Florida 'Stand your ground' shooter now facing charges. + Updates

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Stand Your Ground, the notorious Florida law that has allowed the likes of George Zimmerman to get away with murder, has struck again.

This time in Clearwater, Fla. as an argument over a handicapped parking spot ended in a 28-year-old black man being gunned down. Markeis McGlockton was shot and killed – collapsing and dying in front of his five-year-old son – after he was shot by 47-year-old Michael Drejka last Thursday afternoon.

Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri announced that they will not arrest Drejka despite video showing him killing McGlockton over a handicap parking space at a convenience store.

Gualteri said that the senseless killing falls under Florida’s “stand your ground” law which gives immunity to those who claim to be in fear of their lives and use force to defend themselves. The law has led to a number of instances in which people have been gunned down under dubious circumstances, including those when the shooters instigated the confrontations.

“[The shooting] is within the bookends of ‘stand your ground’ and within the bookends of force being justified,” Gualteri said, later adding, “I’m not saying I agree with it, but I don’t make that call.”

The department will forward the case to the State Attorney’s Office for a final decision, Gualtieri said. The began when Drejka, who according to store regulars had a history of antagonizing and threatening patrons over handicapped spaces, confronted McGlockton’s girlfriend, Britany Jacobs, about parking in a handicap space without a permit.

Surveillance video shows McGlockton, who was in the store at the time, coming up to Drejka and shoving him to the ground. Seconds later, Drejka pulls out a gun and shoots McGlockton in the chest.

McGlockton runs back into the store, before collapsing in front of his son. He was pronounced dead on the scene. Gualtieri said Drejka told deputies that he was he was in fear of being attacked again.

Jacobs, who had been with McGlockton since they were in high school and is the mother of his three children, fought back tears talking about the killing and says that the shooter instigated the incident by coming up to her car.

She says McGlockton was the one defending her.

“He’s getting out like he’s a police officer or something, and he’s approaching me,” she said to the Tampa Bay Times. “I minded my own business. I didn’t do anything wrong.”

Gualtieri, who is also a lawyer, said the outcome may have been different before the “stand your ground” law, which has since put the burden of proof on prosecutors and not defense attorneys. He noted that there’s a pause of a few seconds before shoots McGlockton. “That pause gives me pause,” the sheriff said, invoking an adage: “Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.”

Drejka does not have a criminal history in Florida, but in 2012 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.

A couple of months ago, Rick Kelly says he stopped by the store, parking his tanker truck in the same handicap spot. Much like what happened on Thursday, Drejka walks around the truck checking for decals, then confronts Kelly about why he parked there.

Kelly says a fight escalated and Drejka threatened to shoot him.

“It’s a repeat,” Kelly told the Tampa Bay Times. “It happened to me the first time. The second time it’s happening, someone’s life got taken. He provoked that.”







WOW! Killing someone over a parking spot?! Sure it pisses me off to see someone parking in a Handicap designated spot if it's obvious they don't need to. But to start a confrontation over it, and then shoot someone.

Well, he did shove him to the ground. And while yeah, he probably didn't intend to kill him, assault can be met with equal or greater force. Maybe if he would of kept his temper, he would of kept his life.

Population Control wrote:

Well, he did shove him to the ground. And while yeah, he probably didn't intend to kill him, assault can be met with equal or greater force. Maybe if he would of kept his temper, he would of kept his life.

I agree the man overreacted, and did start the physical altercation.  But I'm on the fence on this. Drejka had issues with harassing people over this very thing. Also he seemed to have a tendency of pulling his gun on people if you go by the article.

Also if you watched the video, the man who shoved him to the ground clearly backed down when he saw the gun, and clearly started backing away from him BEFORE Drejka shot him.  

Maybe it was an accident, maybe not. I'm waiting to see what else is said about it.

The guy should be charged with murder. I don't see a "imminent threat of serious bodily harm and/or death" the man didn't advance on him after he pushed him down and even retreated after the gun was pulled. Being shoved to the ground isn't enough justification to "stand your ground". That's not mentioning the guy was fishing for an altercation arguing over a parking violation.

I think the police have to revisit this one and arrest the shooter.

W.A.R. wrote:

The guy should be charged with murder. I don't see a "imminent threat of serious bodily harm and/or death" the man didn't advance on him after he pushed him down and even retreated after the gun was pulled. Being shoved to the ground isn't enough justification to "stand your ground". That's not mentioning the guy was fishing for an altercation arguing over a parking violation.

I think the police have to revisit this one and arrest the shooter.

My take as well. He knew the man was backing away, and still fired. I'm unclear as to whether it was an accident or on purpose.  Does he say anywhere, "yes I intentionally pulled the trigger"?

I don't feel a need to be polit-correct or polite here, I might as well be Ericquesque in my reply: "Fucker should be shot", very glad he got shot.

The guy parks in handicapped parking spot (for that alone warrants a decent amount of pain), then he has the nerve to physically attack a guy who points it out to him. I'm glad Drejka shot him, would have shot him myself. Good riddens.

US law is often crazy, but this is one case where it clicks and allows people to stand up to losers like that. I hope that woman sues Drejka in court, loses and then will have to pay court fees.

The video shows it was deliberate. He pulls the gun, aims, and then pulls the trigger.

No reaction that it was an accident and even keeps the gun pointed at the victim after the shot.  

Just hope they won't turn this into a race thing I'm sure Drejka would of shot him no matter what race he was.

W.A.R. wrote:

The video shows it was deliberate. He pulls the gun, aims, and then pulls the trigger.

No reaction that it was an accident and even keeps the gun pointed at the victim after the shot.  

It also proves that he wasn't the attacker. He was standing there talking and the thug attacked him, violently throwing him to the ground. Drejka didn't pull the gun at anyone until he was atatcked.

Violence was met with violence. If that thug kept his hands to himself, he would have lived.

Giga143 wrote:

Just hope they won't turn this into a race thing I'm sure Drejka would of shot him no matter what race he was.

Who knows, maybe he's an BLM activist or maybe he's a crazy racist. That's not really the point.

Drejka was violently attacked and he shot only as a reaction to that attack. The assilant is the one at fault here, he broke the law and used violence against Drejka when Drejka was just talking and not even facing him. Drejka defended himself and I hope the judge will agree with me.

I'm no big fan of easy gun laws. But if there is one good thing about easy gun law, it is cases wlike these where random people suddenly can have an edge over violent thungs.

From the article the man was said to have been defending his girlfriend who was still sitting in the car. Who was being verbally attacked by Drejka. Did he overreact by putting hands on the older man? In my opinion yes. Was that shove enough to draw a gun? Possibly if Drejka truly feared for his life. But he fired AFTER the guy had already back several feet away from him.

He was clearly the one in control after the weapon was pulled. So IF he deliberately pulled the trigger then yes, I think he needlessly murdered this man. Just my own opinion.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

From the article, man was said to have been defending his girlfriend who was still sitting in the car.

Defending against what? A guy talking to her? The camera is clear - Drejka is not assulting anyone, he is not trying to brake the window or get into the car.

If Drejka assulted them verbally, they could just respond verbally and drive off after paying the fine for parking on the handicapped space. I think that's probably what sparked the attack - the assilant thought that if he strikes Drejka he will be able to jump in and drive away without having to pay the fine.

There's a very fine line between cussing someone out and violently attacking people like that thug did. He introduced violence to the encounter and paid the price. Good riddens.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

He was clearly the one in control after the weapon was pulled.

So? He's been in control only because he drew the gun and he drew the gun only because the thug attacked him. The thug was more than happy to attack and hurt him as long as he felt that he is in control. I think Drejka is justified in thinking he would be hurt much more if he did not draw the gun.

The law should firmly stand on the side of the citizens, not on the side of violent criminals and thugs.

Sabratha wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

From the article, man was said to have been defending his girlfriend who was still sitting in the car.

Defending against what? A guy talking to her? The camera is clear - Drejka is not assulting anyone, he is not trying to brake the window or get into the car.

If Drejka assulted them verbally, they could just respond verbally and drive off after paying the fine for parking on the handicapped space. I think that's probably what sparked the attack - the assilant thought that if he strikes Drejka he will be able to jump in and drive away without having to pay the fine.

There's a very fine line between cussing someone out and violently attacking people like that thug did. He introduced violence to the encounter and paid the price. Good riddens.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

He was clearly the one in control after the weapon was pulled.

So? He's been in control only because he drew the gun and he drew the gun only because the thug attacked him. The thug was more than happy to attack and hurt him as long as he felt that he is in control. I think Drejka is justified in thinking he would be hurt much more if he did not draw the gun.

The law should firmly stand on the side of the citizens, not on the side of violent criminals and thugs.

Well we clearly don't see eye to eye on this. SO lets just leave it at that.

Either way BOTH were wrong. Drejka for verbally confronting a stranger over a parking spot, that may still lead to him being charged with murder. McGlockton for reacting in a violent manner that ended up costing his life, and likely traumatizing his child for the remainder of his.

There were no winners here.

Drejka doesn't have any authority to hand out fines. It really wasn't his place to confront her about parking in a handicap space....he was simply being a busybody.

McGlockton was wrong to come out and shove him to the ground, but the response from Drejka was not justified...not even under the very lenient "Stand Your Ground" law.

I suspect police will change positions and Drejka will be arrested and charged.

W.A.R. wrote:

Drejka doesn't have any authority to hand out fines. It really wasn't his place to confront her about parking in a handicap space....he was simply being a busybody.

I'm not saying the fine should be paid to him. They should have waited for the police, sheriff or whoever else is in charge of that.

W.A.R. wrote:

McGlockton was wrong to come out and shove him to the ground, but the response from Drejka was not justified...not even under the very lenient "Stand Your Ground" law.

I suspect police will change positions and Drejka will be arrested and charged.

Drejka's reaction was radical, but he was the one being attacked not the other way around. Charging him would send the wrong signal to people - that if you defend yourself against a thug, the law will go after you and not the thug.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Stand Your Ground, the notorious Florida law that has allowed the likes of George Zimmerman to get away with murder, has struck again.

Judging from the very first sentence of the article I'm sure this article is unbiased in it's entirety.   

Quote :

This time in Clearwater, Fla. as an argument over a handicapped parking spot ended in a 28-year-old black man being gunned down.

Take a look at that. The very second sentence of the article and they're already talking about race, trying to insinuate that this was some sort of violent hate crime. How much do you wanna bet that a group of far-left jackasses are going to use this as an excuse to start burning down buildings and shooting at cops for like the umpteenth time?

W.A.R. wrote:

The guy should be charged with murder. I don't see a "imminent threat of serious bodily harm and/or death" the man didn't advance on him after he pushed him down and even retreated after the gun was pulled. Being shoved to the ground isn't enough justification to "stand your ground". That's not mentioning the guy was fishing for an altercation arguing over a parking violation.

I think the police have to revisit this one and arrest the shooter.

You don't see don't see an "imminent threat of serious bodily harm and/or death" when a 28 year old man pushes an handicapped 47 year old man to the black top when he is just standing there?

QuestionMark wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Stand Your Ground, the notorious Florida law that has allowed the likes of George Zimmerman to get away with murder, has struck again.

Judging from the very first sentence of the article I'm sure this article is unbiased in it's entirety.   

Quote :

This time in Clearwater, Fla. as an argument over a handicapped parking spot ended in a 28-year-old black man being gunned down.

Take a look at that. The very second sentence of the article and they're already talking about race, trying to insinuate that this was some sort of violent hate crime. How much do you wanna bet that a group of far-left jackasses are going to use this as an excuse to start burning down buildings and shooting at cops for like the umpteenth time?

I do agree that the wording within the article is somewhat leading or misleading, depending on how you look at it. But that's basically journalism in a nutshell.

Population Control wrote:

You don't see don't see an "imminent threat of serious bodily harm and/or death" when a 28 year old man pushes an handicapped 47 year old man to the black top when he is just standing there?

No. Just because you're pushed down/punched/smacked doesn't mean your life is in immediate danger.

The footage shows deadly force was just not necessary. Im as right-wing as you can be on guns but this guy was wrong.

W.A.R. wrote:

The footage shows deadly force was just not necessary. Im as right-wing as you can be on guns but this guy was wrong.

Agreed.

W.A.R. wrote:

Population Control wrote:

You don't see don't see an "imminent threat of serious bodily harm and/or death" when a 28 year old man pushes an handicapped 47 year old man to the black top when he is just standing there?

No. Just because you're pushed down/punched/smacked doesn't mean your life is in immediate danger.

The footage shows deadly force was just not necessary. Im as right-wing as you can be on guns but this guy was wrong.

What is the 47 year old's handicap? Either way, its not good to push old people down. Maybe not the life in danger, but still serious bodily harm.

W.A.R. wrote:

The footage shows deadly force was just not necessary. Im as right-wing as you can be on guns but this guy was wrong.

Well I'd be considered very left-wing in America as far as gun rights are concerned. I think 95% or mroe of US citizens should have their guns taken away.

With all that, I still say this is one good examplke where US gun laws show some positive apsects. This guy was attacked by a thug much larger than himself and would have been beaten to a bloody pulp if it weren't for teh fact that he had a gun.

Granted, in most cases its criminals with firearms who initiate an event like this. Criminals benefit more from a high density of firearms in the general population. USA would be much safer if it had Poland's laws and Poland's gun ownership rates.

Dreijka wasn't just having a polite conversation with the girlfriend, he was yelling at her and causing enough of a disturbance that one guy went inside to tell the gas station attendant what was going on.  All McGlockton knew was that some crazy guy was yelling at his wife with his kids still in the car.  Pushing him out of the way was probably not the best response, but I think this situation is a little more complicated than, "Thug dies after picking fight with armed man."

Also, Drejka had threatened to kill a man previously for parking in a handicapped spot.  He seems a little unhinged or just another wannabe cop like Zimmerman.

Edit: Kind of irritated by girlfriend saying, "I have a right to park wherever I want to park" but that's another story.

Undyne wrote:

Dreijka wasn't just having a polite conversation with the girlfriend, he was yelling at her and causing enough of a disturbance that one guy went inside to tell the gas station attendant what was going on.  All McGlockton knew was that some crazy guy was yelling at his wife with his kids still in the car.  Pushing him out of the way was probably not the best response, but I think this situation is a little more complicated than, "Thug dies after picking fight with armed man."

Where I come from having a heated debate is legal, while a phsyical atatck like that is treated as assault and attemptng body injury.

Undyne wrote:

Also, Drejka had threatened to kill a man previously for parking in a handicapped spot.  He seems a little unhinged or just another wannabe cop like Zimmerman.

Never said the guy was nice or even normal. Regardless if he was normal or not, after being attacked by that guy everyone in his shoes would have a good reason to shoot.

If I was in Florida, knew the laws and was attacked like that, I would have shot the guy without thinking twice about it. If you have a gun and find yourself in a situation where the law is on your side, why do otherwise?Of course its possible that the Florida law is vague enough to cause a lenghty trial or something, then I would just threaten him with the gun, or force him to lie down with hands on his head and called for the city guard.

But if the law was clear and I'd know the law is on my side, I would have shot that guy.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A Florida man was charged with manslaughter on Monday for fatally shooting another man on July 19 during an argument over a parking spot, after police initially declined to arrest him due to the state's "stand your ground" self-defense law, officials said.

Alleged shooter Michael Drejka was taken into custody on Monday, the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office said in a statement. The suspect was 47 at the time of the crime but turned 48 last week, according to the county jail.

Police had initially not charged Drejka over the July 19 shooting due to the 2005 law, which grants residents the right to use deadly force if they reasonably believe they are at risk of great harm or death. The case was sent to the state attorney's office for further review.

"I support the state attorney's decision and will have no further comment as the case continues to work its way through the criminal justice system," said Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri in a statement on Monday.

The shooting occurred when Drejka got involved in a shouting match outside a Clearwater, Florida, grocery store with a woman who allegedly parked in a spot reserved for handicapped people without the proper permit, the sheriff's office said.

The woman's boyfriend, 28-year-old Markeis McGlockton, approached Drejka and shoved him to the ground, at which point Drejka drew his licensed concealed handgun and shot McGlockton in the chest while his girlfriend and 5-year-old son were inside the store, the sheriff's office said. It said that Drejka said he was in fear for his life at the time.

Surveillance video of the event went viral online, sparking criticism of the "stand your ground" law on social media. The fact that alleged shooter Drejka is white and victim McGlockton was black also sparked charges that way the law is applied ignored racially-fueled crimes.

The law removed the legal responsibility to retreat from a dangerous situation and allowed the use of deadly force when a person felt greatly threatened. It inspired similar laws in other states and was cited as a factor in the fatal 2012 shooting of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin by a volunteer neighborhood watch member.

Backers of "stand your ground" laws say they deter crime.

It was not immediately clear if Drejka had retained a lawyer or if he remained in custody on Monday afternoon.





I was kind of expecting this. But damn people lets not make this about RACE!

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

But damn people lets not make this about RACE!

Too fuckin late. 

I hope the guy gets acquitted.

Told You.

W.A.R. wrote:

Told You.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

CLEARWATER, Fla. — The State Attorney's Office for Florida's Sixth Judicial District has reviewed the controversial 'stand your ground' case into the death of Markeis McGlockton and has decided to file a manslaughter charge.

An arrest warrant was issued on Monday morning and Pinellas County detectives arrested Michael Drejka. He is being booked into the Pinellas County Jail and bond has been set at $100,000.

McGlockton, 28, was shot and killed on July 19 by Drejka, 47, outside of a convenience store in Clearwater, Florida. The shooting stemmed from a dispute over a handicap parking spot between Drejka and McGlockton's girlfriend.

Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said, "I support the State Attorney's decision and will have no further comment as the case continues to work its way through the criminal justice system."

Drejka has a concealed carry license.

Statement from Attorney Ben Crump in response to Michael Drejka being charged with manslaughter:

“My first thought on hearing this news was: It’s about time. I firmly stand behind the decision by the State Attorney's Office to charge Michael Drejka with manslaughter for killing Markeis McGlockton. This self-appointed wannabe cop attempted to hide behind ‘Stand Your Ground’ to defend his indefensible actions, but the truth has finally cut through the noise. I have full faith that this truth will prevail to punish this cold-blooded killer who angrily created the altercation that led to Markeis’ needless death. We will continue to fight until justice is brought for the family of Markeis McGlockton.”

Statement from Clearwater Attorney Michele Rayner:

“On behalf of the family of Markeis McGlockton, I commend the office of State Attorney Bernie McCabe for charging Michael Drejka with manslaughter for his cold-blooded actions. This is a big step forward in the direction of justice, not only for Markeis’ family but also for society as a whole.”

Statement from the family of Markeis McGlockton:

“The announcement that Michael Drejka will be charged with manslaughter provides our family with a small measure of comfort in our time of profound mourning. While this decision cannot bring back our partner, our son, our father, we take solace in knowing our voices are being heard as we work for justice. This man killed Markeis in cold blood, without a second thought about the devastating impact his actions would have on our family, but this charge gives us a measure of hope that the truth will win and justice will prevail in the end.”

Absolute joke to think if your intimidated you can end a life
Isn’t this the reason we have tasors

Smiggles94 wrote:

Absolute joke to think if your intimidated you can end a life
Isn’t this the reason we have tasors  

True. But Florida has some issues.

Good it was cold blooded murder.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

More than two months have passed since Michael Drejka shot Markeis McGlockton in the parking lot of a convenience store.

While developments in the headline-grabbing case have slowed to a trickle as it crawls through the court system, the Tampa Bay Times obtained more than 400 pages of investigative documents from the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office.

The interview transcripts and reports from deputies shed light on Drejka’s thinking in the seconds before the shooting, which began with an argument with McGlockton’s girlfriend over a handicap-reserved parking space. They also paint a fuller picture of a case that disturbed the community, sparked concerns of racial injustice and reignited a debate over Florida’s controversial stand your ground law after authorities cited it in not initially arresting Drejka.

Here are five new details from the documents:

1. Drejka: McGlockton ‘made his step towards me, and that was that.’

A roughly 70-page transcript of Drejka’s interview with detectives provides the most insight yet into how he perceived the moments leading up to the shooting.

Drejka, facing a manslaughter charge, said that during the argument McGlockton’s girlfriend, Britany Jacobs asked if she needed to get her boyfriend. Drejka responded, "are we going to fight?’’

Soon after, McGlockton, 28, came out of the store and shoved Drejka to the ground.

"I was literally blindsided … and tackled to the ground," he said. (A bystander also used "blindsided" to describe how Drejka approached McGlockton.)

Drejka, 48, landed on his right side, his wrist caught under a gun he kept in a holster. He sat up and pulled out the gun. It took one step by McGlockton for Drejka to pull the trigger, he told detectives. He acknowledged that if McGlockton had retreated, or even stayed still, he wouldn’t have used his gun.

"He made his step towards me, and that was that," he said.

Early in the interview, Drejka said he believed McGlockton was going to kick or get on top of him after the shove. Later, he told detectives he thought McGlockton was "gonna finish what the hell he just started." When asked to elaborate, he said, "No clue. Come after me again. That’s about it," then adds, "What he would have done is just pure conjecture."

Drejka didn’t see much of McGlockton from his vantage point on the ground. He told detectives he thought McGlockton was of medium height. He saw McGlockton’s legs but couldn’t see his hands or face.

Drejka used police and military terms to describe some of his conduct, although he told investigators he has never worked in those fields. His father, however, is a former cop, he said, and they used to train together.

At one point, he said he was acting under the 21-foot rule, a self-defense training tactic, and said later he was trying to "neutralize the immediate threat" when he fired the single shot.

"And then that’s it," he said. "No reason to go overboard."

2. Detectives raise the question on everyone’s mind.

More than once, detectives ask Drejka why he didn’t call law enforcement to report that someone had illegally parked in a handicap-reserved parking space.

"Wouldn’t you think it would be better instead of putting yourself in that type of circumstance that could escalate?" Det. George Moffett said.

Drejka said he worried the driver would leave by the time police arrived — "They always do," he said.

"When I just say something to a person about being parked there,’’ he said, "I don’t expect it to go where it went."

Another detective, Richard Redman, asked Drejka about what others may think about him approaching their cars.

"Does it ever go through your mind … that they might not take that right? That this might go sideways a little bit?"

"Um, well, sure," Drejka said. "But that’s why I take precautions as well."

"Like what? What kind of precautions?" the detective asked.

"Well, I’m a very careful person," Drejka said, "and I have a permit."

3. Witnesses: Drejka seemed ‘proud’ and ‘angry’ after shooting.

The documents include interviews with several witnesses.

Their accounts are mostly consistent with what we know about the shooting so far and shed light on Drejka’s conduct afterward.

One bystander, Robert Castelly, told detectives Drejka, who did not call 911, seemed more angry than remorseful.

"He wasn’t really upset that it happened," he said. "He was just like, ‘Yeah the guy got what he deserved’ was like his attitude."

He heard Drejka muttering something to the effect of, "I just shot someone. What’d you think was gonna happen? He shouldn’t have ran up on me." Castelly said he ducked down to call 911. He said he didn’t want Drejka to see him on the phone, worried about how he’d react.

Vicki Conrad, who helped Jacobs, put pressure on McGlockton’s wound inside the store, encountered Drejka as she went outside to check on Jacobs’ two young children in the car. She heard him say, "They got it all on tape."

She described his demeanor as "proud."

Two witnesses added that they felt someone needed to intervene in the argument between Drejka and Jacobs because it was so heated. One, Latoya Wigfals, broke with other witnesses and said Drejka reached into Jacobs’ car, although the surveillance video doesn’t appear to show that.

Castelly told detectives he thought about jumping in himself. Instead, he went inside and told the store clerk. McGlockton, in the store with his 5-year-old son, overheard him and went outside.

"I’m glad I didn’t get involved," Castelly said. "I mean, because, you know, you see a guy yelling at lady sitting in a car, the first thing you think is maybe I gotta back this guy off, maybe the situation’s … getting out of control. I’m glad I didn’t get involved ... because I had no idea that guy was packing."

4. Witness says Drejka use ‘racial black words’.

Protesters and activists have pointed to racial injustice in the case, saying it’s another example of a white person shooting an unarmed black man.

While Sheriff Bob Gualtieri has said there’s no evidence that race was a factor, and Drejka said in a recent interview from jail with WTSP Channel 10 that he’s not a racist, Wigfals said she heard Drejka call Jacobs a "black b----."

"He was, like, using racial black words," she said.

No other witnesses, including Jacobs, told investigators they heard racist language. In an interview this week, Gualtieri said Wigfals had several inconsistencies in her statement. Wigfals said this week that she was "pretty sure" Drejka called her that.

5. Odds and ends: Gunshot wound location, Drejka’s injuries, origins of gun

Authorities have said Drejka shot McGlockton in the chest, while Jacobs said it was on the left side of his abdomen. McGlockton’s autopsy has not yet been released, but the documents include a report from a detective describing the location of the gunshot wound as 2 inches below his left nipple.

Drejka’s interview transcript also has more details about his injuries from the shove. He told detectives the side he fell on hurt and he wasn’t sure if he hit his head. Forensic technicians also documented a tear in his shirt.

Drejka used a .40-caliber Glock handgun. A Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives report tracing where the gun came from was mostly redacted, aside from this note from a detective:

"Based on my findings, it is undetermined how Michael Drejka came in possession of the listed firearm."







This is one of the latest reports I have came across on this case.

"Drejka, 48, landed on his right side, his wrist caught under a gun he kept in a holster. He sat up and pulled out the gun. It took one step by McGlockton for Drejka to pull the trigger, he told detectives. He acknowledged that if McGlockton had retreated, or even stayed still, he wouldn’t have used his gun.

"He made his step towards me, and that was that," he said."




It seems he was caught in a tiny lie. You can clearly see in the video that McGlockton did retreat, as soon as he saw the gun he backed off. Drejka then aimed and fired.  It's a very unfortunate thing that this man lost his life over a parking spot, even worse that his little boy watched his father die due to an altercation that started over a parking spot.  

Just something about this guy seems a bit off to me.    The simple fact that he was known for verbally attacking people and had also pulled a gun out in a couple of prior incidents.  It still all boils down to one thing, he killed a man and will now have to face his actions.