Posted on 02/25/2022 6:19:36 PM PST by NautiNurse
PASCO COUNTY, Fla. (WFLA) — Curtis Reeves, the man who shot and killed Chad Oulson at a Wesley Chapel movie theater in 2014 was found not guilty on all charges Friday night.
After over three hours of deliberation, a six-person jury returned to the courtroom Friday evening and delivered its verdict. Reeves was found not guilty of the counts of second-degree murder and aggravated batter
Reeves has never denied shooting Oulson, but has maintained that he was acting in self defense.
The retired police captain spent several hours on the witness stand Thursday, telling a Pasco County jury about what he says happened the day he shot Oulson in the theater.
He also testified about his career in law enforcement. Reeves helped establish the SWAT team for the Tampa Police Department and ended his career as the head of security for Busch Gardens.
He told the jury he had never drawn his weapon and shot anyone in his years of service as a police officer and says he never encountered rage from anyone the way he did from Oulson the day of the shooting.
Miscarriage of justice.
Yours is a very sensible post. Reeves did have the opportunity to disengage, especially early in the confrontation. But Florida is a stand-your ground-state. So Reeves had no legal duty to retreat.
Unfortunately, cemeteries and prisons are full of people who stood their ground because they had no legal duty to retreat.
I understand that some people (not you) are adamant about not retreating. I respect that. But the famous western phrase “Time to get outta Dodge” was not taken to be a coward’s option. It was instead usually the best move under the circumstances.
I was assaulted on a public transit train, where I was sitting and the guy was standing in front of/over me. It became immediately apparent that that's a really crappy position to be in if a fight starts.
> How is Revves supposed to retreat from sitting cross-legged in a movie theater seat? <
Reeves could have disengaged from the whole situation earlier than that. But I would NOT have convicted him on that basis. Reeves had every right not to disengage. He had every right to stay just where he was.
My problem here is that I think he overreacted. He used deadly force when it was not warranted. Others here disagree with that, and so did the jury. As I noted earlier, that is a fair position and I respect it.
Once again we have Freepers who know only the drive-by version of the court case acting like they know what happened in court. No surprise, unfortunately.
Yeah - maybe he should have shot him in the knee cap.
Some people might disagree but in my opinion any time a larger and younger man beats on an old man it is a life-threatening situation. Unfortunately you can’t wait until after he starts beating on you to use a gun. If an old man who has good reason to believe that the larger younger man is intent on beating the crap out of him then you got to do it.
After saying all of that when I carry a gun I avoid confrontation like the plague. In this situation I never would have said anything to the man. People who are like that in public can be reasonably assumed to be aggressive. I would have either moved to another part of the theater or I would have gone up front and requested management send someone down there. Or I would have just requested a refund and left. When somebody younger and bigger than you is clearly an asshole do not engage them. Period
> If an old man who has good reason to believe that the larger younger man is intent on beating the crap out of him then you got to do it. <
Yep. It’s an ugly and tough decision. The old man might truly believe he is about to be beaten to death. And so he fires. But then the police, the DA, and a jury all disagree with him.
> When somebody younger and bigger than you is clearly an asshole do not engage them. Period <
Very true. Try to avoid having to make that decision in the first place. Unfortunately too many folks have a “got to teach him a lesson” attitude.
Exactly! Heavy on opinions, low on factual information.
Yes, the problem with juries is they all watch too much movies and TV and believe that guns and violence depicted are realistically depicted. You could dig up 20 articles showing the number of people that have been killed by one punch and I don’t think your average TV viewer would even believe it.
If my information is correct, 5 of 6 of the jurors in the Reeves trial hold concealed weapons permits. One juror is a competitive target shooter.
Permit me to add something to my last post. It backs up what you said. Years ago I went to an exhibition given by a Japanese karate master. And he told us he was going to share with us his best move.
What could that move be, I wondered. A roundhouse kick? A straight punch? “My best move,” he said, “is not to be there.”
This guy was one tough hombre. All muscle. I doubt very much if he was a coward.
If that is indeed accurate, the prosecution couldn’t have been happy about that. LOL
But I think my statement is still valid. The average jury of 12 is not going to understand the realities of guns and physical violence and the implications thereof. They have seen too many people on TV and in the movies walk away from shootings and beatings that would have killed a normal person several times over.
Another short fused hot head out of the gene pool. buh bye.
Wondering whether Oulson's wife has trained her daughter to spend countless hours on a cell phone for idle entertainment. Don't want to know what happens when the daughter eats popcorn.
Duh, Reeves was physically assaulted first.
“Did Reeves have any opportunity to walk away, retreat, just get the heck out of there?”
Not when he was attacked.
Yet again, a jury demonstrates that the narrative and the media that creates it are full of bovine excrement.
True, this!
Asking some one to shut off their phone (per theatre rules) is not considered “fighting words” or sufficiently provocative enough to be considered a verbal attack that provoked the assault.
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.