Comments by "Bubba Sawyer" (@Bubba__Sawyer) on "" video.

  1. Drejka didn't confront the woman calmly either. Several people that pulled up to the store and got out of their cars as the confrontation was happening actually made comments to the store owner and Marquis about how loud and aggressive Drejka was. They testified to this at the trial. It was a very heated exchange. Marquis was defending his family like any man would do.
    158
  2.  @shotty2164  Drejka wasn't "talking" to her, he was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen (they testified to this at the trial). If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted, because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    73
  3.  @lavyap676  Several witnesses testified at trial that Drejka was very loud and threatening. 2 of them immediately told the store owner and who they (correctly) assumed to be the woman's husband, Marquis, what was happening outside. If Drejka was a friendly man commenting on what a nice day it was or something then he wouldn't have been shoved to the ground.
    38
  4.  @petterblakk  If he never confronted the woman in the car then none of this would've happened. That's the very definition of initiating a situation.
    21
  5.  @muskokamike127  He did have the right to defend himself, but if he chose to respond with deadly force then there would be a burden of proof he must meet that he genuinely felt his life was in danger.
    14
  6.  @moiseman  He initiated the confrontation.
    12
  7.  @daboy8107  Why go down to the comment section before watching the video?
    10
  8.  @大陆无名氏  We learn from as young as kindergarten what the appropriate response to physical provocation is. Hint; it's not murder.
    10
  9. No, he's figuratively digging himself a hole.
    9
  10.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  All the witnesses who testified at trial said Drejka was very loud and aggressive.
    7
  11.  @LocatedRaider  Drejka also says "expired" instead of "died".
    5
  12.  @dannyj5688  She was parked illegally but she didn't take the space from Drejka. There were MULTIPLE empty spots MUCH closer to the door so, unless someone pulled in in a handicapped van there was really no problem. Drejka is NOT the parking police nor is he the owner of the store therefore it was NOT his place nor his right to harass her about parking there. If he was so disturbed by it he should have either stayed in his car and called the police or gone inside and let the clerk/manager know. about it and let THEM handle it.
    4
  13.  أبو ليلى  Don't ever reproduce.
    4
  14. No, this wouldn't have happened if Drejka had minded his own business.
    4
  15. Michael "Coward" Drejka. He's where he belongs. He's a menace who was looking for trouble. He's pulled similar stunts on 4 separate occasions before this incident.
    4
  16. Stand your ground does NOT mean you get to respond with deadly force to any and every kind of physical provocation.
    4
  17.  @miriambamford6513  "If he didn't pull out his gun, who knows what's gonna happen next." Do you... at any time... see any continuation of aggressive action on the part of McGlockton, after the initial push? "Stopping the threat" was achieved by pulling out the gun. What is supposed to be the goal? Stopping the threat or ending any possibility of a threat. You don't seem to take into account that "the fear" he was under is automatically reversed by the fact that he has a gun and McGlockton doesn't. Is this whole thing as simple as "you pushed me"... "I feel threatened"...."now I can kill you"? Once Mr. McGlockton shoved Mr. Drejka down... and the Mr. Drejka subsequently removed his gun.... the gun itself was obviously a deterrent to any further escalation of the incident ... because Mr. McGlockton backed up at the point the gun was withdrawn. The drawn gun and Mr. McGlockton backing up was supposed to end this situation. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make the case that a man, who is backing up at the sight of a gun, is a threat to the person with the gun. The gun should have served as the "end-all" to the situation.
    4
  18. It was none of Drejka's business. If he hadn't confronted them then none of this would've happened.
    4
  19. You can't murder someone over any and every kind of physical assault. You have to have a reasonable fear for your life, and it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Drejka did not in fact have a reasonable fear that a man walking backwards and turning away was a threat to his life.
    3
  20. Drejka did, yes.
    3
  21. Exactly. He's so unbelievably pathetic and sad. This was the best thing he had to do with his time after retiring young and inheriting a bunch of money.
    3
  22. We have vision from the security camera of Marquis take several steps backwards and turning away at the point in which he's shot. There's also Drejka's history of pulling this kind of shit. What more evidence do you need to prove his guilt?
    3
  23.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  It wasn't justified, which is why he was convicted. Cope.
    3
  24. I watched the sentencing. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them. I don't know what kind of car he drove, but I'd bet money it was a Crown Vic. Drejka had inherited a lot of money from his mother and was retired since his early 40's. This is how he chose to spend his time. He will now reportedly spend his time in prison being a hall monitor asking to see other inmates hall passes. Bad shoot/good verdict.
    3
  25. He was brutally assaulted in prison in 2020. The karma bus will run you over eventually.
    3
  26. It was none of his fucking business that they were parked in a handicap spot.
    3
  27.  @ptrekboxbreaks5198  Several witnesses that were at the store testified that Drejka was very loud and threatening, so much so that they immediately made mention of it upon entering the store which Marquis overheard.
    3
  28. Okay? He still backed up and was turning away when he got shot, and there's no way to justify that.
    3
  29. It's crazy to me that people think any kind of physical assault constitutes a reasonable fear for your life. That's just not how it works.
    3
  30. Interesting wording there, as if Drejka was just standing there minding his own business when all of a sudden Marquis just ran up and bowled him over for nothing.... Seriously dude...
    3
  31.  @chrisman714368 Drejka had no right to harrass his wife and small children either.
    3
  32. Drejka shouldn't have been harassing his wife and child.
    3
  33.  @giovannimiceli2850  Low-effort trolling. Be better.
    3
  34. @The Great Pumpkin "You can deal with someone talking to your wife without putting your hands on them." He wasn't "talking" to her. He was yelling and swearing at her. To the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    3
  35. "so.... we applaud assault right?" No-one is applauding assault in the video or in the comment section. What the fuck are you talking about?
    3
  36. Drejka was verbally abusing his wife. He was a threat. Any man defend their wife the same way. It was a push, not a punch to the face or attack with a weapon. You can't fucking murder someone for pushing you over. That's NOT a reasonable FEAR for your life.
    3
  37.  @dannyj5688  I watched the sentencing. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them. I don't know what kind of car he drove, but I'd bet money it was a Crown Vic.
    2
  38. That's what you took away from this?
    2
  39.  @alexgreen6678  Here you are with the same response to another post. When did they say anything about coming to America? Why even reply with this?
    2
  40. He didn't have a reasonable fear for his life. You can't murder someone for pushing you over. Do you seriously think you can shoot someone dead in retaliation to any kind of physical assault no matter how minor?
    2
  41. Once Mr. McGlockton shoved Mr. Drejka down... and the Mr. Drejka subsequently removed his gun.... the gun itself was obviously a deterrent to any further escalation of the incident ... because Mr. McGlockton backed up at the point the gun was withdrawn. The drawn gun and Mr. McGlockton backing up was supposed to end this situation. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make the case that a man, who is backing up at the sight of a gun, is a threat to the person with the gun. The gun should have served as the "end-all" to the situation.
    2
  42.  @sadisticdemon1145  How's that Free Dylan Roof website coming along?
    2
  43. Drejka could've minded his own goddamn business and none of this would've happened.
    2
  44. Obvious troll is obvious 🙄
    2
  45.  @unworthy1582  "Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself" -George Carlin
    2
  46. Didn't we all spend 10+ years in school learning the appropriate response to physical confrontations? What sort of lunatic thinks it's okay to shoot someone for pushing you? Fuck this guy.
    2
  47. You can't murder people over any and every kind of physical assault either. You have to have a genuine fear that your life is in danger, which the evidence proved Drejka did not have.
    2
  48.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  Even without talking to the cops, the surveillance footage and witness testimony would've been enough. Michael Drejka was rightly convicted by an all-white jury and sent to prison for 20 years, so I have no reason to seethe or cope about anything here. I'm quite satisfied actually.
    2
  49. He murdered someone because he was pushed over. Why would you want a dangerous lunatic like that back on the streets? Didn't you hear in the video how he'd already pulled a gun twice before over similar incidents?
    2
  50. You learn from as young as kindergarten what an appropriate response to physical provocation is. You can't murder someone for pushing you over, especially if you're the one who initiated the confrontation by acting aggressively and threatening towards a man's wife and small children.
    2
  51.  @neilsaxton109  I watched the sentencing. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them. I don't know what kind of car he drove, but I'd bet money it was a Crown Vic. Drejka had inherited a lot of money from his mother and was retired since his early 40's. This is how he chose to spend his time. He will now reportedly spend his time in prison being a hall monitor asking to see other inmates hall passes. Bad shoot/good verdict.
    2
  52. Or maybe mind your own business and don't confront a man's wife and small children while he's in the store?
    2
  53. You can't fucking murder someone for pushing you over, especially when you initiated the confrontation and were threatening the mans wife and children who were in the car. What is wrong with you?
    2
  54. Don't go around provoking confrontations and you'll never have to worry about getting head stomped.
    2
  55. Drejka had pulled this shit on like 4 different occasions in just the last 5 years. He retired early because of wear and tear on his body and also because he had a decent inheritance left to him. Unfortunately he had no aim or purpose in his life. He was looking for a situation where he could create a conflict and then shoot someone in self defense, in some bizarre kind of hero fantasy he had. He wanted to be a cop or in the military but wasn't cut out for either. Being some heroic citizen that saves the day was the next best thing for him, only that scenario isn't so common to find yourself in, so he was trying to make one happen. He was a ticking timebomb.
    2
  56. Exactly. We learn as early as Kindergarten what the appropriate response is to physical provocation.
    2
  57. The man was defending his wife who was being yelled at and abused by a stranger. "pushed so hard he fell on the ground" boo-fucking-hoo. You don't get to murder someone for pushing you over. Jesus Christ, I'd hate to know how you responded to physical altercations back in school.
    2
  58. I watched the sentencing. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them. I don't know what kind of car he drove, but I'd bet money it was a Crown Vic.
    2
  59. Also, Drejka wasn't "talking" to her. He was yelling and swearing at her. To the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    2
  60. You should have to take a psychological exam before owning a gun to weed out nutcase larper's like Drejka
    2
  61. Because multiple witnesses thought the argument was so loud and heated that they made mention of it when they entered the store where Marquis was. He returned to his car to find some crazy redneck screaming abuse at his wife while his small child was in the backseat. He did what any man would do and stepped up to protect his family.
    2
  62. Exactly. He could plainly tell the woman was sitting in the passenger seat and that obviously her husband was in the store. Who the fuck else would he think pushed him?
    2
  63. Stupid is as stupid does. We're talking about a guy who had several previous incidents of pulling a gun out over practically nothing. He was a dangerous idiot.
    2
  64. The threat ended when he pulled the gun out. He had no justifiable reason to shoot him at that point because he did not have a reasonable fear for his life.
    2
  65.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  If he can't see someone from less than 10 ft away stepping backwards then his vision must be severely impaired and he should neither be driving a car or be even able to own a gun.
    2
  66. You can't murder someone for pushing you over, especially if you initiated the conflict.
    2
  67. You can't say any and every physical confrontation constitutes a reasonable fear for your life. It's absurd. Drejka is where he belongs.
    2
  68.  @neuuser7071  I watched the sentencing. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them.
    2
  69.  @neuuser7071  He wasn't "talking" to her. He was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    2
  70. "People are just dumb" No, you're dumb. It wasn't Drejka's job to make sure people that aren't disabled aren't parking in a handicap spot, oh, and by the way...... just where was Drejka parked at this time? He wasn't charged at and tackled to the ground, he was pushed over by a man defending his wife who was being verbally attacked. The guys was backing away and Drejka still shot him. Drejka had no right to be policing the parking spots outside the store anyway. He initiated the confrontation and his reaction was completely unjustified. Their was no further threat. You can't murder people because someone was defending their wife and pushed you over.
    2
  71. Or how about not confronting people about things that don't concern you?
    2
  72. This guy inherits a whole whack of money, doesn't have to work, and he can't think of anything better to do with his time than harass people over parking spaces? Travel the world? Get more education? Finance a business or some kind of creative hobby? Buy a boat or get a pilot's license? Attend sporting events in luxury seats? Buy a beach house and live peacefully on the ocean? Nope, I'm gonna go to the corner store everyday with my gun and look for someone to fuck with. Sheer brilliance Mike, sheer and utter brilliance.
    2
  73.  @Sinbased  For what purpose?
    2
  74.  @hughjainis8302  My first comment already answers that. The way you worded it makes no mention of the circumstances of what happened. Marquis didn't just "truck over a stranger" he pushed a man over who was yelling at his wife while his small children were in the backseat. Context matters.
    2
  75.  @hughjainis8302  You implied Drejka was some random guy that got tackled for no reason. Stop playing games.
    2
  76. How bored and insecure is this guy that he's policing the car park of his local grocery store. A car park that was empty anyway. What a sad existence.
    2
  77. You can't respond with deadly force to any and every kind of physical confrontation. You have to have a reasonable fear that your life is in danger and that you had no other options. There's a burden of proof that must be met to claim self-defense. Drejka clearly didn't meet that as he initiated the confrontation and because Marquis backed up and was turning away at the point when Drejka fired the gun.
    2
  78. That was none of Michael Drejka's concern. It was an empty parking lot anyway, and Drejka himself parked illegally which is the ultimate irony of this needless and unnecessary incident.
    2
  79.  @nfaisnfgay  You can't respond to any and every physical assault with deadly force, especially if you're the one who provoked the confrontation by threatening a man's family.
    2
  80.  @nfaisnfgay  If the verbal exchange occurs in such a manner as to make one fear for their safety, it's assault. He's standing at her door. He has her trapped in the car as he's berating her. His verbal barrage was sufficient to draw the attention of a customer who exited the store and then just sat in her car as well as the two drivers who pulled in AFTER the exchange started. If a cop had been there Drejka would have been instructed to walk away and, had he not, he would have been arrested for assault. Legally: the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
    2
  81. Found the edgy 12 year old 🙄
    2
  82. Less than 1% of gun deaths are from self defense. More guns is absolutely NOT the answer. Less guns in the hands of guys like Drejka is what we need.
    2
  83.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  I watched the sentencing. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot, kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them.
    2
  84.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  Do you... at any time... see any continuation of aggressive action on the part of McGlockton, after the initial push? "Stopping the threat" was achieved by pulling out the gun. What is supposed to be the goal? Stopping the threat or ending any possibility of a threat. You don't seem to take into account that "the fear" he was under is automatically reversed by the fact that he has a gun and McGlockton doesn't. Is this whole thing as simple as "you pushed me"... "I feel threatened"...."now I can kill you"? Once Mr. McGlockton shoved Mr. Drejka down... and the Mr. Drejka subsequently removed his gun.... the gun itself was obviously a deterrent to any further escalation of the incident ... because Mr. McGlockton backed up at the point the gun was withdrawn. The drawn gun and Mr. McGlockton backing up was supposed to end this situation. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make the case that a man, who is backing up at the sight of a gun, is a threat to the person with the gun. The gun should have served as the "end-all" to the situation.
    2
  85.  @alexafromsouthcarolina5666  They said maybe it could've prevented this tragedy. Learn to read.
    2
  86.  @marvinsalmeron585  "Mike’s biggest issue is he really wanted to live out his fantasy and you see it though his interrogation he’s happy to retell the moments" This is a key element of Drejka's character that was a focal point of the trial. He had a history of instigating these sort of incidents. Something like this was bound to happen with him one day. He was continually looking for trouble rather than minding his own business and enjoying his retirement peacefully.
    2
  87.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  They did actually. You'd know that if you watched any of the trial. Your only frame of reference is the first 10 minutes of the video you watched before racing down to the comment section to comment on something you didn't have much context on.
    2
  88. Drejka should've minded his own goddamn business. Of what concern was it to him who parks in a handicap spot? He instigated the confrontation and threatened a man's wife and children.
    2
  89. Actually, he was committing a crime. It's called "assault" and he had no right to block the door of that car. He wasn't "talking" to her. He was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor. According to the witnesses he was swearing at her, demanding she move the car and she repeatedly told him she would move when her man came out of the store. Bottom line, she was parked illegally but she didn't take the space from Drejka. There were MULTIPLE empty spots MUCH closer to the door so, unless someone pulled in in a handicapped van there was really no problem. Drejka is NOT the parking police nor is he the owner of the store therefore it was NOT his place nor his right to harass her about parking there. If he was so disturbed by it he should have either stayed in his car and called the police or gone inside and let the clerk/manager know. about it and let THEM handle it.
    1
  90. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry."
    1
  91. ​ @alexgreen6678  Here you are with the same response to another post. When did they say anything about coming to America? Why even reply with this?
    1
  92. The witnesses to the incident who testified at the trial all seemed to think it was a pretty heated exchange and that Drejka was very loud and threatening.
    1
  93. Haven't we all had some form of physical confrontation at some point in our lives? People can tell how much of a physical threat is posed towards them and determine the appropriate response. Not every physical altercation means you have a reasonable fear that you're life is in danger. There's just absolutely no justification for murdering someone for pushing you over, especially when in this instance Drejka could've logically assumed the person who pushed hi was defending the woman he was yelling at and abusing.
    1
  94. You would've done fuck all mate. Sit down.
    1
  95.  @LocalCoot  Drejka initiated the confrontation. Marquis got physical because Drejka was aggressive and threatening towards his wife.
    1
  96. That's your takeaway from this? Don't ever reproduce.
    1
  97. If he were a cop then all the circumstances of the case would be entirely different, so it's pointless and stupid to even make such a comparison.
    1
  98.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  So now you're admitting the threat of being shot was sufficient? You're all over the place on this one, dude 😂
    1
  99. Great, another MAGA cretin living vicariously through this lunatic 🙄
    1
  100.  @thebluerock6048  and what is that message?
    1
  101. He was threatening his wife and small children who were in the backseat.
    1
  102. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry."
    1
  103. Why would the FBI give a shit about people with a casual interest in true crime? What the hell might you possibly be "planning"?
    1
  104. Reported ⚠
    1
  105.  @WilliamSmith-ex9et  "dRuGs aRe bAd mMmMkAy?" 🙄
    1
  106. JCS refuses to come right out and say it, but they allude to it being because they were demonetized. I think there was something going on behind the scenes though. I think the creators wanted to go their separate ways. Why they're choosing to be so vague and keep everyone in suspense is anybody's guess.
    1
  107. It's such a strange culture. Guns are toys to most Americans.
    1
  108. He was defending his family.
    1
  109. Don't ever reproduce...
    1
  110. In conclusion: Mind your own fucking business and you won't get shoved on your ass.
    1
  111. Wrong.
    1
  112.  @allaboutroofing2  Drejka was yelling and swearing at Marquis' wife to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    1
  113.  @allaboutroofing2  Then there was the CCTV footage which clearly shows Marquis retreat several steps and turn away after the gun was pulled, yet Drejka still fired at him.
    1
  114. The witnesses who testified at trial said Drejka was very loud and aggressive, which is the same way his previous victims described his behavior in the 4 previous road rage incidents he was involved in. He was looking for a confrontation and looking to escalate it to the point where he could use his gun.
    1
  115.  @gameguy10987  Actually, he was committing a crime. It's called "assault" and he had no right to block the door of that car. He wasn't "talking" to her, he was yelling and swearing at her. To the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor. According to the witnesses he was swearing at her, demanding she move the car and she repeatedly told him she would move when her man came out of the store. Bottom line, she was parked illegally but she didn't take the space from Drejka. There were MULTIPLE empty spots MUCH closer to the door so, unless someone pulled in in a handicapped van there was really no problem. Drejka is NOT the parking police nor is he the owner of the store therefore it was NOT his place nor his right to harass her about parking there. If he was so disturbed by it he should have either stayed in his car and called the police or gone inside and let the clerk/manager know. about it and let THEM handle it.
    1
  116. Clearly looking for trouble. He had a history of initiating confrontations and pulling his gun. Another larper who failed at becoming a cop or joining the army. Such a loser.
    1
  117. Drejka was a dangerous lunatic who had altercations like this before. On this day he was itching to initiate a situation like this so he could use his gun. Absolute fucking coward this guy was.
    1
  118.  @cobain2261  He was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    1
  119. Remind me where Drejka parked again?!?!?
    1
  120.  @chefdatboird3617  Nope. Try again.
    1
  121.  @chefdatboird3617  Drejka was parked illegally himself which is the ultimate irony of this whole thing 😂🤣
    1
  122.  @theapplekingdom5493  There are plenty of people in the comments defending him.
    1
  123. If you don't want to be shoved over then mind your fucking business and don't harass a man's wife and children.
    1
  124. It wasn't up to Drejka to enforce that law, so that argument goes right out the fucking window. Drejka started it and finished it. He's where he belongs.
    1
  125. Jesus, who gives a shit....
    1
  126.  @sadisticdemon1145  I hope your Mom revoked your internet privileges for a few days after she saw the kind of edgelord shithead posts you were making online.
    1
  127. *Things 7 year old's notice
    1
  128. Excellent question...
    1
  129. Amazing observation 🙄
    1
  130. There was no reason for Drejka to confront the woman in the first place. Why does everyone defending him just completely skip over the fact that Drejka INITIATED the confrontation? NONE of this happens if he minds his own goddamn business!
    1
  131.  @genericyoutubeuser8957  I think you replied to the wrong comment 😅
    1
  132. He wasn't "talking" to her. He was yelling and swearing at her. To the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor. If the verbal exchange occurs in such a manner as to make one fear for their safety, it's assault. He's standing at her door. He has her trapped in the car as he's berating her. His verbal barrage was sufficient to draw the attention a customer who exited the store and then just sat in her car as well as the two drivers who pulled in AFTER the exchange started. If a cop had been there he would have been instructed to walk away and, had he not, he would have been arrested for assault. Legally: the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
    1
  133. Assault a man's wife and small children and be ready to accept the consequences.
    1
  134. His intentions were to defend his wife and small children who were in the backseat from a scruffy looking stranger that was threatening them.
    1
  135.  @snarkynader9400  Even if Drejka had consulted a lawyer first, the evidence showed that he instigated the confrontation and did not have a reasonable fear for his life. The surveillance footage and the witnesses from the store sealed his fate, regardless of what he said during the interrogation.
    1
  136.  @snarkynader9400  3 witnesses at Drejka's trial testified that Drejka was loud and threatening, to the point that they immediately called attention to the situation when they went into the store.
    1
  137.  @snarkynader9400  Drejka had 4 prior incidents like this in which he pulled his gun out and threatened people. He was a menace who was deliberately trying to instigate a confrontation. He had no business confronting Marquis and his wife, and by the letter of the law, was NOT justified to shoot and kill and man who stepped backwards and turned away from him after he drew his gun.
    1
  138. Drejka approached a car and could see a woman sitting in the passenger side and small children in the backseat. Upon being shoved to the ground it should've been obvious to him that it was the woman's husband. Drejka had no reason to feel his life was in danger.
    1
  139.  Ene  So who upon seeing a woman in the passenger seat and no-one in the driver seat, who do you suppose Drejka thought was driving and had parked in that space?
    1
  140.  @bettyboop7499  Do you... at any time... see any continuation of aggressive action on the part of McGlockton, after the initial push? "Stopping the threat" was achieved by pulling out the gun. What is supposed to be the goal? Stopping the threat or ending any possibility of a threat. You don't seem to take into account that "the fear" he was under is automatically reversed by the fact that he has a gun and McGlockton doesn't. Is this whole thing as simple as "you pushed me"... "I feel threatened"...."now I can kill you"?
    1
  141.  @bettyboop7499  Once Mr. McGlockton shoved Mr. Drejka down... and the Mr. Drejka subsequently removed his gun.... the gun itself was obviously a deterrent to any further escalation of the incident ... because Mr. McGlockton backed up at the point the gun was withdrawn. The drawn gun and Mr. McGlockton backing up was supposed to end this situation. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make the case that a man, who is backing up at the sight of a gun, is a threat to the person with the gun. The gun should have served as the "end-all" to the situation.
    1
  142. 4. Mind your fucking business
    1
  143. Mind your own business.
    1
  144.  @ayemex5444  For what? What the hell else could he or should he have done in that situation?
    1
  145. Actually, he was committing a crime. It's called "assault" and he had no right to block the door of that car. He wasn't "talking" to her. He was yelling and swearing at her. To the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor. According to the witnesses he was swearing at her, demanding she move the car and she repeatedly told him she would move when her man came out of the store. Bottom line, she was parked illegally but she didn't take the space from Drejka. There were MULTIPLE empty spots MUCH closer to the door so, unless someone pulled in in a handicapped van there was really no problem. Drejka is NOT the parking police nor is he the owner of the store therefore it was NOT his place nor his right to harass her about parking there. If he was so disturbed by it he should have either stayed in his car and called the police or gone inside and let the clerk/manager know. about it and let THEM handle it.
    1
  146. Drejka was only brave enough to confront people because of his "fOrCe MuLtIpLiEr"
    1
  147.  @ReneAensland  He didn't have any reasonable fear for his life. We spend 10+ years in school from the age of 5 learning not to escalate physical violence. You can't fucking murder someone for pushing you over, especially when YOU INITIATED THE FUCKING CONFRONTATION!
    1
  148. She was parked illegally but she didn't take the space from Drejka. There were MULTIPLE empty spots MUCH closer to the door so, unless someone pulled in in a handicapped van there was really no problem. Drejka is NOT the parking police nor is he the owner of the store therefore it was NOT his place nor his right to harass her about parking there. If he was so disturbed by it he should have either stayed in his car and called the police or gone inside and let the clerk/manager know. about it and let THEM handle it.
    1
  149. So much stupidity I don't even know where to begin. I pray you neither have a gun license or children.
    1
  150. I don't think Drejka was even 40 at this point. How the f**k is he an old man?
    1
  151. The only p*ssy was the guy confronting a woman and child rather than waiting for the man to return to the vehicle.
    1
  152. You can't murder someone for pushing you over. Dangerous idiots like you and Drejka shouldn't be allowed to have guns.
    1
  153.  @cobain2261  Don't confront people over things that have nothing to fucking do with you. Threaten a man's wife and small children and find out 👊🏾
    1
  154. Remind me again who initiated this whole thing?
    1
  155. Race-baiting, trolling, stupidity. Not even gonna bother with this one...
    1
  156. "AND the ENTIRE situation was INITIATED by the young black woman" Drejka initiated the situation. He had no business confronting the woman. None of this would've happened if he'd minded his own business.
    1
  157. Looks like he murdered a man who merely pushed him to the ground after he was yelling abuse at his wife and small children in the car who were waiting for him. Drejka's a coward and so are you.
    1
  158. Last time Drejka has freedom. All he had to do was mind his own business and go about his day. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Take notes Gary!
    1
  159. He wasn't "talking" to her. He was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    1
  160.  @greg77389  Not every physical assault has you in genuine fear for your life that justifies responding with deadly force.
    1
  161. Do you... at any time... see any continuation of aggressive action on the part of McGlockton, after the initial push? "Stopping the threat" was achieved by pulling out the gun. What is supposed to be the goal? Stopping the threat or ending any possibility of a threat. You don't seem to take into account that "the fear" he was under is automatically reversed by the fact that he has a gun and McGlockton doesn't. Is this whole thing as simple as "you pushed me"... "I feel threatened"...."now I can kill you"? Once Mr. McGlockton shoved Mr. Drejka down... and the Mr. Drejka subsequently removed his gun.... the gun itself was obviously a deterrent to any further escalation of the incident ... because Mr. McGlockton backed up at the point the gun was withdrawn. The drawn gun and Mr. McGlockton backing up was supposed to end this situation. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make the case that a man, who is backing up at the sight of a gun, is a threat to the person with the gun. The gun should have served as the "end-all" to the situation.
    1
  162. Michael Drejka is not the kind of man you want to emulate...
    1
  163. Murder someone who merely shoved you to the ground because you were verbally abusing his wife? Really?
    1
  164.  @cobain2261  Threatening a man's wife and small children is certainly enough to provoke a physical confrontation. Drejka instigated the entire thing.
    1
  165.  @cobain2261  He was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. It was concerning enough that they remarked about it to the store manager and to Marquis. These people all testified to this at the trial. If Drejka had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    1
  166. Yet look at where Drejka ends up parking. Ironic.
    1
  167. Because he was aggressively confronting his wife and there was also small children in the backseat. Is a man wrong to defend his family?
    1
  168.  Ene  Clearly Drejka was acting threatening with both his words and body language. The dude's wife and small children were in the car. He merely pushed him over. How is shooting him the appropriate retaliation? Is there a reasonable fear for your life after simply being pushed over? Come on....
    1
  169.  Ene  You can't murder someone for pushing you over. We spend over a decade of our lives in the school system learning the appropriate response to provocation. Did you ever fear for your life in the playground after another kid pushed you over?
    1
  170.  Ene  It wasn't "seemingly out of nowhere". Like I already said, who did he think was driving? He approached a car with no-one in the drivers seat, but someone sitting in the passenger seat, so logically he should've assumed whomever pushed him wasn't just some random person, but the driver of the car he'd approached. Also, again, where was the fear for his life? You can't classify any kind of physical attack as a legitimate fear for your life. Would you really want to live in a country where you can fucking murder anyone that makes any sort of physical contact with you, no matter how minor, in retaliation?
    1
  171. Spoken like a true cowardly piece of shit.
    1
  172. She was parked illegally but she didn't take the space from Drejka. There were MULTIPLE empty spots MUCH closer to the door so, unless someone pulled in in a handicapped van there was really no problem. Drejka is NOT the parking police nor is he the owner of the store therefore it was NOT his place nor his right to harass her about parking there. If he was so disturbed by it he should have either stayed in his car and called the police or gone inside and let the clerk/manager know. about it and let THEM handle it.
    1
  173. Why the hell does it matter? and what the fuck business was it of Drejka's?
    1
  174. "And the lesson here is to not assault anyone without cause" Which is what Drejka did, and now he's paying the price. Murdering someone because they merely pushed you over in an act of defending their wife? Seriously, fuck this guy.
    1
  175.  Tyler Godby  It's not up to Drejka to hold anyone accountable for anything. It was a situation that didn't concern him whatsoever.
    1
  176.  @reddiver7293  First mistake: Cosplaying as the handicap placard inspector Second mistake: Thinking any kind of physical provocation give you the right to respond with deadly force
    1
  177.  @lx4079  Drejka wasn't disabled. Learn the basic facts of the case before commenting next time 👍
    1
  178.  @toad1863  "non of this would have happened if the man didn't assault him for no reason." He was yelling at and threatening his wife while his small children were in the backseat. Try to pay attention.
    1
  179.  @alexgreen6678  Weird response...
    1
  180. His wife and small children were being threatened.
    1
  181. Race-baiting and trolling attempts failed. Try harder next time.
    1
  182. CCTV footage of him shooting a guy dead for pushing him over says otherwise....
    1
  183. Would you think you had the right to shoot him dead even after he stepped backwards and turned away?
    1
  184. ​ @nfaisnfgay  I think the racial element was definitely overblown in this case (as it is in many cases today), but even without it, there was still enough evidence against Drejka to support his conviction. Marquis and his wife were no angels. I have no doubt that she mouthed off to Drejka, and the shove from Marquis was pretty excessive. I think Marquis could've gotten within 10 feet, shouted at Drejka while marching towards him and it would've made him back off. However, once Marquis shoved Drejka down... and Drejka subsequently removed his gun.... the gun itself was obviously a deterrent to any further escalation of the incident ... because Marquis backed up at the point the gun was drawn. The drawn gun and Marquis backing up was supposed to end this situation. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make the case that a man, who is backing up at the sight of a gun, is a threat to the person with the gun. The gun should have served as the "end-all" to the situation. The bottom line is though that there never would've been any confrontation had Drejka minded his own business. He wasn't disabled himself. He didn't pull up to a full parking lot with his disabled mother and then politely ask someone without a placard to park somewhere else, he was a serial pest that was looking for a confrontation and a reason to use his gun.
    1
  185. Who initiated the confrontation again?
    1
  186. And what fucking authority did Michael Drejka have in this situation? None.
    1
  187. He provoked the confrontation and didn't have a reasonable fear for his life.
    1
  188. Try watching the video to the very end. Context is important. You can't just form an opinion based on the security footage.
    1
  189. Don't ever reproduce...
    1
  190. Legend has it your sister is also your mother.
    1
  191. Not as long as YouTube keeps the channel demonetized.
    1
  192.  @jeanmariechopin5080  Content guidelines are pretty strict on YouTube now. If something isn't entirely kid friendly then it get demonetized. So many content creators have to rely on a healthy Patreon subscriber base now. YouTube still gets all their ad revenue though.
    1
  193. Try actually watching the video....
    1
  194.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  Drejka wasn't "talking" to her. He was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor. According to the witnesses he was swearing at her, demanding she move the car and she repeatedly told him she would move when her man came out of the store. Bottom line, she was parked illegally but she didn't take the space from Drejka. There were MULTIPLE empty spots MUCH closer to the door so, unless someone pulled in in a handicapped van there was really no problem. Drejka is NOT the parking police nor is he the owner of the store therefore it was NOT his place nor his right to harass her about parking there. If he was so disturbed by it he should have either stayed in his car and called the police or gone inside and let the clerk/manager know. about it and let THEM handle it.
    1
  195.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  Solid arguments 👍 Were you captain of the debate team in high-school?
    1
  196. That's your takeaway from this? Don't ever reproduce.
    1
  197. He was defending his wife who was being threatened by Drejka. He merely pushed him over, which at worst sprained his wrist. You don't think killing the guy in response was perhaps a little over the top?
    1
  198.  @svelt8336  The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them. I don't know what kind of car he drove, but I'd bet money it was a Crown Vic. Drejka had inherited a lot of money from his mother and was retired since his early 40's. This is how he chose to spend his time. He will now reportedly spend his time in prison being a hall monitor asking to see other inmates hall passes.
    1
  199. There's something wrong with you...
    1
  200. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry."
    1
  201.  @CruisingMadeForYou  He wasn't "talking" to her, hee was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    1
  202.  @CruisingMadeForYou  He was choked that "they" were at "his" cornerstore in "his" neighborhood, and what are "they" doing there ? He seized the opportunity to play neighborhood cop in order to discourage "them" from coming into "his" neighborhood again, by harrassing them....playing it off like he's doing the store management and the neighborhood a favor, and likely expected affirmation by others. Thus, after fully embracing the starring role as the armed neighborhood racist bully....he falls shamelessly backwards into the character of the helpless victim, though he was superman 2 minutes ago. I believe he was looking for a confrontation where he could brandish his weapon to scare them away, and he shot the husband purely out of retribution for ending the power trip he was waging on the man's wife. He instantly lost all his power and lost face in front of everybody present, so he makes a move to reclaim power and control of the situation. It has nothing to do with self defence.
    1
  203.  @CruisingMadeForYou  The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them. I don't know what kind of car he drove, but I'd bet money it was a Crown Vic. Drejka had inherited a lot of money from his mother and was retired since his early 40's. This is how he chose to spend his time. He will now reportedly spend his time in prison being a hall monitor asking to see other inmates hall passes.
    1
  204. Drejka wasn't disabled so this was none of his business.
    1
  205.  @cobain2261  Do you... at any time... see any continuation of aggressive action on the part of McGlockton, after the initial push? "Stopping the threat" was achieved by pulling out the gun. What is supposed to be the goal? Stopping the threat or ending any possibility of a threat. You don't seem to take into account that "the fear" he was under is automatically reversed by the fact that he has a gun and McGlockton doesn't. Is this whole thing as simple as "you pushed me"... "I feel threatened"...."now I can kill you"? Once Mr. McGlockton shoved Mr. Drejka down... and the Mr. Drejka subsequently removed his gun.... the gun itself was obviously a deterrent to any further escalation of the incident ... because Mr. McGlockton backed up at the point the gun was withdrawn. The drawn gun and Mr. McGlockton backing up was supposed to end this situation. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make the case that a man, who is backing up at the sight of a gun, is a threat to the person with the gun. The gun should have served as the "end-all" to the situation.
    1
  206.  @normanreviewsgames698  They're just 2 of many examples.
    1
  207. Maybe Drejka should've minded his own fucking business then and not cowardly threatened a man's wife and small children.
    1
  208.  @alig5211  You have to have a reasonable fear for your life to use deadly force. You can't fucking kill someone over any kind of physical assault, especially if you're the one who instigated the confrontation and were verbally abusing a man's wife and small child.
    1
  209.  @user-tf5lg7fc9s  A jury of 12 decided Drejka was not justified to murder a man who was unarmed and stepping backwards away from him. Cope.
    1
  210. Actually, he was committing a crime. It's called "assault" and he had no right to block the door of that car. He wasn't "talking" to her, he was yelling and swearing at her, to the point where other customers, both coming OUT of the store and going in ALL stopped to watch and listen. If he had been speaking in a calm, polite manner I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have paid the least bit of attention. And he didn't need to touch the car. He had her trapped by standing blocking the door and he was speaking in a threatening manner which is part of the reason why he was convicted. Because he instigated the entire incident. He is NOT the parking lot police. It's not his property so he had no right to walk over and say ANYTHING. In doing so he became the aggressor.
    1
  211. @@nickwest9921 He comes across like some racist edgy teen. It's embarrassing.
    1
  212. I know right? Because it's not 4K footage it might misrepresent things like someone stepping forward or someone stepping backwards. That defense lawyer can't possibly think the jury would've been that stupid to buy that.
    1
  213.  @looking4things669  It's just one word salad reply after another from Johnny Douchebag without ever responding to a single point other people are making. He's probably on the spectrum or something.
    1
  214. Sure. Must be why he's in prison for life, right?
    1
  215. No-one would do that to a cop though, so it's a stupid comparison. Drejka was loud and threatening, which several people who were there testified to.
    1
  216. How much guns and canned goods do you have stockpiled in your basement?
    1
  217. Imagine a scenario where you weren't a racist fuckwit.
    1
  218. I don't think anyone is denying that, but he's clearly backing up and turning away after the gun is drawn though.
    1
  219. Hypocritical how?
    1
  220.  @yoransom  I watched the sentencing. The judge gave an excellent detailed step by step explanation of this incident and why it was not self defense. The judge also brought up previous incidents provoked by Drejka. Drejka was a wanna-be cop who appointed himself lot monitor of the convenience store parking lot. The store owner had told Drejka about confronting people for using the H/C parking space, saying something along the lines of "it's not worth it. You're going to run into the wrong person one day." Reportedly Drejka replied, "That's why I carry." The judge also noted how ironic it was that when Drejka drove into the lot to confront the woman parked in the H/C space, he himself parked illegally. Supposedly Drejka would sit in his car across the street and watch the H/C space. When someone without a H/C placard or plate parked in the H/C space he would drive into the lot kinda Starsky & Hutch style to confront them. I don't know what kind of car he drove, but I'd bet money it was a Crown Vic.
    1
  221.  @yoransom  If Drejka wasn't playing parking inspector then none of this would've happened. He was the instigator.
    1
  222. That's your takeaway from this video? Wow....
    1
  223. What does?
    1