FL:Stand your ground law under fire for parking space dispute murder

[philip964]

https://nypost.com/2018/07/20/stand-you ... e-sheriff/

Man shoots and kills another man after being thrown to the ground over a handicapped parking space event. To me it would depend on if the original aggressor was attempting to harm the man on the ground a second time. The old man was not charged. Lots of sympathy now for the original aggressor, who died in front of his 5 year old child. Being a thug and parking in a handicapped space, is dangerous in Florida.

Video is hard to watch. To me the original aggressor had backed up as soon as he saw the gun, to me the gun had done its job without a need to fire it, but that is just how I saw it. The man may have been making threatening statements at the time the gun was fired.

Note to self: not your job to police handicapped parking spaces.

Edit: I originally said old man. He is 47 and that is not old at all.

[KLB]

Note to self: not your job to police handicapped parking spaces.

Indeed. Or to police most other things.

[Charles L. Cotton]

This will be an interesting case to follow. As the OP noted, the video does not have audio so we don't know what was said by the deceased. We do know that he launched a violent assault against an unsuspecting victim from behind. This could easily have resulted in serious injury or death, but luckily it did not. It's interesting that the victim stayed on the ground for a good while before getting up. He may have been hurt/injured.

I can say two things with absolute certainty. First, I don't argue with anyone over parking spaces. Secondly, I don't hit anyone from behind. Doing either can result in an unfortunate outcome.

Chas.

[bigtek]

It's fake news to attack the Florida stand your ground law based on this. The victim was attacked and knocked to the ground. He wasn't standing when he shot his attacker, and it's not likely a person knocked to the ground can crawl fast enough to escape a standing attacker.

[rotor]

According to this article the shooter pulled a gun before on someone for parking in a handicap spot.
https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsaf ... _170174041

Sounds like a nutcase to me. If this is true then this shooting was not warranted.

[Charles L. Cotton]

According to this article the shooter pulled a gun before on someone for parking in a handicap spot.
https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsaf ... _170174041

Sounds like a nutcase to me. If this is true then this shooting was not warranted.

The article claims he pulled a gun over road rage, but he denied it. No charges were filed.

Chas.

[bblhd672]

IMHO, the victim did not attack the shooter from behind, he steps between his girlfriend and the antagonist shoving him away. Yes, he was wrong to get physical with the self appointed parking space police. When the shooter pulls his gun the victim is backing away when he is shot.
The shooter was wrong, both to confront and start an argument with a woman over a parking spot and to shoot her boyfriend when he takes exception to the shooter’s behavior.
Four wrongs leading to tragic consequences: parking in a handicapped space, believing you as a licensed handgun holder should be policing traffic laws, escalating the situation by initiating violent behavior and using deadly force when your civilian policing actions gets you knocked down.
Appears to me the shooter is one of those types who the appeal of licensed carry is the hope you’ll get to shoot someone. At minimum one who doesn’t recognize his placer as a licensed handgun carrier in a civil society.
I hope the prosecutor pursues an indictment against the shooter.

[rotor]

According to this article the shooter pulled a gun before on someone for parking in a handicap spot.
https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsaf ... _170174041

Sounds like a nutcase to me. If this is true then this shooting was not warranted.

The article claims he pulled a gun over road rage, but he denied it. No charges were filed.

Chas.

Charles, read on further in the article. Similar thing with another customer.

[Mike S]

IMHO, the victim did not attack the shooter from behind, he steps between his girlfriend and the antagonist shoving him away. Yes, he was wrong to get physical with the self appointed parking space police. When the shooter pulls his gun the victim is backing away when he is shot.
The shooter was wrong, both to confront and start an argument with a woman over a parking spot and to shoot her boyfriend when he takes exception to the shooter’s behavior.
Four wrongs leading to tragic consequences: parking in a handicapped space, believing you as a licensed handgun holder should be policing traffic laws, escalating the situation by initiating violent behavior and using deadly force when your civilian policing actions gets you knocked down.
Appears to me the shooter is one of those types who the appeal of licensed carry is the hope you’ll get to shoot someone. At minimum one who doesn’t recognize his placer as a licensed handgun carrier in a civil society.
I hope the prosecutor pursues an indictment against the shooter.

Very well stated. Tragic outcome that either party could have avoided.

[bigtek]

If it's fair to consider Drejka's past then it's fair to consider McGlockton's past.

Records show Drejka does not have a criminal history in Florida, although the Sheriff’s Office had prior contact with him in 2012 when a driver accused him of pulling a gun during a road rage incident. Drejka denied he showed the gun, and the accuser declined to press charges.

McGlockton’s history included a drug conviction in 2010 and an arrest for aggravated battery a decade ago, records show, but the charge was dropped.

[rotor]

If it's fair to consider Drejka's past then it's fair to consider McGlockton's past.

Records show Drejka does not have a criminal history in Florida, although the Sheriff’s Office had prior contact with him in 2012 when a driver accused him of pulling a gun during a road rage incident. Drejka denied he showed the gun, and the accuser declined to press charges.

McGlockton’s history included a drug conviction in 2010 and an arrest for aggravated battery a decade ago, records show, but the charge was dropped.

Drejka's past as quoted from the article...
At the convenience store Friday, customers filed in and out, buying cigarettes, lottery tickets and sodas, many of them familiar with details of the shooting. Mustafa Hashen, a clerk and witness, said both men were regulars.

It wasn’t the first time he saw Drejka in a fight with another customer. A couple of months back, Rick Kelly stopped by the store, parking his tanker truck in the same handicap spot.

The details to Thursday’s incident are similar: Drejka walking around the truck checking for decals, then confronting Kelly, 31, about why he parked there. The fight escalated, and Drejka threatened to shoot him, Kelly said.

"It’s a repeat. It happened to me the first time. The second time it’s happening, someone’s life got taken," Kelly said. "He provoked that."

Normal people don't patrol handicap parking spots and pull guns on people with parking violations. Something major wrong with this guy.

[bigtek]

Normal people don't patrol handicap parking spots and pull guns on people with parking violations. Something major wrong with this guy.

I'm not saying I want Drejka as a neighbor.

I am saying, if we consider prior behavior, we should consider it for both men. Drejka didn't have a criminal record, although there are accusations that didn't result in arrest. McGlockton does have a criminal record, including a drug conviction and an arrest for aggravated battery, and an unknown number of accusations that didn't result in arrest.

I am saying a person knocked to the ground by the first physical attack in a dispute doesn't have a reasonable opportunity to flee a standing aggressor, and "stand your ground" is a misnomer for what happened.

[Ruark]

All this jabbering about criminal records, handicapped spaces, provoking language, etc. is really irrelevant to the case. The only question here is whether or not Drejka was threatened with death or serious bodily injury sufficient to justify the use of deadly force. From watching the video, I don't think he was. I think Drejka drew and fired in a moment of sudden, unthinking rage from being unexpectedly shoved to the ground from behind. I can see him going down for 3rd degree murder (killing in passion, without malice aforethought).

[jonmo1]

No, he was not standing his ground. It was more like revenge for getting pushed down. The guy was backing away after the gun came out. If he had made an aggressive move forward then it would be justified.
I’d say 2nd or 3rd degree murder, certainly not first degree.

[spectre]

Did the cops ticket the car that was illegally parked, which set off this whole chain of events?