Posted on 03/11/2017 9:33:51 AM PST by BenLurkin
In addition, prosecutors played audio of Reeves talking to detectives shortly after the shooting.
“As soon as I pulled the trigger I said, ‘Oh shoot, that was stupid.’ If I had to do it over again, it would have never happened,” he said.
I opined much the same thing in my post #14.
CNN also left out a crucial detail about the defendant.
“Probably more to this story than meets the eye. “
Only that Reeves was a retired cop.
Why do you assume there was no proper investigation? There is a video of the incident and it shows no such cellphone assault, only the popcorn.
Angry, like drunk, is not a good mental state in which to make a shoot-don’t shoot decision.
[[However, I still think Curtis Reeves is culpable, because he allowed a simple incident, while perhaps annoying, get him aggravated to the point of possible escalation.]]
I don’t- rights stop t the tip of a person’s nose- ie the man throwing something at him crossed the line- we can shout and yell all we want- and it’s legal- (sort of) It’s not illegal to yell at someone- but when assault happens- the situation changes- The popcorn, while not dangerous, crossed the line- then the phone- which could cause injury, even serious injury-
Was Curtis a jerk? Probably- but that doesn’t give someone a right to assault him
Now as for use of deadly force- that’s a separate issue- I didn’t hear courtroom testimony- so it’s hard to determine here on a forum- I’m not sure what stand your ground entails- does the person have to prove they legitimately feared for their life? Someone ‘acting aggressively’ after having already demonstrated that they were trying to do serious bodily injury, by throwing the phone at the defendant’s head- should be construed as a possibly dangerous escalation - should it rise to a level of concern where deadly force is warranted? I dunno- again we don’t know all the details-
Texting...i f’ing hate texting!
The arguments between the two men started by Reeves was likely a lot more disruptive to the other patrons than the texting ever was. The old guy should have moved to a different seat. Or if you really are a movie fan, watch at home.
Legal point: In Florida, SYG is not a self-defense justification pled at trial. It is a pre-trial motion decided solely by the judge.
Def can still plead self-defense at trial, but doubt it will fly.
This is much like a professional boxer or martial arts expert having to restrain the weapons of their trade in commerce with ordinary people.
Reeves most obviously did not.
You posted while I was typing. Great minds and all....
I’m sure CNN will circle back to the defendant being a SWAT cop next time they need a hit piece on law enforcement. All the news that fits the narrative, all the time.
“asked the judge to dismiss”
Key phrase.
This’d be something for a jury to decide.
First off why was he confronting the guy about texting in the first place? Is he that much of a bitch? Can people chew gum around him as well? And second, whether he threw popcorn or a cellphone, you don’t shoot the freakin’ guy. Just showing you have a gun is quite sufficient to end any argument.
As much as despise idiots who have to play with their i-Toys all the time no matter where they are, this was an overreaction.
SYG only removes the requirement to use all reasonably proper means to retreat. It does not justify the core shooting. The video shows no cellphone. Def in deep Kim Chee.
“law that allows residents to use deadly force when they fear death or great bodily harm.”
The stand your ground law does not just apply to situations where you fear death may happen- but also where ‘great bodily harm’ might occur - Again- we’ don’t know the whole story or testimonies- Like i said the fella had already had a cell phone thrown at his head- likely with a lot of force- and the other fella was clearly enraged-
[[This is much like a professional boxer or martial arts expert having to restrain the weapons of their trade in commerce with ordinary people.]]
xcept in stand your ground cases- I would imagine- I would think that if a boxer was forced to hit a person and it resulted in death- they ocudl argue on the grounds of stand your ground-
I have sort of been following. The victim was being rude and obnoxious and was texting his babysitter. The old vet was being rude and demanding. It escalated but from what I know, the old vet with the gun had no cause to fear for his life. String him up.
was there video of the whole thing? He had left, then came back and it re escalated- apparently
Are you seriously trying to justify this killing?
“...I would submit that an ex-SWAT police captain, who undoubtedly trained in military situations, and had to have the biggest package in the room in a roomful full of testosterone-laden gear queers during his career, should have a greater duty to exhibit restraint than your average retired police officer.
This is much like a professional boxer or martial arts expert having to restrain the weapons of their trade in commerce with ordinary people.
Reeves most obviously did not. ...”
True this
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.