Michael Drejka Update

Knight

Knight

Well-known Member
Trial date set for Clearwater stand your ground shooter
Posted: 1:06 PM, Dec 14, 2018 Updated: 4:54 AM, Dec 17, 2018

By: Sarah Hollenbeck


CLEARWATER, Fla. — The man at the center of a controversial stand your ground case in Clearwater appeared in court Friday afternoon. The judge set a jury trial date in this case: August 19th at 1:30 P.M.


Clearwater resident Michael Drejka is charged in the death of Markeis McGlockton. The shooting happened in July outside of the Circle A convenience store on Sunset Point Road.
John Trevena, Drejka’s defense attorney tells ABC Action News new evidence in the case could help a jury rule in the shooter’s favor.

Trevena says the toxicology report indicates Markeis McGlockton had drugs including ecstasy in his system. He also says an independent witness heard Britany Jacobs, McGlockton’s girlfriend tell Drejka, “My boyfriend is gonna f*** you up. He’s going to kill you,” moments before the fatal shot was fired. Trevena hopes to enter both pieces of information into evidence for the future trial.


"This is a man who was a bully, who beat on pregnant females and has a history of violence with police officers and other individuals. So to characterize him as a saint or a victim is a farce,” Trevena said about McGlockton.


The wheels of justice move slowly.
 

Well, it is no surprise that the shooter's attorney wants to characterize his client as the good guy and the victim as a scumbag. I doubt whether the victim's history of being a bully, if that is true, has any effect on this particular case except in the press. It isn't about who is the nicer guy; it is about whether the shooter was justified in shooting the victim at that moment in time. Unjustified killing is unjustified killing whether the victim is Mother Theresa or Jeffrey Dahmer. To me, the salient points are that the shooter had a gun and the victim was unarmed and reportedly moving away at the time he was shot.

And yes, after a lifetime in law offices I can personally testify that the wheels of justice turn VERY slowly.
 
I saw the video. The shooting was entirely unnecessary. The victim started to back away as soon as he saw the gun. But Drejka shot him anyway. If I were on the jury I would vote guilty to 2nd degree murder.

And I'm saying that as a gun owner, a holder of a concealed carry permit, and a firm supporter of the 2nd amendment.
 

No doubt the lawyer will use this. It goes to state of mind after Drejka was shoved to the ground?




“My boyfriend is gonna f*** you up. He’s going to kill you,” moments before the fatal shot was fired.


Turning doesn't take him away from close proximity. Only Drejka knows what he thought in those few seconds. The judge set the court date but the charge wasn't in the article. 2nd. degree as the charge makes sense because shooting towards center mass doesn't IMO doesn't mean intent to kill.


I don't think this is relevant.


""This is a man who was a bully, who beat on pregnant females and has a history of violence with police officers and other individuals. So to characterize him as a saint or a victim is a farce,” Trevena said about McGlockton."




The lawyer may even try to use this.




The Tueller Drill is a self-defense training exercise to prepare against a short-range knife attack when armed only with a holstered handgun.
Sergeant Dennis Tueller, of the Salt Lake City, Utah Police Department wondered how quickly an attacker with a knife could cover 21 feet (6.4 m), so he timed volunteers as they raced to stab the target. He determined that it could be done in 1.5 seconds. These results were first published as an article in SWAT magazine in 1983 and in a police training video by the same title, "How Close is Too Close?"[1][2]
A defender with a gun has a dilemma. If he shoots too early, he risks being accused of murder. If he waits until the attacker is definitely within striking range so there is no question about motives, he risks injury and even death. The Tueller experiments quantified a "danger zone" where an attacker presented a clear threat.[3]
The Tueller Drill combines both parts of the original time trials by Tueller. There are several ways it can be conducted:[4]
The (simulated) attacker and shooter are positioned back-to-back. At the signal, the "attacker" sprints away from the shooter, and the shooter unholsters his gun and shoots at the target 21 feet (6.4 m) in front of him. The attacker stops as soon as the shot is fired. The shooter is successful only if his shot is good and if the runner did not cover 21 feet (6.4 m).
A more stressful arrangement is to have the attacker begin 21 feet (6.4 m) behind the shooter and run towards the shooter. The shooter is successful only if he was able take a good shot before he is tapped on the back by the attacker.
If the shooter is armed with only a training replica gun, a full-contact drill may be done with the attacker running towards the shooter. In this variation, the shooter should practice side-stepping the attacker while he is drawing the gun.
MythBusters covered the drill in the 2012 episode "Duel Dilemmas". At 20 ft (6.1 m), the gun-wielder was able to shoot the charging knife attacker just as he reached the shooter. At shorter distances the knife wielder was always able to stab prior to being shot.[5]


AT SHORTER DISTANCES THE KNIFE WIELDER WAS ALWAYS ABLE TO STAB PRIOR TO BEING SHOT.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill


And yes I do know there was no knife involved.
 
“My boyfriend is gonna f*** you up. He’s going to kill you,” moments before the fatal shot was fired.
Click to expand...

source/link? (not that it would matter...)

Strange that this so-called threat supposedly heard by some un-named anonymous witness is JUST NOW coming out. It was never mentioned before - not once.

Puhleeeze. :rolleyes:


This case was discussed here - no need to rehash what's already been said, and SEEN.

https://www.seniorforums.com/showth...ting-argument-in-parking-lot?highlight=drejka
 
Last edited:
Drejka is the one that started the whole mess by by going out looking for trouble while carry a gun. When you go looking for trouble, trouble will find you. That's a universal law of nature.

What kind of person get's in someone's face over a parking place? I see people parking places they shouldn't be all the time. I don't go confronting them. And I don't see other people doing it either. That's because most people have half a grain of sense. And better things to do. It's law enforcement's job. And they do that by writing parking tickets.

I got one a couple of years ago. From a meter maid. Cost me a 10 dollar fine. It's not exactly a big time crime. And it's certainly not something a private citizen packing heat should be getting in someone's face about.

Drejka is not the kind of person I want walking around carrying a gun. As I said before, if I were on the jury I would vote to put him away for 2nd degree murder.
 
Because this was a hot topic updating the slow legal process & pointing out the defense attorneys intent to use a witness seemed reasonable. But if he is already convicted here then I guess there is no need to point out what the defense attorneys plans to do.

Why people do what they do is a mystery. Seems pretty obvious Drejka has an agenda about parking illegally in a space set aside for handicapped people.
 
Trade said:
I saw the video. The shooting was entirely unnecessary. The victim started to back away as soon as he saw the gun. But Drejka shot him anyway. If I were on the jury I would vote guilty to 2nd degree murder.

And I'm saying that as a gun owner, a holder of a concealed carry permit, and a firm supporter of the 2nd amendment.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.
 
Trade said:
Drejka is the one that started the whole mess by by going out looking for trouble while carry a gun. When you go looking for trouble, trouble will find you. That's a universal law of nature.

What kind of person get's in someone's face over a parking place? I see people parking places they shouldn't be all the time. I don't go confronting them. And I don't see other people doing it either. That's because most people have half a grain of sense. And better things to do. It's law enforcement's job. And they do that by writing parking tickets.

I got one a couple of years ago. From a meter maid. Cost me a 10 dollar fine. It's not exactly a big time crime. And it's certainly not something a private citizen packing heat should be getting in someone's face about.

Drejka is not the kind of person I want walking around carrying a gun. As I said before, if I were on the jury I would vote to put him away for 2nd degree murder.
Click to expand...

Precisely.
 
Knight said:
Because this was a hot topic updating the slow legal process & pointing out the defense attorneys intent to use a witness seemed reasonable. But if he is already convicted here then I guess there is no need to point out what the defense attorneys plans to do.

Why people do what they do is a mystery. Seems pretty obvious Drejka has an agenda about parking illegally in a space set aside for handicapped people.
Click to expand...

The defense attorney can try to use whatever he wants to use, as they always do. The rules of evidence will govern what he can and cannot enter into evidence. He can't enter "everyone knew he was a bully" sort of stuff or other hearsay. My personal opinion, based on what I've read and seen (and of course I haven't read and seen all that the jury will have available to them), is that the shooter was not justified in his action in shooting the unarmed victim.
 
None of us felt what Drejka felt in terms of threat. So what if McGlockton stepped back, Drejka might have felt he going for a gun in the process. Under Florida's SYG law he was right to shoot.
 
rgp said:
None of us felt what Drejka felt in terms of threat. So what if McGlockton stepped back, Drejka might have felt he going for a gun in the process. Under Florida's SYG law he was right to shoot.
Click to expand...

With that kind of logic anyone could shoot anyone else because of what they "might" do.
 
Olivia said:
With that kind of logic anyone could shoot anyone else because of what they "might" do.
Click to expand...

If they felt like there was an honest threat....yes. Otherwise there is no need for the SYG law.

In the heat of the moment it was still his fears that governed his actions.
 
Butterfly said:
Well, I'll await the court's verdict.
Click to expand...

That's all we can do. And unfortunately it's still possible to get away with murder in a state like Florida, especially if the victim is black. As we saw with the George Zimmerman case. So I would not be surprised to see Drejka walk.
 
Zimmerman. Drejka. Tough bullies with guns, sticking their noses where they shouldn't. Then crying like babies that they're SCARED ​and must shoot an unarmed black guy. Maybe not so tough after all. Maybe just killers.
 
Drejka was found guilty of second degree manslaughter.
Sentencing will be Oct 10.

LARGO — A jury found Michael Drejka guilty of manslaughter late Friday in the 2018 shooting death of Markeis McGlockton in a convenience store parking lot.

The conviction came after 6½ hours of deliberations by the jury of five men and one woman.

It was read aloud at 10:41 p.m. Drejka stared straight ahead, standing beside his lawyers. He could face up to 30 years in prison.

(more)

https://www.tampabay.com/news/pinel...of-manslaughter-in-markeis-mcglocktons-death/
 
Last edited:
StarSong said:
Thank you for the update, AC. I'd say that with this verdict, justice has prevailed.
Click to expand...
I hope so but I'll wait 'til we hear the sentence. Might be 6 months home confinement with an ankle bracelet. Then with the lax gun laws he can hit one of the gun shows or buy a piece from his cousin (no backround checks) and be back patrolling the parking areas hoping for violaters to challenge. What a country it's become.:(
 
DaveA said:
I hope so but I'll wait 'til we hear the sentence. Might be 6 months home confinement with an ankle bracelet. Then with the lax gun laws he can hit one of the gun shows or buy a piece from his cousin (no backround checks) and be back patrolling the parking areas hoping for violaters to challenge. What a country it's become.:(
Click to expand...
Agreed, but at least the verdict was just. We'll have to see how it goes from there.
 
I have a prediction. The thug's family will be very disappointed at Drejka's sentence (assuming the conviction's appeal is not successful).
And, the thug got exactly what he deserved.
Yes, Drejka was stupid for confronting the woman but Mr. Tough Guy had no right to put his hands on him. I wish people would use their brains before thinking: "I'm twice his size....I'll just kick his ass."
 
I really can't comment on this. There are so many inflammatory appeals to ones biases, and the over -the- top character assignations, from both sides; that you can't unemotionally come to a conclusion. It's hard to get past the "he eats babies for breakfast" attorney spin to get at the truth.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top