Sounds like a civilian would have been convicted under the same circumstances. A case of police privilege, something I don't care for.
Based upon my limited knowledge of the case, I'd have voted to convict.
I’m also at odds with some here.
So, I guess I’m satisfied that there’s precedent for me to murder an unarmed person who throws their phone at me if I can make a convincing argument that ‘he was gonna attack me with his hands’.
Oh, wait: I’m not retired LEO with all the right connections. /s
He never would have provoked Oulson if he wasn’t armed, which is EXACTLY the case a prosecutor in my state would make against any armed citizen who killed an unarmed person, and a fundamental ‘morality’ which guides all of my decisions.
Obviously Reeves lives by a different standard.
For the record, Reeves was convicted, he appealed, the ‘stand your ground law’ shifted the burden of proof to the prosecution, he got a biased jury IN THE SAME JURISDICTION and the rest is history.
Anyone who believes this was justifiable homicide is a dumbass.
Reeves is an embarrassment to the profession and one who will be judged for his actions.