YTread Logo
YTread Logo

Michael Drejka sentenced to 20 years in prison for killing of Markeis McGlockton over a parking spot

Michael Drejka sentenced to 20 years in prison for killing of Markeis McGlockton over a parking spot
if society Shousha society that he's that he's remorseful and he can benefit from this experience and then pay back the community in other ways that does not include

prison

and obviously that would mean we would ask for probation or house arrest or some form of confinement of home confinement that's what we're asking for judge mr. treviño would point out judge then at some point we'll ask the court consider other circumstances for your courts consideration but with that being said judge the first thing that I wanted to point out is there's one of the mitigating circumstances judge was that the offense was committed committed in an unsophisticated manner and was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse I think if you look back we know that from the Williams rural evidence this was the only time that we submit that a gun was ever actually displayed and unfortunately used I know that the court heard the testimony from the Williams rule witnesses about other incidences of aggression or least hostility from other people towards either other people or towards mr. Drake but in terms of what happened on this particular day judge I've asked what that couldn't consider that this was not something that was very sophisticated I think that the court can agree and I think the state would agree this was not something that was premeditated not planned I think the state had focused many times during their presentation of their case in...
michael drejka sentenced to 20 years in prison for killing of markeis mcglockton over a parking spot
chief that this was not something done with ill ill will malice or hatred so that's what the court considered that this was something that was unsophisticated was isolated and he has shown remorse we know from his interview with law enforcement judge that he did cooperate with law enforcement he didn't try to run after the incident had occurred waited for law enforcement to arrive and the court saw his interview that lasts a little over an hour at which time he was concerned and expressed some concern about what had happened the status of mr. McLaughlin later on judge he gave an interview on TV my client a mr. Drake and expressed remorse there at the court again consider that as a basis for downward departure as the court is aware on the 920 1.200 to 6 sub 2 sub J it is the burden of our burden to show that the offense was committed in the sophisticated manner it was a lie isolated incident and has shown remorse and I think the court is aware that the court has a two-step process one is their basis to depart downward and two does the court sure the court has exercised its discretion in departing downward this is a gentleman judge who has no prior record no offense at all whatsoever no convictions at all whatsoever and he's asking the court to consider downward departure based on that that's 921 point zero zero two six sub two sub J again I I don't believe there's anything that the state has ever presented that shows that this was something that was...
michael drejka sentenced to 20 years in prison for killing of markeis mcglockton over a parking spot
sophisticated in any capacity or any fashion did the other prong that I'd asked what the court consider also under the statute judge is this the other prong would be or the other factor that the court consider is the victim was the initiator comma willing participant comma D breasts are common or provoker of the incident judge I know that society has been torn apart about as to what happened that day but I think that the facts do speak for themselves there was this encounter and at some point mr. blocked infect the need to come out and approach mr. Drake of the way he did there's some case law there that supports that even though the jury did not make a finding or did not find that self defense was applicable this court can still consider whether or not the instant that the instigator was in fact mr. McLaughlin in this particular instance and there's some cases that I want to cite to that in a moment as I mentioned judge there's nothing from the way the case was presented nothing about way of evidence or testimony that shows that this was in fact something that mr. Drake had planned and unfortunately was initiated and instigated when mr. McLaughlin initiated the contact with him Authority that the authority that's out there judged I was psyched we'd be Hinds V state 817 7 second 964 I'm sorry 960 for Florida Southern second 2002 a second DC a hill that a downward departure sentence could could be imposed even though the jury rejected a self-defense...
michael drejka sentenced to 20 years in prison for killing of markeis mcglockton over a parking spot
claim and there's some other cases that are cited that concisely state B Mathis 541 7 second 744 it's a third DCA case there was a it was an aggravated battery case where the victim in that case provoked the incident and the appellate court upheld the downward departure despite the fact that the jury rejected the self-defense claim one other case I want to cite briefly is state state versus Thai van Lai t AI v and lay le 553 southern ii 258 another florida second DC a case there that was a murder case or again the victim was the aggressor and the jury rejected the self-defense claim and so what we have your judges again we have some authority that are allowed the court to consider a downward departure based on again whether it be an isolated incident from which has shown remorse or the fact that the victim was an initiator in theory judge there's a the other notion that the defendant cooperated with the state to resolve the current offense it's probably a weakness of our argument judge but the authorities out there in this sense that I get that the legislature intended that provision to call for someone cooperates such as an informant substantial assistance but the authority that's out there judges seems that if he cooperated with the resolution in this case he didn't go in there I mean he mr. drinker and lied to law enforcement he gave them everything that he wanted he didn't have to subject himself to a post arrest interview but he did and he...
explained the situation he cooperative in law enforcement and in the end judge law enforcement made the decision ultimately either initially not to arrest if the courts are wearing them ultimately arrest him down the road but nonetheless he did cooperate with law enforcement the way he felt that he should as a law-abiding citizen and gave them the information that ultimately was used against them by mr. sharp and mr. Rosen washer in the case in chief so my request judge is to consider that the bottom of the guideline says again is eleven point three

years

in

prison

I'm sorry eleven point five with the maximum obviously 30 at us at the court considered nothing greater than the 11.5 but consider giving mr. Drake an opportunity to pay back society through house arrest probation he never failed to appear this court was always on time despite the public outcry judge that was demanding his incarceration despite the fact that he had an electronic monitoring in fact the fact that he lured the monitor and to my knowledge never had any issues with the monitor never try to cut it off like many of our clients have done in the past and many of the defendants have done before your honor either try to cut it and then try to super glue it back together I've seen some really crazy stuff he did not do any of that he poured it as he was instructed to pretrial services took this matter seriously and I think that the court can consider all that in terms of mitigation and I think that...
judge that there is an option there an opportunity or I should say that mr. Drake I can pay back society contribute to society worked if he has to work judge and then and maybe even restitution to it and I know that's another factor this family the family the magog the time we can never be made whole obviously on a personal level judge but whatever means that we can contribute I know that mr. blocking left behind some children and whatever it means that he can provide for them by way of restitution sir I think would be appropriate and that would also be another matific mitigating factor so that's my request judge and with that being said if I could just turn this over to mr. treviño no thank you thank you may it please the court I'm gonna keep my comments fairly brief Your Honor that's no secret that this case was very divisive in our community and nationally there are have been a large number of individuals who have set all of us on the legal team various emails and texts in support of mr. Drake some of these are very reputable attorneys throughout the country some of them even involved in the judiciary throughout the country who felt that the prosecution was ill-advised to say the least and that mr. Drake had acted in conformity with the stand-your-ground statute as I know the court ruled that that was inadmissible during the trial that sheriff Gualtieri had indicated that his actions felt squarely within the vulcans of the stand-your-ground statute I would...
again ask the court to consider that his actions by many intelligent people were determined not to be criminal in nature that was the State Attorney's Office in this jurisdiction that elected to proceed with a criminal prosecution 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 were needing clarification on the issue 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 verdict form it has the wrong date on it that troubles us and of course those issues will be dealt with in later form and when the appeal in the case but nevertheless it's indicative that they even struggled and it took them about six hours or more to reach a conclusion in the case and their deliberations our legal team has gotten to know mr. Drake in ways that the community could not possibly know him I know that there will be a letter read shortly from his wife we've gotten to know him on a very personal level in the year of preparation before the trial and since the trial I can assure you that this is not a person that's been characterized in the media he's not a racist he's not someone who was eager to take someone's life as the state has suggested and prior hearings and during the trial anything from that he actually is very remorseful about the entire incident and it's...
not just because he was charged in the case that he's remorseful he genuinely feels bad that a human life was taken he's always expressed that to all the members of the legal team I've seen him incarcerated at the Pinellas County Jail your honor he's being held in a isolation cell completely by himself he cannot even have any contact with anyone has to be done through the glass it's about 55 degrees in there generally so he has been suffering in ways that the community has no knowledge of and this court may not even have been aware of but his conditions at the jail are anything but luxurious to say the least he has suffered greatly as a result of this prosecution his family has suffered he suffered financially he suffered in ways that I wouldn't even be able to begin to delineate to this court however I will say that as mr. Camerino suggested if there ever was a case that called for consideration of a departure I cannot imagine facts that would support a departure more than in this case even apart from the divisive nosov the legitimacy of the prosecution itself all of those issues take those aside here's a man with absolutely no prior record never been in trouble with the law was attacked and I know I'm gonna be called racist again for saying it because every time we mention this it's there's a press conference later saying that we're all racist for saying that mr. McLaughlin attacked our client but he did it's a fact it's...
on video and it's something the court not only should consider the court must consider that in assessing a proper sentence in this case what is better for the community and for the country than to give him an opportunity to speak about this incident to others as a condition of probation rather than locking him in a cold cage isolated from all contact for

years

how's that suffice justice in this case we would respectfully suggest that's 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 established to make it easy for people to get guns and carry guns many states are now eliminating the need for even a concealed weapons permit allowing carry without a permit this state has allowed two concealed weapons permits but we'll look at the training that they're engaging in to get these permits you can I think you can even go online now and get a concealed weapons permit it's absurd and yet the prosecution in this case wanted to hold mr. Drake to the standard of a law enforcement officer we heard that theme throughout their entire case in chief their entire case was based upon if this were a law enforcement officer this would not be proper and he violated these rules and the 21-foot role and all of that nonsense and the reality is he was not ever properly trained and now we're going to hold him accountable for the...
state's failure to have proper training in place for holders of concealed weapon permits I think that's unfair to to the client because he did what was legally required of him to we possess and carry a firearm he did it and now he's being criticized because his training wasn't a sufficient level that 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 pull a gun you better be prepared to fire it you don't pull it unless you're gonna use it but now we have you pull the gun it's okay the state argued during the case in chief it was okay for him to pull the gun but he should have stopped there that doesn't make sense to me and it doesn't seem to comport with logic that if you're gonna pull a firearm and display lethal force that you're not gonna follow through the use of lethal force I just think that given the totality of all the circumstances judge this case begs for a departure and I would hope that given similar sentences in other cases I mean just the other day we heard that the Dallas police officer who was convicted of homicide in Texas was given a 10-year sentence that's less than the guidelines in this case there are a multitude of examples of imperfect self-defense because that's essentially what we're talking about here is he acted in self-defense the state's argued it wasn't truly self-defense...
under the law so it's an imperfect self-defense argument that he should now be punished as if he were an intentional act or trying to kill someone essentially their argument first-degree murder but they charge you does manslaughter we're here on a manslaughter case we're not here to talk about intent because intents not an issue or element in a manslaughter case so again we would ask the court respectfully to look at the totality of the circumstances this Court's well aware that your honor is not meant to give a sentence that's popular it's meant to give a sentence that's just and we would just again respectfully suggest that a just sentence in this case would be an alternative means to incarceration to allow him to speak about what occurred which you frequently see in DUI manslaughter cases where people have been given probation and they use that opportunity to educate others about the problems with obviously in this case the concealed weapons laws and the concealed weapon permit process training process and so forth thank you two letters here one is from mr. Draco's wife and another from a longtime friend of former coworker I'm only going to read the one from his wife I gave you the other one so the court can read that one silently to themselves so it begins dear judge bolon I'm writing to request leniency today when sentencing

Michael

Drake 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 eleven

years

and every day I feel blessed to have it in my life you may have noticed that I have not attended any of the court appearances and I'm not here today for his sentencing please don't mistake my absence as a sign that I do not support him or love him this case has gained a lot of unwanted attention for all of us

Michael

myself our family and friends due to the continued threats it was decided that the only way to keep me safe was for me not to attend any court appearances keeping me out of the media

spot

light the same decision was made regarding our family and friends who all wanted to be here to show support for

Michael

I believe in my husband and trust him with my life he is not the person at the prosecution and the media have made him out to be

Michael

is a kind loving caring funny supportive hard-working man who will do anything to take care of his family and help someone in need

Michael

is an amazing man who has brought so much joy and love into my life he makes me laugh every day he drives my tears when I'm upset and listens when I need to talk since we have been married I have had eight different surgeries on my back and

Michael

was there every day to help me through recovery he is my best friend my soul mate who I love more than anything and I will be side for the rest of our lives we do not have any children in a traditional sense but we do have our girls our children two...
German shepherds research has proven that dogs and other animals can sense a person's personality if they are good or bad from the day I brought our girls home they have been

Michael

s dogs they must be near him they follow him wherever he goes and whine when he is not home then greet him with excitement and love when he walks through the door any of them have ever shown any fear towards

Michael

because they can sense that he has a loving caring person who would never hurt them we cannot do we cannot undo the events of July 19th we cannot bring back marquees or ease the pain felt by his family and his children everyone's lives are forever changed my thoughts and prayers go out to Brittany and her children I am truly sorry for their loss my husband is not a bad person not a violent person he is an honorable man and a good human being on behalf of myself our family and everyone who knows

Michael

I am asking you to show leniency when considering

Michael

's sentence and to give him the least amount of time allowed by the law thank you for your time and consideration and Your Honor I would just add that you know throughout this entire trial and all the proceedings there has been an absence of mr. Drake as family or friends and it is because of obviously these threats and I can tell you that the threats were not only to his family and his wife but even the attorneys on his behalf have received received threats as well myself included so we just didn't want the court...
to think that he didn't have any support he does have a lot of support on the outside so that's all I have at this time thank you anything else from the defense at this point mr. Drecker do you want to make a statement at all yeah all right very good state may proceed my name is Monica Robinson I'm the mother of marquise di McLaren who life was tragically taken at age of 28 in front of his very young children on Thursday July 19 2018 at around 3:30 I received a phone call that marquise had been shot he had shot not killed but as a mother I knew my child was gone everyone that I talked to while I was in route to the hospital kept saying stop saying he's dead he's not dead my response was yes my child 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 was something that I never thought of because our children are supposed to outlive us parents the loss of a child at any age is such an unimaginable pain both emotional and physical not only did marki still play out so many times in my mind but also repeatedly on TV and social media the last time I physically saw Marquis was at his funeral when I kissed him one last time and closed his casket knowing this was my last time touching or seeing 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 brother grandson uncle cousin friend and a...
companion Marquis was loved by so many and because of you

Michael

Drecker my son is now a memory Marquis we never get to take a picture of his kids first day of school teach them how to ride a bicycle attend any of his sons for the events a walk his only daughter down the aisle the most hurting thing that I heard you saying was doing the interview when you was asked if there was anything he would change about that day and your response was no I don't hate you but I would never forgive you I would never with this depth on anyone but I do not wish or hope but I do wish and hope that you get the maximum sentence of 30

years

but no matter what census you receive you still have your life alright do any of the lawyers have any questions next will be the father

Michael

McLaughlin the podium is fine if you'd rather do it at the podium that's fine now I mean you're just going to give a statement correct correct you may proceed good morning -

Michael

Draco because you felt the need what's your name first of all my name is

Michael

mcLaughlin okay see -

Michael

Draco because you felt the need to police the

parking

lot of the circle a food store my only birth child is not there's no longer here you know you not only took him away from me you also took him away from his kids his grandparents his uncles his theses and his brothers and sisters your actions has affected all of us and because of you our lives would never be the same I want you to know that it really...
hurt me to see the tape when you did the end 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 none but you also did another interview with Reginald Roundtree after you finally got arrested after 23 or 24 days of being free you had the audacity to cry or show emotions because you miss 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 in order to get into heaven we must forgive those who trespass against us at this point in my life I am not there yet and if just so happened that the Lord chooses 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 all right thank you sir who's next marques is partner Britney Jacobs good morning my name is Brittany Jacobs I am the partner of Mark Houston McLaughlin Marquis from Lawton was my partner in life he was the father of my children and he was the man I love Marcus 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 kids we have four children now we have Mark he's six Marley Marley is for marshana's one and I was pregnant when he died so mark he's dead see our baby and his name was martavius I never had 2x Marquis for help with his kids he knew that he okay I'm sorry he knew what they needed and he loved...
tending to them he loved us and we loved him Marquis was spiritual he was protective and he made us laugh he was all these things to us and so 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 you all to pause and imagine the person you love most picture their eyes picture their smile and they hear them laugh picture how their hand feels in yours and how it feels when they wrap their arms around you and hug you tight I want you to imagine the spark of jewelry you feel when you walk in the door at the end of the day and your three little children screaming excitedly because the center of their world is home imagine the deep sense of warmth it gives you to know you spend your life with that person now imagine a cold empty place imagine the silence of the door not opening of knowing it it never will and what that means for you and your children think about what it's like to know you'll never hold their hand and you're never sure the warmth of hugging hugging them tight think about raising four children alone without their daddy imagine a stencil sadness and pain that you can't ignore it feels like a weight and it's one you know you're never I mean you are caring for ever without marquees my world can never behold again our youngest two children will have low memories of their daddy our oldest ask me questions about him that I...
don't have the answers to and as they get older our youngest will have their questions too I'll try to answer as best as I can but I know I won't have all the answers either there was only one Marquis and there never know the joy of getting to another day I asked myself why why did this happen how could one person's anger about a

parking

spot

turn it to the man I loved dying and his four children being loved without their day I asked how how can a defendant shoot an unarmed man how does he pulled out a gun and watch another man raise his arms and back away and in front of the man's family let's do it aside he needs to pull the trigger the defendants weakness to kiss cowardness and his anger couldn't find a way to manage our the reasons Marquis is dead his anger is the reason he wanted to yell at me today at the convenience store he didn't care that my children was in the car he was angry and that would matter more Marquis saw man yelling at his family he pushed their man to the ground to defend us it didn't matter when Marquis raised his hands and backed away the defendants decided to shoot his killer wasn't scared he was frustrated because the finding wasn't man enough to figure out to solve the way to solve his problems Marquis died in my family suffers the courts should remember that this wasn't the first time for the defendant before he shot Marquis he had an established history of road rage and of starting similar...
confrontations in the confrontations he had leading up to Marcus's death the defendant demonstrated that he was a to the community and pulling the trigger on Marquis and he followed through on that thread through his DS he has proven he is a man in search of conflict ready to instigate and then pull the trigger when the situation gets beyond his control now he is a convicted killer and he just deserves to be punished for his actions just as well as we are accounting for arms the defendant has said he's sorry but he's still the man who believes that he was on the right side of the law and he still is the man who believed that the sheriff's decision was not to arrest him vindicating him through his words and his deeds the defendant has shown that in the death of remorse hinges on how the loss is read as I sit here today I am a mother of four young children I no longer have my love and they are no longer Heather day the defendant is the only one responsible for that he killed a man and he has bitten the law to let him get off the hook his pattern of behavior suggests user3 and while I want him punished for what he has done to Marquis and our family it is more important that he'll never be allowed to do it again it's for this reason that I implored the court to deny him the ability to ever do this for as long as possible the defendant deserved the stiffest punishment the law allows that people in our community deserves to know that he victimized someone...
else just a little background we've sat here our officer hearing how we backed down to pressure to file these charges and those type of things that's the farthest thing from the truth I've ever heard the day that the shooting occurred mr. McCabe was out of town on business and he had watched the video and in his mind it wasn't even close that next day he called me and said I want a complete investigation I'm not liking what I see on that video I think there's a crime here we conducted a complete investigation brought in all the witnesses talked to everybody tried to find out as much about

Michael

Drake as possible and we did and after that it was confirmed that these charges were appropriate the jury after a trial verified that by their verdict so all this that we bowed down death to pressure and all that type of things for as long as I've been at this office and you know how long it's in a long long time I've never seen once our state attorney give a press conference out in front of a courtroom never seen wants him give a press conference on any situation we judge cases by the facts by the testimony and filed charges based on that in my mind when I saw that video the first time I saw a man backing up I also saw a man that was going to defend his family they brought out the fact that mr. McLaughlin was the instigator and no he wasn't mr. Drake it had been warned previously and that was the most important thing of that Williams role the...
real crux of that William drool was out in that

parking

lot he was told knock it off you can't do this anymore it's gonna cause a problem and he acknowledged it he said I know I can't help myself it always gets me in trouble and he predicted what was gonna happen he was a man no matter what just talk about the gun laws he was a man that should not have possessed a firearm there are people in this world who are parents who should never be parents and he's a person that should never possess a firearm because time after time after time he showed that he didn't know how to responsibly handle that firearm we've had an out go out going support from the community on this case and you know who the strongest support has come from gun owners people who carry the permit people who carry concealed weapon 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 they cried out for justice in this case because they they said it gives them a bad name lawful gun owners his behavior gives them a bad name when you carry a concealed weapon like that going into a convenience store you are not supposed to put yourself in the position to have to use that firearm he puts himself in a position to use it by confronting people he didn't know who was in that car and who he was confronting and the mental capabilities of the person that he was confronting it's wrong what...
he did terribly wrong and as a result of it he took the life of another human being and little children will never have the opportunity to have their daddy walked them down the aisle at a wedding but daddy see them come home after their first prom a daddy to watch them play in their sporting events when all the other kids have parents there to watch they'll never have that that's always going to be missing from their lives because of

Michael

Drake uh I brought today many many months ago people came into the State Attorney's office with a box full of signatures and this box has over let me see here I think it's forty six thousand six forty six thousand thirty six signatures but they wanted justice they want to adjust this for Marquis and I kept these kept them in my office they were always there throughout the pendency of this forty six thousand signatures of people that supported Marquis but Lockton and recognized the unlawful nature of

Michael

Drake of actions we received letters we have to file polls this is one of them a letter of people who thought that this was a clear-cut case but this was not a self-defense case and most of those letters are from people who carry concealed weapons and were appalled by his behavior the defense talks about remorse and there's a reason to depart we haven't seen remorse in this case what we've seen is the defense and mr. Drake doble many every and anybody but himself blame the educational laws of training in...
getting a Karen concealed weapon permit we like to blame that blame the victim we like to blame the victim he hasn't taken responsibility for his actions matter of fact that interview with Reginald Roundtree he said he would do it again under the same circumstances the same exact thing that's sad I don't think we want somebody like that educating people about the proper use of firearms so he hasn't shown remorse in this case as they have indicated he's blamed everyone except himself it's not taking responsibility and outside this courtroom one of the one of the hardest things during this tendency of this case is the the treatment that the family members have had and that deceased after every hearing every hearing there would be press conferences by the defense outside and in those press conferences they would indicate that the victim was a weapon they would indicate that the defect the defendant of the victim was a drug raged maniac that he that he was a terrible parent that he was a thug and the parents had to hear those things for over a year press conferences outside this courthouse outside the doors of this courtroom and they'd hear that the parents Marquesas parents were terrible parents how they raised their son they had to listen to that each and every time well I'll tell you what what we did learn about Marquis was he was a hard-working man he held down a job he worked nights work days taking care of the children watching them worked...
evening shifts he was a parent that was there for his children he was there for his kids and now he's been taking from them his own son saw him get shot his own son saw him die fall down in that convenience store at his feet the jury didn't see that video and rightfully so but think about that his son witnessed his father's death and his father dying right in front of him mr. treviño talked about the jury and all that we received some phone calls from jurors afterwards there was one man that was confused that was the foreman he thought the death penalty might apply in this case he was concerned that the death penalty might 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 when people leave this earth some people leave this earth with footprints and sand and those footprints go away pretty quickly that's not the case with Marquis McLaughlin and I can say that because I didn't know Marquis but unbelievable outgoing support that I've seen and I've heard and not just family people that knew him his footprints will never go away that they'll always be there for the family he left a footprint the PSI in this case was conducted after the psi was done they recommended 25

years

followed by five

years

the parents are asking this case was senseless there was no reason to take the life of another human being mr. Covina talks about 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 shot a person every time they pulled a gun out that would be sad if we know that's not true mr. drinka didn't have to pull that 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 choices the choice he'd used was bad it was wrong he didn't have to pull that trigger he didn't have to take the life of a human being because of this we asked that the court sent to him appropriately thank you thank you anything else from the state any rebuttal at all that's new from the defense all right let's go over the financial obligations first the standard court costs are five hundred and fifty dollars that includes a discretionary felony fine of one hundred and twenty-five dollars and seventy two cents there's a hundred dollars for a cost of prosecution I see that there's a balance on here of $50 so I assume he had the public defender's office originally so there's the $50 public defender application fee it's the state asking for any investigative costs it's the state asking for any restitution all right mr. drinka you have the right to a hearing in regard to the amount of restitution and also all the fees and cost oh I would think that we also need a seven dollar charge for DNA...
because I know mr. Drake you do 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 give up your right to a hearing and agree to the amount of the fees and costs and agree to the amount of restitution okay and you'll 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 may think and we don't look at pull numbers we are here to do justice and that's what we do every day in this courthouse on a daily basis that's what we strive to do here every day and in this case like in every case that's 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 possess and carry firearms however with those rights come responsibilities each of us has a duty to act reasonably and responsibly toward others each of us has a duty to preserve and protect human life Shawn Brown the defense firearm expert in this case said a couple of very important things during the trial number one it is everyone's responsibility to not create conflict so that a person must use a firearm and number two that a person must 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 in his...
training he was taught to remove himself from heated situations that makes sense the jury in this case found that the defendant did not act reasonably and did not act responsibly when he shot and killed or Keith McLaughlin back on July 19 2008 it's important to understand the context of all the facts in this case so that everyone has an understanding as to what led up to this and what happened did fed it was 47

years

old at the time of the shooting according to his own taped 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 to to become a law enforcement officer and at one point even said that is the father said that he would break his arm if he became a police officer for whatever reason so he became a clearanced tree trimmer and he retired in 2006 and 2007 he indicated that he inherited a lot of money from his mother so he was retired for a long period of time at a young age he did have a daily routine while he was retired he would go to the circle a convenience store every day and he would buy monster drinks I think the owner of the store who said that 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 show that the defendant was a wannabe law enforcement officer he became the handicapped

parking

space monitor and enforcer at the circle a convenience store when people...
parked in the handicap

parking

space the defendant would inspect their vehicles and would photograph their vehicles and why would he do this in his taped interview he said why and in his own words it was to eff with people 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 stuff like that they automatically think hey what's this guy trying to do F me and then detective says wouldn't you think that a little bit if somebody came taking pictures around your car and then the defendant says well that's exactly what I'm trying to do so he is agreeing that he's confronting people to harass them and mess with them and in his words eff with them so apparently when he does this and people show respect and perhaps fear he has no problem with the way things are going because he is getting respect he is enjoying himself being a wannabe law enforcement officer of this handicap the

parking

space by the way this handicap the space is on the side of the circle a it's not even in the front where they the front doors so it's not even the best in the

parking

space in the whole

parking

lot of the circle a I understand that there's a ramp near there but it's also near the front as well so it's not even a really ideal in the

parking

space so when there's disrespect that's shown to the defendant he becomes irate and an example of this is back on February the 14th of 2008...
Ricky Kelly in the Parks's truck in the infamous handicapped

parking

space at the circle a convenience store Kelly goes into the store to buy a soda the defendant approaches the truck the defendant approach inspects the truck and he takes photographs of the truck Kelly comes out of the store and asks the defendant what he's doing they get into a heated argument the defended feels disrespected and he says according to mr. Kelly and I quote 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 he admitted that the only thing that happened out there on February the 14th was a verbal confrontation and according to Ricky Kelly he says I should kill you I should shoot you the defendant then goes into his vehicle and his rummaging around in the center console apparently trying to get a gun it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense that he's trying to get anything else when he goes into his vehicle and he is searching for something right after he says I should kill you I should shoot you so probably the smartest thing that anyone did in this case is what mr. Kelly did at this point which is to hop in his truck and drive off the defendant then calls mr. Kelly's boss John Tyler and in the taped interview the defendant did admit that he called John Tyler and according to mr. Tyler the defendant says and I quote again if I had a gun I would have shot him so the defendant admits it's...
just a verbal confrontation out there and according to Ricky Kelly he says I should kill you I should shoot you and he says to John Tyler if I had a gun I would have shot him so the owner of the store speaks to the defendant after this and he tells him he needs to modify his behavior he tells that the defendant to stop messing with people and stop harassing people and stop fighting with people because it's not worth it and then the defendant says according to the owner of the store and I quote here I cannot help it I get myself in trouble well the evidence showed that the defendant did modify his behavior but he didn't stop messing with people or harassing people or confronting people or in his words effing with people this is how he modified his behavior it seemed like he didn't actually have the gun on him unfair the 14th based upon his statements and the fact that he went in looking for something in the vehicle this is how he modifies his behavior now when he confronts people and he harasses people he carries a firearm that's the modification of the behavior instead of stopping harassing people and confronting people and creating conflict he modifies his behavior by actually having the firearm honest person during the taped interview of the defendant the detective says does it ever go through your mind that when you go up and talking to these people informing them of of them being parked in a handicap

spot

that they might not take that right that this might...
go sideways a little bit and then the defendant says um well sure but that's why I take precautions as well and the detective says like what what kind of precautions the defendant says well I'm a very careful person and I have a permit so what he's saying there is he can create conflict he can create confrontation and if there's an issue he has a firearm so if he creates a conflict and things go sideways he can just shoot somebody that's really what he's saying so that's the defendants mindset that leads up to what happened on July the 19th 2008 and his mindset it's important because although it's arguably not that significant in a manslaughter case it's a very significant in a self-defense case justifiable use of deadly force or not then comes the shooting death of Marquis McLaughlin on July 19th 2018 Britney Jacobs drives her vehicle to the circle a convenience store Marcus McLaughlin is in the front passenger seat and their three young children are in the back seat Brittany parks in the infamous handicapped

parking

space and most of this is on video we see mark he's going into the store along 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 of the defendant in this case then drives up rather quickly and parks his vehicle there Brittany's vehicle yeah and this is right on the video and he just seems to...
come out of nowhere kind of like a superhero to make sure he enforces this violation of the handicapped

parking

spot

now I don't know where he came from there's a gun shop across the street I don't know if that's where he was but he just seems to come out of nowhere and the most ironic thing about this whole case is he parks illegally he doesn't even park in a

parking

space he parks close to Brittany a Jacobs to argue about her

parking

illegally and to do this he zooms up and he parks illegally and that's the most ironic thing about this whole case so our wannabe police officer is there he gets out of the vehicle he approaches Brittany's vehicle he looks all around the vehicle looks a another vehicle Brittany rolls down the window and like a Ricky Kelly she's not going to be as respectful as the defendant would like she argues with him and shows a lack of respect the defendant becomes irate he points at Brittany and screams at Brit if this is on the video and it's cooperated by by one of the witnesses who indicated that she thought that the defendant was being threatening that he was loud and confrontational and threatening now Marquis is in the store and he's told by somebody to go out into the

parking

lot because there's an issue out there and he needs to go out there Marquis goes out there in the meantime Brittany's getting out of the car she doesn't go too far Marquis observed that the defendant continues to be irate and...
points at Brittany and is yelling and screaming at her Marquis approaches you had the defendant and no doubt about it he pushes him down and he pushes him down hard the defendant then pulls out his gun and let me say this about the video believe your own eyes all right the gun comes out Marquis doesn't step toward the defendant Marquis goes back and he turns his body as if to flee back into the store now I know that that's not what the defense argument was at least pretrial but one thing that I noticed is that the annual buffington the pharmacologist testified in this case and he testified that he saw the video and he testified that when mr. drake a-- pulled out the gun that Marquis McLaughlin backed up and retreated and turned his body so I don't know if he was actually supposed to say that but that's exactly what is said so you have to believe your own eyes whatever that is the defendant then shoots Marquis in the side obviously this collaborates at the fact that he was turning his body in a defensive position that's not an offensive position that's a defensive position when you go back and you turn your body and you try to get out of there marquis tanana flees into the store where he collapses and he dies right in front of his five-year-old son the defendant is later interviewed and he admits the following that Marquis made no verbal threats that he said nothing at all that he had no weapon the defendant admitted that he was only slightly dazed when...
he fell the defendant insisted that Marquis took a step toward him right before he shot him and at one point the defendant stated that Marquis took even more than one step and again in the tape interview the detective says and I quote he only made one step and then the defendant said quote he barely made the second step before I pulled the trigger so he was saying that there was one step and then the beginning of another step but if you look at that video Marquis is not advancing the defendant admitted that the shooting would be unjustified if Marquis was retreating or standing still again here's the taped interview and these are direct quotes the detective says if he didn't come toward you would you still have fired around the defendant says hell no there's no reason to if he's retreating that I don't need to use my firearm the detective says what if he's standing still and the defendant says I still don't need to use any firearm and again the video indicates that Marquis wasn't going toward him that he wasn't standing still and he was retreating and he was 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 be avoided only through the use of that force the jury found that the defendants actions were not excusable and they were not justified no one really use...
perfect judgment in this case perhaps everyone could have done a little something a little bit different perhaps some people could have done a lot different but the evidence in this case shows that the defendant created conflict and created a confrontation that he shot and killed an unarmed the man who was backing up and were treating and was trying to save his own life by retreating once he saw the firearm and he did flee into the store where he died right in front of his young son one cannot say that that is unabated in regard that all of these facts in order for me to depart it's a two prong test and it's one of the unusual situations where the defense actually has the burden of proof they have to show number one that there's a legal reason for departure and number two that I should do it under all the facts and circumstances they have to show both prongs I do agree with the state and that I'm not really sure that I heard any remorse in this case what I've heard is that the defendant felt that he was justified in doing what he did and that he would do it again that's not really remorse in regard to this interview with Reginald Roundtree I I've never seen it it's not part of the record I heard from the defense that he was remorseful there I heard from the witnesses that he was a remorseful about not being able to see his dogs and his wife the bottom line is this that I really haven't heard in this courtroom any remorse so your respective...
quite frankly of whether there is a legal reason for a departure I'm going to find that based upon the totality of the circumstances that a departure is not warranted so the only reason I brought up the lack of remorse situation was because the defense brought it up in regard to legal reasons for departure and I'm going to find that there it's not a legal reason for a departure I'll also find that even if there is a legal reason for departure under the second prong I'm going to find that it is not appropriate under all the facts and circumstances so having said all that regarding the background and the facts of the case I'm going to find that it's not a nun aggravated situation however there certainly is mitigation and I have to consider any and all aggravation and any and all mitigation because my job is to do justice in the case and that's what judges do and that's what judges are supposed to do there's absolutely nothing improper whatsoever 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's my job as a judge to do what in my estimation is justice in this case there is mitigation in this case the defendant was blindsided he was pushed down rather violently I don't think there's any doubt about that he did indicated that he was at least slightly dazed when he was pushed down he didn't flee he did cooperate...
with the police perhaps the biggest mitigation is is he has no prior record now one reason that he cooperated with the police and he didn't flee was because he thought that he was justified in doing this which the jury found was not true and the evidence would also show that as well accordingly after that rather detailed legal and factual analysis the sentence will be as follows mr. Drake I'm going to find you guilty I'm going to adjudicate you guilty I'm going to sentence you to 20

years

in the Department of Corrections with all credit for time served and I believe he has in 91 days is that it 92 days with credit for it 92 days as I said before court costs are 550 dollars that includes a discretionary felony find $125 and 72 cents $100 for costs of prosecution the $50 public defender application fee $7 charge for DNA all those fees and costs are payable to the clerk's office and there will be a restitution lien of $5,000 and who would we like that to go to a mother the father Britney Jacobs all right so a $5,000 restitution leading to Britney Jacobs all right mr. Drake II do have 30 days to appeal and if you cannot afford to hire a lawyer for purposes of Appeal I will appoint one for you do you have lawyers for purposes of Appeal all right anything else to come before the court at this point all right good luck to everyone that's been affected by this case friends and family of mr. McLaughlin good luck mr. break-up thank you yeah