Posted on 02/07/2014 7:21:32 AM PST by Uncle Chip
[Live Bond Hearing -- continuation from Wednesday]
(Excerpt) Read more at myfoxtampabay.com ...
Would than not require the shooter to show his ticket again to get back in???
That means witnesses and well as possible video.. But that is not the issue is it meatloaf???
It will revealed, admitted and or proved the former cop shooter was already packing a weapon in the movie theater.
Ya think he needed to leave the theater to ensure his weapon was ready for a very fast grab and shoot???
You don’t think it’s possible the shooter could do this after leaving his seat, being pissed off and went to complain to management and then returned to his seat totally ready????
You don’t know that either, and in fact you don’t know when he left is seat, pissed off to complain to management, if he returned with his weapon totally ready for easy access.
In fact, did you not state it was so fast in fact, witnesses said it happened in the “Blink of an eye????
Would this not possibly establish it was possible the shooter already readied the weapon for a quick grab and shoot???
In fact, you seem inordinately eager to defend someone, who was already pissed off, who appears to have shot to death an unarmed individual.
>> “This is very unusual for a bond hearing.” <<
.
Very unusual defendant!
He is the epitome of the reasons not to grant a defendant bail.
.
I’m not willing to make a rush to judgement. I’ve posted several times there’s something more than meets the eye here. Both men have histories that don’t explain what happened.
I’m going with innocent until proven guilty. I did the same with Zimmerman. I will continue to defend, as you term it, Reeves until I’m convinced of his guilt.
>> “That’s why the retired cop didn’t do a show and tell with the gun. He was on automatic.” <<
.
Seemingly a good reason to prohibit police from possessing weapons when off duty.
.
You don’t know that either, and in fact you don’t know when he left is seat, pissed off to complain to management, if he returned with his weapon totally ready for easy access.
That would have had to happen after he sat down. None of the witnesses said he got the gun out.
In fact, did you not state it was so fast in fact, witnesses said it happened in the “Blink of an eye????
The actual drawing and firing did happen that fast.
Would this not possibly establish it was possible the shooter already readied the weapon for a quick grab and shoot???
Maybe, maybe not. For someone such as a LEO or another who practices self defense, I’m not surprised. If Reeves had been wearing tight fitting jeans I might have been more impressed with the speed if the gun was in his pocket. A lot depends on how and where he carried.
Posting HTML
That would have had to happen after he sat down.
No it wouldn't.
None of the witnesses said he got the gun out.
BS, that is not what the witnesses stated.
That would penalize everyone who trains to defend themselves. Self protection is a basic right.
Obviously I missed the witness that said Reeves got the gun out when he sat down before Reeves hit him with the popcorn. Got a link?
If he returned to his seat, after already being pissed off, could he have easily readied the gun, had it in his lap, under his arm, or had his hand on it in his pocket, ready for any excuse/reason to use it?
I would guess this is in fact what occurred and will bet a cup of coffee the jury agrees.
BS, that is not what the witnesses stated.
Obviously I missed the witness that said Reeves got the gun out when he sat down before Reeves hit him with the popcorn. Got a link?
If witness did not happen to see something before it happened, in a low light theather, and the shooter had it ready concealed in his lap, under his arm, OR had his hand on the gun in his pocket, does this mean it never occurred ?????
Reeves even got angry with his own wife, and told her: “You shut your fu#king mouth, and don’t say another word.” (According to sheriff’s deputy testimony.)
Answer the questions.
Yep...and Mr. meatloaf is being very evasive here. I expect the defense will be the same way...But won’t do them any good.
He could have done what you said. You’re still guessing without a witness stating that’s what they saw. Neither Mrs. Oulson or Mrs. Reeves saw that. Others have said Mr. Reeves had the popcorn and Reeves knocked out of his hand. Another said Reeves had his own phone out. How many hands does Reeves have.
There are statements out there that are mutually exclusive. I thought the retired Air Force lt. colonel was credible, but even he seemed confused. The prosecutor made a big deal out of how the witness was a trained observer who was situationally aware. The tape clearly showed Oulson reaching toward Reeves. The witness said Oulson did not do that. ????
Protecting one’s self does not extend to a total lack of analytical response.
Police are paid fairly high salaries for a supposed ability to act analytically.
.
Perhaps you and NautiNurse can tell us just what this single freeze frame is supposed to show that we don’t already know from witness testimony:
Here’s the whole video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G27d9hCjsUE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Wow...So we agree.
You’re still guessing without a witness stating that’s what they saw.
Come on Mr. loaf...Did you expect the already pissed off former cop to return to his seat, flash his gun and announce:
"If that SOB disrespects me again and I am ready to shoot the SOB!"
If I can be honest, the actions of this former cop captain reflects really bad on every single CW holder in the country...
Anyone with level of anger issues or authority issues this guy had, should never have been assigned any authority over anyone.
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.