So he talked with a manager, not a supervisor. Who cares? Since when is deadly force used in theaters to enforce cell phone restrictions? The fact he initiated the confrontation, could walk away and returned rather than move to another seat (only 25 ppl) indicates he was the instigator and aggressor. And if the management chose not to evict the patron what business is it of his to pursue the matter?
Discretion? Decency? Maturity? Wisdom? In 71 years he has less of these than a 43 year old?
FAIL.
The guy was shot because he did not bow down to what Reeves considered to be his authority. he was used to talking down to people and the victim, in his mind, had the gall to resist his authority. For that, he died. Message sent. Message received.
<>So he talked with a manager, not a supervisor. Who cares?<>
Relax —
Manager and supervisor are the same thing and same person.
One detective says he spoke with manager/supervisor, the other one says he didn’t but spoke to somebody.
Odds are he spoke to an employee who was going to pass it on to his boss — the supervisor/manager.
Not making anything out of this except to demonstrate how one statement had two sides to it depending upon which detective you quote.
The question is when he walked back from there did he feel dissed and what was he determined to do.
His gun was not holstered but in his pants pocket.
Was his hand in that pocket at the same time as he returned to the auditorium???
If so then what was his intent at that time.