, which obviously would be provoking some sort of response from Drejka.

With the stand your ground laws would it also have been justified for anyone to shoot Drejka the moment he draws his weapon in order to protect the victim?
Seems like the most ridiculous law which has essentially created this exact situation.

(08-03-2018, 04:50 PM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]looked like he was.  The parking lot was empty. After he drew the weapon he was never in any danger. In fact I'm not sure he was ever in any real danger.

Yeah, you're right.  Being physically assaulted is hardly considered a threat.

(08-03-2018, 05:54 PM)FBT Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-03-2018, 04:50 PM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]looked like he was.  The parking lot was empty. After he drew the weapon he was never in any danger. In fact I'm not sure he was ever in any real danger.

Yeah, you're right.  Being physically assaulted is hardly considered a threat.

Wow a push really horrible assault that! Good thing for Ramsey that AJ Green wasn't carrying hey.

(08-03-2018, 04:50 PM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]looked like he was.  The parking lot was empty. After he drew the weapon he was never in any danger. In fact I'm not sure he was ever in any real danger.

(08-03-2018, 06:15 PM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]Wow a push really horrible assault that! Good thing for Ramsey that AJ Green wasn't carrying hey.

He was knocked to the ground. And it wasn't a simple push, either. Dude's feet almost left the ground.

Besides, he advanced on him before Drejka pulled the gun. He had every intention to continue attacking Drejka. The law only requires a reasonable person to believe they'll be seriously injured. If he thinks he's going to get his [BLEEP] handed to him, then he has reason to believe it. You can diminish what happened, but it only takes a moment to go from being pushed to the ground to being kicked in the head.

I do feel you would be saying the opposite if the races were reversed unfortunately.

(08-03-2018, 06:46 PM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]I do feel you would be saying the opposite if the races were reversed unfortunately.

I don't care what you feel. If you're so hung up on race, that's your problem not mine.

(08-03-2018, 06:35 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-03-2018, 04:50 PM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]looked like he was.  The parking lot was empty. After he drew the weapon he was never in any danger. In fact I'm not sure he was ever in any real danger.

(08-03-2018, 06:15 PM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]Wow a push really horrible assault that! Good thing for Ramsey that AJ Green wasn't carrying hey.

He was knocked to the ground. And it wasn't a simple push, either. Dude's feet almost left the ground.

Besides, he advanced on him before Drejka pulled the gun. He had every intention to continue attacking Drejka. The law only requires a reasonable person to believe they'll be seriously injured. If he thinks he's going to get his [BLEEP] handed to him, then he has reason to believe it. You can diminish what happened, but it only takes a moment to go from being pushed to the ground to being kicked in the head.

That's half of it. But the other half is that the person must reasonably believe that the use or threat of the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. Since the attacker had already taken four steps back due to the threat of deadly force (pulling the gun), is it reasonable to think that deadly force was then necessary? Maybe, maybe not. I would love to have the courts decide.
 
Drejka's past incidents tell me he is a hothead looking for confrontation.

(08-09-2018, 12:29 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-03-2018, 06:35 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]He was knocked to the ground. And it wasn't a simple push, either. Dude's feet almost left the ground.

Besides, he advanced on him before Drejka pulled the gun. He had every intention to continue attacking Drejka. The law only requires a reasonable person to believe they'll be seriously injured. If he thinks he's going to get his [BLEEP] handed to him, then he has reason to believe it. You can diminish what happened, but it only takes a moment to go from being pushed to the ground to being kicked in the head.

That's half of it. But the other half is that the person must reasonably believe that the use or threat of the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. Since the attacker had already taken four steps back due to the threat of deadly force (pulling the gun), is it reasonable to think that deadly force was then necessary? Maybe, maybe not. I would love to have the courts decide.
 
Drejka's past incidents tell me he is a hothead looking for confrontation.

Of course it has to be necessary, but that's the argument we're having here. 

It looks like 2 or 3 to me and he then he stops. That distance is more than enough to advance and attack Drejka again. There's study after study that shows that the attacker almost always has the advantage. In this case, McGlockton steps back a couple steps and stops. After being attacked by McGlokton, seeing McGlokton continue toward Drejka as though he wanted to continue attacking, I find it reasonable to assume McGlokton still wants to attack him no matter if it's 2 or 3 steps away from Drejka.

Can we use McGlockton's history against him too?

(08-09-2018, 12:45 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-09-2018, 12:29 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]That's half of it. But the other half is that the person must reasonably believe that the use or threat of the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. Since the attacker had already taken four steps back due to the threat of deadly force (pulling the gun), is it reasonable to think that deadly force was then necessary? Maybe, maybe not. I would love to have the courts decide.
 
Drejka's past incidents tell me he is a hothead looking for confrontation.

Of course it has to be necessary, but that's the argument we're having here. 

It looks like 2 or 3 to me and he then he stops. That distance is more than enough to advance and attack Drejka again. There's study after study that shows that the attacker almost always has the advantage. In this case, McGlockton steps back a couple steps and stops. After being attacked by McGlokton, seeing McGlokton continue toward Drejka as though he wanted to continue attacking, I find it reasonable to assume McGlokton still wants to attack him no matter if it's 2 or 3 steps away from Drejka.

Can we use McGlockton's history against him too?

I think it's reasonable to assume that McGlockton no longer wants to attack him once there is a pistol pointing at him. But again, I would like the courts to determine that, after evidence from both sides is presented at trial.

Yes, McGlockton's history should absolutely be used against him, if pertinent.

(08-09-2018, 12:45 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-09-2018, 12:29 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]That's half of it. But the other half is that the person must reasonably believe that the use or threat of the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. Since the attacker had already taken four steps back due to the threat of deadly force (pulling the gun), is it reasonable to think that deadly force was then necessary? Maybe, maybe not. I would love to have the courts decide.
 
Drejka's past incidents tell me he is a hothead looking for confrontation.

Of course it has to be necessary, but that's the argument we're having here. 

It looks like 2 or 3 to me and he then he stops. That distance is more than enough to advance and attack Drejka again. There's study after study that shows that the attacker almost always has the advantage. In this case, McGlockton steps back a couple steps and stops. After being attacked by McGlokton, seeing McGlokton continue toward Drejka as though he wanted to continue attacking, I find it reasonable to assume McGlokton still wants to attack him no matter if it's 2 or 3 steps away from Drejka.

Can we use McGlockton's history against him too?

See this link for a video that captures a little more of the shooting. It looks like most other news videos (including the OP) stop just short of the actual shot being fired, perhaps due to squeamishness. McGlockton takes what appears to be four steps back and then an additional step while turning away from Drejka. I do not see McGlockton stopping at any point.

If the first link I gave you has loading issues, you can see this link instead. It will be the second video down in the article.

Drejka has been charged with manslaughter.

(08-13-2018, 01:07 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]Drejka has been charged with manslaughter.

Dude seems to have some issues..... I know you're only supposed to prosecute the crime which has been presented before the court but his documented behavior is similar enough to this incident as to show habitual behavior. Only this time someone actually was shot and killed. And the documented cases are just the known ones. How many times has this guy terrorized people?

"Drejka has remained largely a mystery to the public in the weeks since the shooting. The Tampa Bay Times reported last week that he has been the accused aggressor in four incidents since 2012. He was not arrested in any of the cases and does not have a criminal history in Florida.

His arrest warrant notes three out of four of the prior cases. Two were road rage incidents documented by law enforcement in which he was accused of showing a gun. A third was an argument a few months ago over the same parking space in which Drejka confronted another man, Rick Kelly, and threatened to shoot him. A fourth report found by the Times described an incident in which Drejka braked in front of a woman with two children in her car."

(08-13-2018, 05:21 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-13-2018, 01:07 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]Drejka has been charged with manslaughter.

Dude seems to have some issues..... I know you're only supposed to prosecute the crime which has been presented before the court but his documented behavior is similar enough to this incident as to show habitual behavior. Only this time someone actually was shot and killed. And the documented cases are just the known ones. How many times has this guy terrorized people?

"Drejka has remained largely a mystery to the public in the weeks since the shooting. The Tampa Bay Times reported last week that he has been the accused aggressor in four incidents since 2012. He was not arrested in any of the cases and does not have a criminal history in Florida.

His arrest warrant notes three out of four of the prior cases. Two were road rage incidents documented by law enforcement in which he was accused of showing a gun. A third was an argument a few months ago over the same parking space in which Drejka confronted another man, Rick Kelly, and threatened to shoot him. A fourth report found by the Times described an incident in which Drejka braked in front of a woman with two children in her car."

The guy sounds like a menace. This event was just a matter of time.

(08-13-2018, 05:21 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-13-2018, 01:07 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]Drejka has been charged with manslaughter.

Dude seems to have some issues..... I know you're only supposed to prosecute the crime which has been presented before the court but his documented behavior is similar enough to this incident as to show habitual behavior. Only this time someone actually was shot and killed. And the documented cases are just the known ones. How many times has this guy terrorized people?

"Drejka has remained largely a mystery to the public in the weeks since the shooting. The Tampa Bay Times reported last week that he has been the accused aggressor in four incidents since 2012. He was not arrested in any of the cases and does not have a criminal history in Florida.

His arrest warrant notes three out of four of the prior cases. Two were road rage incidents documented by law enforcement in which he was accused of showing a gun. A third was an argument a few months ago over the same parking space in which Drejka confronted another man, Rick Kelly, and threatened to shoot him. A fourth report found by the Times described an incident in which Drejka braked in front of a woman with two children in her car."

The more that comes out the more I think he needs to be prosecuted. The guy is trying to use the letter of the law to indulge/ hide an aggressive personality disorder

Bit quiet from the people desperate to pretend the shooter was the ultimate victim.

Seems to have been desperate for confrontation which was obvious from the video anyway in an empty parking lot. I bet we find out he was threatening use of his gun to the woman when he got pushed too.

(08-14-2018, 09:05 AM)Dumptruck Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-13-2018, 05:21 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]Dude seems to have some issues..... I know you're only supposed to prosecute the crime which has been presented before the court but his documented behavior is similar enough to this incident as to show habitual behavior. Only this time someone actually was shot and killed. And the documented cases are just the known ones. How many times has this guy terrorized people?

"Drejka has remained largely a mystery to the public in the weeks since the shooting. The Tampa Bay Times reported last week that he has been the accused aggressor in four incidents since 2012. He was not arrested in any of the cases and does not have a criminal history in Florida.

His arrest warrant notes three out of four of the prior cases. Two were road rage incidents documented by law enforcement in which he was accused of showing a gun. A third was an argument a few months ago over the same parking space in which Drejka confronted another man, Rick Kelly, and threatened to shoot him. A fourth report found by the Times described an incident in which Drejka braked in front of a woman with two children in her car."

The guy sounds like a menace. This event was just a matter of time.

Yeah, it certainly sounds that way.  He was more than just an innocent bystander, and odds are that justice will catch up to him.

(08-14-2018, 07:05 PM)lastonealive Wrote: [ -> ]Bit quiet from the people desperate to pretend the shooter was the ultimate victim.

Seems to have been desperate for confrontation which was obvious from the video anyway in an empty parking lot. I bet we find out he was threatening use of his gun to the woman when he got pushed too.

Quiet? What is there to say? 

The prosecutor's office is making a political arrest. He's going to have the sheriff's office at his defense when this goes to trial. There's no chance there's a conviction when you have the cops on the stand saying it was justified.

You, however, pretend all that McGlokton didn't do anything except touch Drejka. So, not quiet... just nothing left to add.

Why are you so mad at McGlokton? He pushed a guy over and in return was executed in front of his family.