Full Michael Drejka sentencing

everyone stands up 3/4 back instead of smug good morning okay so we're here at a ruling on the state of Florida versus Michael, to separate is to be ready, yes, your honor, the defense is ready, yes, Your honor, very well, fine, so I will allow the defense. To go first, we want to present any evidence we can. If there is anyone who wants to address the court, he can do so. If you just want to make an argument, you can do so. Yes sir. Good morning, Brian Cameron, on behalf of Mr. Draco said that with the permission of the court what we would like to do is...

I would like to begin my presentation and then, if mr. trevino could just chime in have something extra and then conclude with miss coy if that's possible judge good job taking a look at the

sentencing

guidelines the criminal punishment score sheet that the state has calculated mr. Drake is sentenced to a presumptive personal prison term, the lowest, eleven point five years, when I will ask the court to consider the mitigating circumstances described in the statute. I think it's pursuant to chapter 921. I would like the court to focus, obviously, we want. What is best for the client?

You know we are here in the position of judge. We know that a life was taken and we don't want to lose credibility with the court, but obviously, for the sake of our clients, we want the lowest sentence allowed, but also for that reason. jadi we also request that the courts consider the following mitigating circumstances and consider at least the opportunity to give the society that Shousha sought out the society because he is remorseful and can benefit from his experience and then pay it back to the community in ways other than include prison. and obviously that would mean that we would ask for probation or house arrest or some form of home confinement, that is what we are asking the judge and this mr.

Treviño will point to the judge and then at some point ask the court to consider other circumstances for consideration, but with that being said, judge, the first thing I wanted to point out is that one of the judge's mitigating circumstances was that the crime was committed. in an unsophisticated manner, it was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse. I think looking back we know that, based on the usual evidence, this was the only time we claim that a gun was ever displayed and, unfortunately, used. I know that the court heard testimony from injury witnesses about other incidents of aggression or at least hostility from other people towards these other people or towards mr.

Draper, but in terms of what happened in this particular danger, I asked them what they couldn't consider that this was not something very sophisticated. I think the court can agree and I think the state would agree that this was not something that was premeditated, not planned. I think the state had focused many times during the presentation of its case in chief that this was not something done with ill will, malice or hatred, so that's what the court found to be something unsophisticated, it was isolated and has shown remorse, we know from his interview with the law enforcement judge that he cooperated with the police, he did not try to flee after the incident occurred he waited for the police to arrive and the court saw his interview, the last during more than an hour in which time showed concern and expressed some concern about what had happened with the situation of mr.

Lockton later, the judge, gave a television interview to my client, Mr. Drake and expressed his regret there in court did not consider that as a basis for the departure down, as the court knows, according to 921 point zero zero two six sub two sub J, it is appropriate to prove that the crime was committed in the sophisticated manner was a isolated incident and has shown remorse and I think the courts are aware that the court has a two step process: one is your basis for the party to down and two is done by the court in case the court has exercised its discretion by stepping down on this is a gentleman judge who has no record, has no crime at all, has no convictions whatsoever and is asking the court to consider moving down based on that, that's 921 dot zero zero two six sub two sub J again I don't think there is anything that the state has ever presented that shows that this was something that was sophisticated in any capacity or form, made the other point I asked what can the court do also under the judge statute is this the Another problem would be or the other factor that the court considers is that the victim was the initiator as a willing participant in the comedy breasts are common or the provocateur of the incident judge I know that society has been torn by what happened that day but I think that The facts speak for themselves there.

It was this meeting and at some point Mr. blocked and felt the need to get out and approach the man. Draper, the way he did, there was case law supporting that even if the jury did not reach a conclusion or find that self-defense was applicable, this court can still consider whether at the instant the instigator was actually Mr. McLaughlin in this particular case and there are a few cases that I want to cite in a moment, as I mentioned to the Judge, nothing about the way the case was presented, nothing about the form of evidence or testimony that shows that this was, in fact, something that mr. jurika had planned and was unfortunately instigated into this when mr.

McLaughlin initiated contact with him, the authority out there, judge. I was excited, behind state V 817, seven seconds, 964, sorry, 964, Florida Southern 2nd 2002, the second DC Hill, that a downward departure sentence could be imposed even though the jury rejected a claim of self-defense and there are some other cases that are cited in the state Mathis quotes me 541 seven seconds 744 is a third case eca there was a case of aggravated assault where the victim in that case provoked the incident and the court of appeals confirmed the downward departure to even though the jury rejected the self-defense claim. Another case that I want to briefly cite is state state versus Thai van lay t AI V y lay le 553 Southern ii 258, another second Florida DCA case there that was a murder case in which again the victim was the aggressor and the jury rejected the self-defense claim, so we have the judges here again, we have some authority that allowed the court to consider a downward departure based again on whether it was an isolated incident. that he has shown remorse or the fact that the victim was the initiator in theory judge there is another notion that the defendant cooperated with the state to solve the current crime is probably the weakest of our arguments judge but the authorities in this sense that I I understand that the legislature intended that provision to request that someone cooperate, like an informant, substantial assistance, but the authority that's out there seems like if they cooperated with the resolution in this case it didn't go in there, I mean, sir. drinker and lied to the authorities he gave them everything he wanted he did not have to undergo a post-arrest interview but he did and explained the situation to them he cooperated with the authorities and in the end the judge ultimately made the decision initially not to arrest them if they courts are using them, eventually arresting them in the future, but he still cooperated with authorities the way he felt he should as a law-abiding citizen and gave them the information that was ultimately used against him by sir.

Cobb and mr. Rosen water in the case in chief, so I ask the judges to consider that the bottom line of the guidelines is once again eleven point three years in prison. Sorry, eleven point five with the highest authority obviously for us in court was not considered anything greater than eleven. point five but consider giving mr. Drake was given the opportunity to pay back society through house arrest and probation. He never failed to appear before this court, always arriving on time despite the judge's public outcry demanding his imprisonment and despite the fact that he had an electronic monitoring effect due to the fact that he attracted the monitor. and as far as I know I never had any problem with the monitor, I never tried to cut it like many of our customers have done in the past and many of the defendants have done before, your honor, try cutting it and then try gluing it back on. together I've seen some really crazy things he didn't do any of that he poured it out as instructed pretrial services took this matter seriously and I think the core can look at all of that in terms of mitigation and I think that judge there is a choice, there is an opportunity or should i say mr.

Drake, who can give back to society, contribute to society, worked if he has to work, judge and then, and maybe even pay it forward, and I know that's another factor of this family, the family without the time, never we'll be able to recover, obviously on a personal level, judge, but whatever it means we can contribute. I know that mr. blocked and left behind some children and whatever that means that he can support them through institutions or that he thinks would be appropriate and that would also be another mitigating factor, so that's my request judge and with that being said, if I could change this to mr. treviño, please, the court.

I'm going to keep my comments fairly brief. Your Honor, it is no secret that this case created a lot of division in our community and nationally there have been a large number of people who have sent several emails to all members of the legal team. and texts in support of mr. Drake, some of them are highly regarded attorneys across the country, some of them even involved in the judiciary across the country and they felt that the prosecution was, at the very least, misguided and that mr. Drake had acted in accordance with the stand your ground statute, as I know the court ruled that was impermissible during the trial that Sheriff Gualtieri had indicated that his actions fell squarely within the bookends of the stand your ground statute. position. ask the court to consider that his actions by many intelligent people were determined not to be criminal in nature.

There was the State Attorney's Office in this jurisdiction that chose to proceed with a criminal proceeding and here we are today. I will say that the jury seemed confused. During their deliberations, the question that was asked cemented that confusion when they indicated that they wanted to clarify the question of reasonable doubt as it applied to the self-defense aspect of the jury instructions, they were so confused that if you look at the jury form jury verdict. has its own date, which concerns us and of course those issues will be addressed later and will be presented in the appeal of the case, but nevertheless, it is indicative that they even had difficulties and it took them about six hours or more to arrive an agreement. conclusion of the case and its deliberations our legal team has gotten to know mr.

Drake in ways the community might not know him. I know that a letter from his wife will be read soon. We have gotten to know him on a very personal level during the year of preparation before the trial and since the trial. I assure you that this is not the person you have characterized in the media, he is not a racist, he is not someone who was eager to take someone's life as the state has suggested and in previous hearings and during the trial, none of that, He is actually very sorry for the whole incident is not just because he was accused in the case, he is sorry, he really feels bad because a human life was taken away from him, he has always expressed it to all the members of the legal team.

I've seen him incarcerated in the Pinellas County Jail, your Honor. He's being held in an isolation cell all alone, he can't even have any contact with anyone, it has to be done through glass, it's usually about 55 degrees in there, so he's been suffering in ways that the community is not aware of and this court may not have even been aware of it, but his conditions in prison are anything but luxurious, to say the least. He has suffered greatly as a result of this prosecution. His family has suffered financially. He suffered in a way he couldn't even begin to understand. outline this court however I will say it as mr.

Camerino suggested that if there was ever a case that required consideration of a way out, I can't imagine facts supporting a way out any more than in this case, even aside from the prosecutor's own divisive nurse, all of those issues are put aside. here's a man with absolutely no prior record attacked, I've never been in trouble with the law and I know I'm going to be called a racist again for saying it because every time we bring this up there's a press conference later saying we're all racists. for saying that. Sir. McLaughlin attacked our client but he did it, it is a fact, it is on video and it is something that the court must not only consider, but in evaluating an appropriate sentence in this case, what is best for the community and for the country that give him a chance to talk about this incident with others as a condition of parole instead of locking him in a cold cage isolated from everythingcontact for years.

How is that enough justice? In this case, we respect

full

y suggest that this is not justice and one of the ironies of the case is that mr. Drake our society encourages gun ownership our society encourages concealed weapons permits our society encourages it through laws put in place to make it easier for people to obtain and carry weapons many states are now eliminating the need for even a concealed weapons permit that allows carry without a permit this The state has allowed two concealed weapons permits, but we will look at training. The turn to evaluate to obtain these permits.

I think you can even go online now and get a concealed weapons permit. It is absurd and yet the prosecution in this case wanted to retain Mr. Drake to the standard of a law enforcement officer, we heard that theme throughout his entire case, in general, the entire case was based on if this was a law enforcement officer, this would not be appropriate and he violated these rules and the 21 foot role and all that nonsense and the reality is he never received proper training and now we are going to hold him accountable for the state's failure to provide proper training for concealed weapons permit holders.

I think that is unfair to the client because he did what he was legally required to own and carry a firearm, he did it and now he is being criticized because his training was not up to a sufficient standard and he should have hesitated more before pulling the trigger. I'm not sure where the logic is in that. "I thought we were all taught in firearms training that when you draw a gun you better be prepared to shoot it, you don't draw it unless you're going to use it, but now that you draw the gun, that's fine," the state argued during In the main case, it was okay for him to pull out the gun, but he should have stopped there.

It doesn't make sense to me and doesn't seem to jive with the logic that if you're going to pull out a firearm and show deadly force. that you are not going to continue by using lethal force. I just think that given the totality of all the circumstances, the judge in this case asks for a way out and I hope that given similar sentences in other cases, I mean, the other day we heard that the Dallas police officer who was convicted of murder in Texas received a 10 year sentence which is less than the guidelines in this case, there are a multitude of examples of imperfect self-defense because that is essentially what we are talking about here.

He acted in self-defense, the State argued that it wasn't really self-defense under the law, so it's an imperfect self-defense argument that he should now be punished as if it was an intentional act or he was essentially trying to kill someone. we are arguing first degree murder but he is charged with involuntary manslaughter we are here in a manslaughter case we are not here to talk about intent because intentions are not an issue they were an element in a manslaughter case so again we would ask the court respect

full

y looking at the totality of the circumstances, this Court is well aware that your honor is not meant to hand down a sentence that is popular, but is meant to hand down a sentence that is just and when Woods again respectfully suggests that a sentence fair in this case would be an alternative means to incarceration to allow him to talk about what occurred, which is frequently seen in DUI manslaughter cases where people have received probation and take that opportunity to educate others about the issues. with, obviously, in this case, concealed weapons laws and the concealed weapons permit training process. process and so on, thank you, thank you, I have two letters here, one is from Mr.

Draco's wife and another one from an old friend a former co-worker I'm just going to read his wife's I gave him the other one so the court can read it silently to themselves this is how it begins dear Judge Bolon I am writing to I request leniency today to the

sentencing

Michael Drinka, who was my husband. I met Michael 11 years ago and instantly fell in love with his laugh, his smile and the way he made me laugh. We have been married for nine of those 11 years and every day I feel blessed. to have him in my life, you may have noticed that I have not attended any other court appearances and I am not here today for his sentencing.

Please don't mistake my absence as a sign that I don't support or love him in this case. has gained a lot of unwanted attention for all of us, Michael, our family and friends, due to the continued threats, it was decided that the only way to keep me safe was to not attend any court appearances, keeping me out of the attention of the media. The same decision was made regarding our family and friends who wanted to be here to show their support for Michael. I believe my husband and I trust him with my life, he is not the person from the prosecution and the media has made him out to be Michael. a kind, loving, fun, caring and hard-working man who will do anything to take care of his family and help someone in need.

Michael is an incredible man who has brought so much joy and love to my life that makes me laugh every day he leads me cries when I'm angry and listens when I need to talk since we got married. I have had eight different surgeries on my back and Michael was there every day to help me through recovery. He has my best friend, my soulmate, and he loves me more than anything and I will be by his side for the rest of our lives we don't have children in the traditional sense but we do have our girls our sons two German Shepherds research has shown that dogs and other animals can sense a person's personality if they are good or bad since the day I brought our girls home they have been Michaels dogs they must be close to him they follow him wherever he goes and complain when he doesn't is home they greet him with excitement and love when he walks through the door neither of them have ever shown fear towards Michael because they can feel that they have a loving and caring person who would never hurt them.

We can't do anything, we can't undo the events of July 19. We cannot recover the marquees or alleviate the pain his family and children feel. Everyone's life has changed forever. My thoughts and prayers are with Britney and her children. I'm really sorry for your loss. My husband is not a bad person or a violent person. He is an honorable man and a good human being in my name. Our family. And to everyone who knows Michael, I ask that you show leniency when considering Michael's sentence and give him the shortest time allowed by law. Thank you for your time and consideration, your honor.

They just added me, you know, during this whole trial and everything. During the procedure there was the absence of Mr. Draco's family or friends and it is obviously because of these threats and I can tell you that the threats were not only to his family and his wife, but even the lawyers on his behalf, as you have seen, received threats and myself included, so we just didn't do it. I don't want the court to think that he had no support; It does have a lot of support overseas, so that's all I have at the moment. Thanks for anything else from the defense at this time, Mr.

Drecker, do you want to make the statement? No, it's fine, very good condition. You can continue. My name is Monica Morrison. I am the mother of Marquis Fiamma Cotton, who had her life tragically taken at the age of 28 in front of his very young children on Thursday. On July 19, 2018 around 3:30 I received a phone call from Marquis saying the men shot, he had shot, not killed, but as a mother I knew my son was gone, all the people with the ones I talked to while on the way to the hospital kept saying to stop saying. he's dead he's not dead my answer was yes my son is dead I know he's gone I can feel it because a part of me died with him the thought of making funeral arrangements for one of my children something I never thought about because our children They are supposed to outlive us parents, the loss of a child at any age is such an unimaginable pain, both emotionally and physically, not only did Mikey's things replay so many times in my mind, but also repeatedly in the television and social media the last time like this, please watch it.

Marquis was at his funeral when I kissed him for the last time and closed his casket knowing that this was the last time he would touch or see my son. I'm not sure how many parts make it whole, but I will never be whole again, not only did you take a son, but you also took a father, a brother, a grandson, an uncle, a cousin, a friend and a companion. Marquis was loved by many and thanks to you, Michael Drecker, my son is no longer a memory. Marquis for another can take a photo of his children on the first day of school. teaches them to ride a bike attends any of their children to events a walk only lasts an hour the most hardened thing you say I was doing the interview when they asked you if there was anything you would change about that day and your answer was no, I wouldn't.

I hate but I would never forgive you. I would never lift this death on anyone, but I don't wish for our hope, but I do wish and hope that you get the maximum sentence of 30 years, but no matter what. Senses you receive You still have your life Thank you Any of the lawyers Have any questions Next will be Father Michael McLaughlin I'm sure the podiums are fine If you prefer to do it on the podium It's fine now I mean you're just going to give a correct statement correct can you continue come on - Michael Draco because you felt the need what's your name first my name is Michael mcLaughlin okay - Michael drinking because you felt the need to guard the circle parking lot a food store my only birth child doesn't exist anymore he's not here you know If not only did you take him away from me you also took him away from his children his grandparents his uncles his nieces and his brothers and sisters your actions have affected us all and thanks to you our lives will never be the same I want you to know that it really hurt me to see the tape when you did that and when he was in an interview room and they asked you know I'm sorry and they told you that Marquis had passed away.

You showed absolutely no remorse, but you also did another interview with Reginald Roundtree after you were finally arrested after 23 or 24 days of being free. You had the audacity to cry or show emotion because you missed your pets and your wife. I want you to know that. that was a slap in my face you deserve to die in prison in the Bible it says that in order to enter heaven we must forgive those who offend us at this point in my life I haven't gotten there yet and it just so happened that the law uses to take me before I come to terms with this then I will see you in hell where you and I will finish this mark my words well thank you sir who will be the next Marquis your partner Britney Jacobs good morning my name is Britton Jacobs I have a partner of mine he is in the bathroom Marquis wen hua for him he was my partner in life he was the father of my children and he was the man I love Marquis was there for me and he was there for our three little children he worked that night and during the day he helped raise our children, we have four children, now we have Marquis six, Marley Marley is for Marshana's and I was pregnant when he died so Mike is dead, look at our baby and her man was Martavius.

I never had 2x Marquis to help me. with his children he knew what they needed and he loved caring for them he loved us and we loved him Marquis was spiritual he was protective and he made us laugh he was all of these things to us and much more there are no words to fully describe what his loss has done to our family There is no way for everyone here to understand the hole that has been left in our world. I want everyone to pause and imagine the person you love the most. Imagine their eyes. Imagine their smile and you hear them laugh.

Imagine how their hand feels in yours. and how it feels when they put their arms around you and hold you tight. I want you to imagine the sparkle of jewelry you feel when you walk through the door at the end of the day and your three little children screaming with excitement because the center of their world is home, imagine the deep feeling of warmth that comes from knowing that you spend your life with that person now imagine a cold and empty place imagine the silence of the door that does not open knowing that I will never open it and what that means for you and your children think about what it is like to know that you will never hold their hand and you are never sure the warmth and hug holding them tight think about raising four children alone without their dad imagine a sense of sadness and pain that you cannot ignore, it feels like a weight and it is something that you know you will never be able to carry forever without my keys, my The world will never be able to stand again, our two youngest children will have no memories of their dad, our oldest asks me questions about him that I have no answers to, and as they grow, our youngest will have their questions too, trying to answer what best I can, but I know I won't have all the answers either. a marquis there never knows the joy of arriving at another day.

I wondered why this happened. How could a person's anger over a parking spot turn toward the man I love dying and his four children being left without his day? I asked how How can a defendantshoot an unarmed man? How did he pull out a gun and see another man raise his arms and back away from the man's family? he decides he needs to pull the trigger the weakness of the accused children cowardice and his anger he couldn't find a way to control are the reasons why Marquis is dead his anger is the reason he wanted to yell at me today in a store of convenience and he didn't I cared about my kids being in the car, I was angry and that would matter more.

Marquis saw the man yelling at his family, he pushed them to the ground to defend us, it didn't matter when Marquis raised his hands and backed away in the way the defendant still decided. shoot his killer he was not scared he was frustrated because the finding was not man enough to figure out how to solve his problems Marquis died in my family suffers the court should remember that this was not the first time that the The accused before shooting him Marquis had an established history of road rage and initiating similar confrontations in confrontations he had prior to Marcus' death.

The defendant proved that he was a threat to the community and pulled the trigger on the marquees and moved on. that threat through his actions has shown that he is a conflict seeking man ready to walk through your door and then pull the trigger when the situation gets out of control he is now a convicted murderer and simply deserves to be punished for his actions. In addition to the fact that we are counted by our own, the defendant has said he is sorry but he is still the man who believes he was on the right side of the law and arrests the man who believed that the sheriff's decision was not to arrest him, vindicating him through In his words and deeds, the defense has shown that in death remorse depends on how the loss is read, as I said here today.

I am a mother of four children. little children I no longer have my love and they are no longer Heather Day the defendant is solely responsible for that he killed a man and has bitten the law to let him off the hook his pattern of behavior suggests that he is a threat and Although I want him to be punished Because of what he has done to Marquis and our family, it is more important that he is never allowed to do it again. It is for this reason that I implore the court to deny him the ability to do this for as long as possible.

To the extent possible, the defendant deserved the harshest punishment the law allows. The people of our community deserve to know that you victimized someone else, what Mr. Buying your Honor just a little bit of history, we sit here in our office listening to us recoil from the pressure to bring these charges and that sort of thing. , that is the furthest thing from the truth I have ever heard in my life the day the shooting occurred, Mr. McCabe. He was out of town on business and he had seen the video and in his mind it was nowhere near that the next day he called me and said I want a full investigation.

I don't like what I see in that video. I believe there is a crime here we conducted a full investigation we gathered all the witnesses we spoke to they all tried to find out everything they could about Michael Drake and we did and after that it was confirmed that these charges were appropriate the jury after of a trial he verified it with his verdict. So this whole thing is us buckling under pressure and all that kind of stuff for as long as I've been in this office and you know how long it's been in a long time, I've never seen once our state attorney gave a press . conference in front of a courtroom never seen before wants me to give a press conference about any situation we judge cases on the facts by the testimony and we file charges based on that in my mind when I saw that video the first time I saw a man retreating I also saw a man who was going to defend his family.

They brought up the fact that mr. McLaughlin was the instigator and no, he was not mr. Drake, had been warned previously and that was the most important thing about Williams rule, the real fact of the matter is that William drooled outside that parking lot. They told him you can't do this anymore, it's going to cause a problem and he acknowledged it, he said: I know I can't help it, that always gets me in trouble and he predicted what was going to happen. He was a man, no matter what happened, he only talked about gun laws. He was a man who should not have owned a firearm.

There are people in this world who are parents who should never be parents and he is a person who should never own a firearm because time and time again he demonstrated that he did not know how to responsibly handle that firearm that we have owned. come out and support the community on this one and you know who has received the strongest support from gun owners, people who carry the permit, people who carry the concealed weapons permit, people who want to have the ability to carry those concealed weapons, people who want to have the ability to carry a firearm in their home for protection, cried out for justice in this case because they said it gives legal gun owners a bad name their behavior gives them a bad name when You carry a concealed weapon like that going into a convenience store, you're not supposed to put yourself in the position of having to use that firearm, he puts himself in the position of using it by confronting people he didn't know were in that place. car and who he was confronting and the mental capabilities of the person he was confronting is wrong, what he did terribly wrong and as a result he took the life of another human being and young children will never have the opportunity for their dad walks them down the aisle at a wedding that dad sees they come home after their first prom a dad to watch them play at their sporting events when all the other kids have parents there to watch them, they will never have that thing that will always be missing in their lives thanks to Michael Draco.

I brought many today Many months ago people came to the State Attorney's Office with a box full of signatures and this box is gone let me see here I think there are forty-six thousand six forty-six thousand thirty-six signatures but they wanted justice they want to adjust this for Marquis and I kept them in my office, they were always there during the processing of these forty-six thousand signatures of people who supported Marquis McLaughlin and recognize the illegal nature of the actions of the micro switches. We receive letters, we have two five holes, this is one of them. a letter from people who thought this was a clear case but it was not a case of self defense and most of those letters are from people who carry concealed weapons and were shocked by their behavior the defense talks about remorse and there is a reason for part not We have seen remorse in this case what we have seen is the defense and mr.

Draco blames everyone and everyone but himself he blames Karen's concealed weapon permit training educational laws we like to blame the victim we like to blame the victim he has not taken responsibility for his actions in fact that interview with Reginald Roundtree said he would do it again under the same circumstances, exactly the same thing, that's sad. I don't think we want someone like that educating people on the proper use of firearms, so he hasn't shown remorse in this case like they have. indicated that he has blamed everyone except himself, stability is not needed and outside of this courtroom, one of the most difficult things during the processing of this case is the treatment that the family members have had and that the deceased after each audience, every audience there.

There would be press conferences by the defense outside and at those press conferences they would indicate that the victim was a weapon they would indicate that the defect the victim's defender was a drug addict maniac that he was a terrible father who was a bully and the parents They had to hear those things for over a year at press conferences outside this courthouse, outside the doors of this courtroom, and they heard that the parents, what pieces, the parents were terrible parents, how they raised their son, They had to hear that, each and every one of them. every time, well, I'll tell you why what we learned about Marquis was that he was a working man, he had a job, he worked nights, weekdays, taking care of the children, watching them, he worked night shifts, he was a father who It was there. for his children he was there for his children and now he has been taking away from them his own son saw him get shot his own son saw him die fall in that store at his feet a jury did not see that video and rightly so, but Think about that His son witnessed his father dying and his father dying right in front of him, Mr. travina talked about the jury and all that we received some phone calls from the jurors later there was a man who was confused, it was the foreman, he thought the death penalty could be applied in this case, he was worried that the death penalty would be could apply to this situation and that was his main concern for some reason, he didn't understand that the death penalty didn't apply when people leave this earth, some people leave this earth with footprints in the sand and those footprints disappear pretty quickly, that This is not the case with Marquis McLaughlin. and I can say that because I didn't know Marquis, but I have seen and heard incredible and outgoing support, and not only people from the family who knew him, his traces will never disappear and will always be there for the family. he left a mark the PSI in this case was done after the psi was done they recommended 25 years followed by five years the parents ask this case made no sense there was no reason to take the life of another human being sir. of wine' talks about the week we compare him to a law enforcement officer, well a law enforcement officer is under the same set of laws when it comes to manslaughter charges and if a law enforcement officer were to shoot a person every time he pulls out a gun, that Be sad because we know that's not true, Mr.

Drinken didn't have to pull the trigger, he didn't have to fire that gun, he didn't have to take the life of another human being, he didn't have to confront Miss Brittany Jacobs, he had many, many options, the option that he What he had used was bad, it was wrong, he did not have to pull the trigger, he did not have to take the life of a human being that is why we ask that the court set it properly, thank you, thank you, anything else from the state. rebuttal of everything new from the defense let's first review the financial obligations the standard court costs five hundred and fifty dollars which includes a discretionary felony fine of one hundred twenty-five dollars and seventy-two cents there is one hundred dollars for the cost of prosecution I see there is a balance fifty dollars here, so I assume originally in the public defender's office, so there is fifty dollars per public defender application fee, it is the state that requests the investigation costs, it is the state that requests the restitution, it is Well, Mr.

Drinker. I have the right to a hearing regarding the amount of restitution as well as all fees and costs. Oh, I think we also need a seven dollar fee for the DNA because I know Mr. Drake, you have the right to a hearing on the amount of restitution and the fees and costs. Would you like a hearing on any of that or if you want to waive or waive your right to a hearing and accept the amount of the fees and costs and agree to the amount of restitution, that's fine, and you will agree to the amounts.

It's been a very emotional case, obviously, and what separates the judiciary from the other branches of government, of course, is that we don't look at what others might think and we don't look at the numbers, we're here to do justice and that's what that we do every day in this court, that is what we strive to do here every day and in this case, as in all cases, that is what I will strive to do. In this case, under the law, the people of the state of Florida, at least under certain circumstances, have the right to keep and bear firearms;

However, those rights come with responsibilities. Each of us has a duty to act reasonably and responsibly toward others. Each one of us. has a duty to preserve and protect human life Shawn Brown, the defense firearms expert in this case, said a couple of very important things during trial number one: It is everyone's responsibility not to create conflict so that a person should use a firearm and number two, that a person should avoid conflict and shoot only as a last resort John Tyler, who was Ricky Kelley's boss in this case, testified during the trial that he owns a firearm and that in His training taught him to remove himself from heated situations, which makes sense to the jury.

This case found that the defendant did not act reasonably and did not act responsibly when he shot and killed Keith McLaughlin on July 19, 2018. It is important to understand the context of all the facts in this case so that everyone understands what led to this and what happened yes he did, he was 47 years old at the time of the shooting, according to his own recorded statement, his father was a law enforcement officer and he himself always wanted to be a law enforcement officer, but he stated that his father did not allow him become a law enforcement officer and at one point he even said that the father said he would break his arm if he became a police officer for any reason, so he becamein licensed tree trimmer and retired in 2006 and 2007.

He indicated that he inherited a lot of money from this mother, so he was retired for a long period of time at a young age. He had a deli routine while he was retired. He would go to a convenience store circle every day and buy monster drinks. I think the store owner said he would buy four at a time. I think the defendant indicated that he bought two, but one of his main hobbies and let's be honest, the evidence showed that the defendant was an aspiring law enforcement officer. officer became the handicapped parking space monitor and enforcer in the circle of a convenience store when people parked in the handicapped parking space the defendant would inspect their vehicles and photograph them and why he would do this in his recorded interview he said why and in his own words they were to screw people over, that's exactly what he said in the transcript and these are exact quotes here and the defendant says, but when they see me doing things like that, they automatically think, hey, what is this guy trying to do me? the detective says when you think that a little if someone came to take pictures around your car and then the defendant says well that's exactly what I'm trying to do so he agrees that he's confronting people to harass them and mess with them and in their words they are nasty to them so apparently when you do this and people show respect and maybe fear you don't have a problem with the way things are going because you are getting respect you are having a lot of fun being the police officer of this disability in the parking lot. space by the way this con the space is on the side of the circle and it's not even in the front where the main door is so it's not even the best in parking space and in the whole circle parking.

I get it, I think. There is a ramp near there but it is also near the front so it is not even ideal in parking space so when the accused is disrespected he gets angry and an example of this is 14 February 2008, Ricky. Kelly in Parks' truck in the infamous handicap parking space in the circle a convenience store Kelly enters the store to buy a soda the defendant approaches the truck the pert defendant inspects the truck and takes photographs of the truck Kelly exits the store and asks the defendant what he is doing. in a heated argument that a guy feels disrespected and says, according to mr.

Kelly and I thought I should kill you, I should shoot you and by the way the defendant admitted that he had this verbal confrontation with Ricky Kelly and admitted that the only thing that happened there on February 14 was a verbal confrontation and according to the Orakei colony says I should kill you , I should shoot you, the defendant then gets into his vehicle and rifles through the center console apparently trying to get a gun, it doesn't really make much sense that he is trying to get anything else. when he gets into his vehicle and he's looking for something right after he says, "I should kill you, I should shoot you," so probably the smartest thing anyone did in this case was what Mr.

Kelly did what he did at that moment, which was to get into his truck and take the accused and then call Mr. Kelly's boss, John Tyler, and in the recorded interview, the defendant admitted that he called John Tyler and, according to Mr. Tyler, the defendant, says, and I quote again, if he had a gun, he would have shot him, so the defendant admits that it's just a verbal confrontation and, according to Ricky Kelly, he says, "I should kill you, I should shoot you," and he says says to John Tyler. If he had a gun he would have shot him, so the store owner talks to the defendant after this and tells him that he needs to modify his behavior.

He tells me that the accused: he stops playing with people, he stops harassing people and he stops fighting. with people because it's not worth it and then the accused says according to the owner of the store and I quote here I can't help it, I'm getting in trouble because the evidence showed that the accused did modify his behavior but he didn't stop messing with people or harassing at people or confronting people or his words bothering people that's how he modified his behavior it seemed like he didn't actually have the gun pointed unfair 14 based on the statements and the fact that you came in looking for something in the vehicle that's how he modifies his behavior now when he confronts people and harasses people, he carries a firearm, that is behavior modification on his feet, he stops harassing people and confronting people and creating conflict, he modifies his behavior by have the firearm. about your person during the defendant's recorded interview, if the detective says, does it ever occur to you that when you approach and talk to these people, informing them that they are parked in a handicapped spot, they may not take that right? this might go a little sideways and then the defendant says "well, sure, but that's why I take precautions too" and the detective says what kind of precautions does the defendant say "well, I'm a very careful person and I have a permit, so What you're saying is you can create conflict, you can create confrontation and if there's a problem, you have a gun, so if you create conflict and things go sideways, you can just shoot someone, that's really what it is. saying, so that's the mentality of the defendant that leads to this. to what happened on July 19, 2008 and your Mike, that's important because even though it's arguably not that significant in a manslaughter case, it is. very significant in a case of self-defense, justifiable use of deadly force or not, then comes the shooting death of Marquis McLaughlin on July 19, 2018 Britney Jacobs drives her vehicle into the circle of a convenience store Marquis McCoy Tennyson in the seat of the front passenger and there are three small children in the back seat.

Brittany Parks in the infamous handicapped parking space and most of this is on video. We see the brands going. They enter the store with their five-year-old son, Little Marques, to buy some drinks and some food. The two youngest children remain in the back seat. Brittany remains in the vehicle. Michael Drake, the defendant in this case, then comes up pretty quickly and parks his vehicle there, Brittany's vehicle, yeah, and this is right on the video and he seems to come out of nowhere like a superhero to make sure this violation is enforced. of the handicapped parking space.

Now I don't know where it came from. There's a gun store across the street. I don't know if that's where he was, but he seems to have come out of nowhere and the most ironic thing about this whole case is that he parks illegally, he doesn't even park in a parking space, he parks nearby. to Brittany and Jacobs to argue about her illegal parking and to do this, she walks up and parks illegally and that's the most ironic thing about this whole case, so I want to be a police officer. Is he getting out of the vehicle?

He approaches Brittany's vehicle. looks around the vehicle looks in front of the vehicle Brittany lowers the window and, like Ricky Kelly, is not going to be as respectful as the defendant would like, she argues with him and shows a lack of respect, the defender gets angry and points at Brittany. and she yells at Britannian. This is on the video and is supported by one of the witnesses who indicated that he thought the defendant was being threatening, that he was loud, confrontational and threatening. Now Marquis is in the store and someone tells him to leave. He goes out to the parking lot because there is a problem out there and he needs to get out.

Marquis gets out while Britney is getting out of the car, she doesn't go too far. Marquis watches as the defendant continues to be angry and points. at Brittany and he yells and yells at her. The marquis approaches. You had the defendant and you certainly pushed him down and pushed him hard. The defendant then pulls the gun on him and let me say this about the video. Believe it in your own eyes. The gun comes out. Marquis does not take a step towards the defendant. Marquis returns and turns his body around as if he were going to flee towards the store.

Now I know that wasn't the defense's argument at least before the trial, but one thing I noticed is that the Annual Buffington, the pharmacologist testified in this case and testified that he saw the video and testified that when mr. Drake pulled out the gun as Marquis McLaughlin stepped back and turned his body around, so I don't know if he was really supposed to say that, but that's exactly what he said, so you have to believe what you see, whoever the accused is. . who shoots Marquis in the side obviously this collaboration due to the fact that he was turning his body in a defensive position which is not an offensive position which is a defensive position when you go back and turn your body and try to get out of there Marky then the fleas in the store where he collapses and dies right in front of his five-year-old son.

Defendant is later interviewed and admits the following: Marquis made no verbal threats and said nothing at all, then he did not have any weapon, defendant admitted that he was only a little dazed when he fell, defendant insisted that Marquis took a step towards him just before shooting and then at one point the defendant stated that Marquis took even more than one step and again in the recorded interview the detective says and I quote the only step he took and then the defendant said quote, he barely took the second step before he pulled the trigger, so he was saying there was one step and then the beginning of another, but if you watch that video, Marquis doesn't move forward. the defendant admitted that the shooting would be unjustified if Marquis was backing away or stood still again here is the recorded interview and these are direct quotes the detective says if he hadn't come at you he still would have shot around the defendant says Hellmuth there is no reason to if he is leaving I don't need to use my firearm, the detective says what if he stays still and the defendant says I don't need to use any firearm yet and again the video indicates that Marquis was not going towards him at that time .

He was not standing still and was backing up and turning his body under Florida law to justify the use of deadly force. The appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could only be avoided by the use of that force, the jury concluded that the defendants' actions were not excusable and they weren't justified, no one really used their perfect judgment in this case, maybe everyone could have done something a little differently, maybe some. people could have done a lot differently, but the evidence in this case shows that the defendant created a conflict and created a confrontation in which he shot and killed an unarmed man who was backing away and was trying to save his own life by retreating. once.

He saw the gun and fled to the store where he died right in front of his young son. You can't say that that hasn't diminished with respect to all of these facts for me to go off of is a two-pronged test and it's one of In the unusual situations where the defense really has the burden of proof, they have to demonstrate, first, that there is a legal reason for the departure and, second, that I must do so under all the facts and circumstances. They have to prove both aspects. I agree with the state and I'm not really sure I've heard any remorse in this case, what I've heard is that the defendant felt he was justified in doing what he did and that he would do it again, that's not really remorse with regarding This interview with Reginald Roundtree.

I have never seen her. It is not part of the file. I heard from the defense that he was remorseful. I heard from witnesses that he was sorry for not being able to see his dog and his wife. The line is this: I haven't really heard in this room any remorse, so quite frankly, on whether there is a legal reason for an exit, I will find that, based on the totality of the circumstances, an exit is not justified. So the only reason I brought up the lack of remorse situation was because the defense raised it with respect to the legal reasons for departure and I will find that there is no legal reason for departure.

I will also find that even if there is a legal reason for departure under the second point, I will find that it is not appropriate under all the facts and circumstances, so having said all that regarding the background and facts of the case, I will find that it is not a really aggravated situation, however, there is certainly mitigation and I have to consider any aggravation and any mitigation because my job is to do justice in the case and that's what judges do and that's where judges are supposed to do. There is nothing improper at all about the legislative branch or the executive branch looking at the poll numbers and considering that 44,000 people said this and 44,000 people said that, but it is my job as a judge to do what I believe is justice, in this case there is mitigation in In this case, the defendant was taken by surprise.

They pushed him down quite violently. I don't think there's any doubt about that. He indicated that he was at least a little dazed when he was pushed down. He didn't run away. He cooperated with police. Perhaps the greatest mitigation is that he has no record, now one of the reasons he cooperated with the police and did not flee was becausehe thought he was justified in doing this, which the jury found was not true and the evidence would show this as well. Well, consequently, after that fairly detailed legal and factual analysis, the sentence will be as follows: Mr.

Drake, I am going to find you guilty, I am going to find you guilty, I am going to sentence you to 20 years in the Department of Corrections with full credit for the time served and I believe he has done it in 91 days is that 92 days with credit for it 92 days as I said before the court costs are 550 dollars which includes a discretionary felony fine of $125 and 72 cents $100 for the cost of the process the $50 public defender application fee $7 DNA fee all of those fees and costs are paid to the clerk's office and there will be a $5,000 restitution lien and who would we like to see go to the mother the father Britney Jacobs is well then a restitution of $5000 Linda Burton and Jacobs is fine sir.

Drake II, you have 30 days to appeal and if he cannot afford that, hire an attorney for appeal purposes. I will appoint one for you. Does he have lawyers for appeal purposes? Okay, anything else needs to be presented to the court at this time, okay. Good luck to all those who have been affected by this case, friends and family of Mr. McLaughlin thank you very much yes