Posted on 03/11/2017 9:33:51 AM PST by BenLurkin
The case dates to January 2014 when Reeves, then 71, confronted a man in a suburban Tampa movie theater about texting during the previews before a showing of "Lone Survivor." The two argued, and then Reeves walked out of the theater to complain to an employee. When Reeves returned, he and the man, Chad Oulson, began arguing again.
Oulson threw a bag of popcorn at Reeves, according to a criminal complaint, and Reeves then took out his handgun and fired at Oulson, killing him.
Defense attorneys asked the judge to dismiss the murder charge under the "stand your ground" law that allows residents to use deadly force when they fear death or great bodily harm.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
“It’s amusing that the beefy CCW ex-SWAT captain was all “terrified” of a 6’4” guy “leaning in”.”
A “beefy” (if you say so) “CCW ex-SWAT captain” who is 71 years old and faced with someone who looks to be 20-30 years younger and in good shape, and is not just “leaning in” but in the words of the story “aggressively leaning in”. I don’t know that I’d be terrified, but I’d have some concern for my well being.
“Heck, I’d do it anyway...”
Seems like the kind of attitude that got the dead guy shot.
One of the things that came up at the time was the fact that Reeves' wife was an eyewitness, and she remained mum.
Of all people, she would know for a fact if he was a "confrontation jerk".
If he abused her all these years with his CAJ, maybe she'll end up with him in prison, and her with the retirement cash, and out from under his thumb.
Wonder who she's rooting for? :)
Interestingly, the Internet has these things called "pictures".
You should try exploring them some time. 😀
“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.”
I don’t assume there was no proper investigation. I observe that opinions differ on what the video shows and that the results of a proper investigation could cast more light on what happened, but the story doesn’t directly mention that.The story does say that “...defendant’s testimony was significantly at odds with the physical evidence...” but I’d be happier if it said if and where the investigation found the phone.
“Angry, like drunk, is not a good mental state in which to make a shoot-don’t shoot decision.”
I agree that it’s not a good mental state in which to make such decisions and note that it would simplify things if everyone waited till they were calm and sober to decide whether to shoot or not when they believe someone is trying to kill them.
“Are you seriously trying to justify this killing?”
No, I am not.
I noted a short coming in the story and responded to those making light of the idea of the thrown popcorn.
I was in a theater in New York state a month ago and they had a guy who making periodic rounds carrying one of those red traffic control flashlights. I hadn’t seen that in a while.
Yeah, he was a side of beef, all right.
You realize that Reeves shot the wife, too?
Peasants go directly to prison for spraying bullets around like that. ESPECIALLY if they have CCW.
Please remove me off the Ping List.
The problem with being an a-hole is you will eventually meet a bigger one. Rude dude finally met his. Either one could have descaled this, or never escalated it in the first place. Shooter needs to do time IMO.
[[Period. And denying it just makes you look stupid.]]
That’s pretty friggin rude of you- thought we were having a discussion- apparently you’re not capable of doign so?
While the texting may have been annoying, the ex policeman, and I always give the police the benefit of the doubt, certainly did not handle the situation very well either. In fact his method created a much bigger disturbance than the one he was complaining about.
It takes two fools to escalate something as innocuous as texting into the outcome that developed. But I cannot find any compelling reason to justify the deadly use of force for the crime of texting. There were several ways that were available for the ex police officer to defuse the situation, and he chose none of them. He was standing his ground for sure, but not because he feared for his well being.
Also, Reeves shot the wife, too.
The arguments we had at the time are starting to come back to me now.
Basically, a CCW peasant who did this same crime is going to prison RIGHT NOW.
The question is: why the delay?
That’s the same conclusion I came to when this first came to light years ago.
The dude was obviously a short fuse just waiting to get lit and a phone in the hands of a text addict was probably all he needed while at the theater.
Hope he rots in jail till he dies.
Movie theater pop corn? Kinda stupid of the man to throw away a $12 bag of pop corn.
Is that for real? He was texting the babysitter? I didn’t read the whole article but what I did read did not seem to bode well for the ex policeman in my opinion. Those that know me know I was looking for an explanation to the ex policeman’s advantage. But it just wasn’t there.
Just saying like it is. There’s no logical defense for the guy. He killed somebody for the sole crime of texting during the previews. He’s a murderer. He’s a jerk. And defending him reflects poorly on you. If you don’t like how it reflects on you stop.
[[I observe that opinions differ on what the video shows and that the results of a proper investigation could cast more light on what happened,]]
Precisely- Folks seem to be jumping to a conclusion that it must have been the one with the gun that escalated the situation to the point of increasing hostility=- We don’t know who confronted the who when the gun fella returned from the lobby- up until that point- it is likely it was just a verbal argument and possibly a thrown phone (not sure when that was supposed to have taken place)
If the phone was thrown before- that would lean in the direction of the dead fella escalating the situation, and the fact that the cop went to manager shows he probably tried to get the situation taken care of by the manager-
This is just speculation- but your point is a valid one- the whole situation was not simply about ‘being assaulted with popcorn’ - there was a lot more going on
Have witnesses come forward with any info? It would seem such info would be public by now 3 years later-
This whole situation certainly didn’t rise to the level that the George Zimmerman case did- but rather now rests on the perception of the police officer or whether he just wanted to use deadly force at some point in his life- Did he have a legitimate concern for his safety?
[[“...defendant’s testimony was significantly at odds with the physical evidence...”]]
The CNN opinion of the story that is- perhaps in the opinion of others working the case too- The trial will bring that out-
[[He killed somebody for the sole crime of texting during the previews.]]
It’s not me that doesn’t understand the issue- As explained already This was not just about popcorn nor was it about just texting- there were a lot of dynamics going on that lead to what happened-
[[He’s a murderer.]]
He killed someone- it hasn’t been determined that he murdered anyone yet- there’s a big difference
[[He’s a jerk.]]
Noone is questioning that- but being a jerk does not automatically make one a murderer when someone dies at their hand- That’s why facts matter- That’s why it has to be determined in court WHO initiated contact or incited to violence- that’s why we have trials- because emotions don’t make for sound judgments-
Do you know what happened when he returned from the manager? Who started the argument back up? What was said? Or is it simply enough for you that one man is dead, one man had a gun- and was a hothead, and therefore must be guilty of murder?
I agree that he overreacted. The question is why he reacted as he did. For that the answer can be found in the book, The Power of Habit, which was published around the time of the incident. Once you understand how the brain stores habits, it’s likely that the retired policeman’s training resulted in a response without conscious thought. Some articles said his first words after the shooting were, “What have I done?” I suspect he was surprised as the guy shot dead.
Athletes do something similar by repetitive training to react to circumstance without the involvement of conscious thought.
[[Just saying like it is.]]
An no- you are not ‘just saying it like it is’ you are being friggin rude- and turning this into a personal insults because I don’t agree with you that the shooter is automatically guilty, and because i happen to believe he should have a fair trial where objective facts are presented- There are all kinds of scenarios that could have happened- The fella texting could have been a hothead who threatened the fella with the gun- We know he provoked the situation by throwing crap- an there’s a chance that fella is the one that continued the issue after the man came back- You have not provided evidence that he didn’t- That’s a pretty important fact that needs to be brought out in the case-
I was never rude or insulting to you in this thread before you acted the way you did- so If you wish to discuss the issue without the personal insults- then we can do so- if you’re going to continue to be rude and insulting- then goodbye
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.
