United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: In theater shooting case, justice is anything but swift
Source:
Herald Tribune
URL Source: http://www.heraldtribune.com/news/2 ... -justice-is-anything-but-swift
Published: Feb 1, 2017
Author: Tom Lyons
Post Date: 2017-02-01 11:13:02 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 3094
Comments: 15
Sometimes the circumstances of a shooting make it the focus of a lot of news coverage for a while, only to be all but forgotten as the case is prosecuted. Defendants may be sent to prison on a murder conviction, or sent home with charges reduced or dropped, and we sometimes never hear about it. So when a reader asked what happened to that retired police officer who killed a man in a movie theater north of Tampa, after an argument about a cell phone, I had no idea. I thought it might be an example of a case that got away. That theater shooting happened in January of 2014, after all. Curtis Reeves, then 71, is the retired cop who said he fired the fatal shot in self defense during an argument with Chad Oulson, 43, as both men were sitting with their wives and waiting for a movie to start. After angry words about Oulson's cell phone, Oulson grabbed Reeves' popcorn and threw it. Reeves claimed he pulled his gun and fired because he believed Oulson was attacking him and about to beat him up. Last I knew, his lawyer was planning to rely on Florida's "Stand Your Ground" defense. The law allows you to use deadly force when threatened and in danger, even if retreating was perhaps a more reasonable option. My take was that it looked a lot like a cowardly shooting that might will be seen as totally unjustified. But, had a judge quietly dismissed the second-degree murder charge when I wasn't paying attention? No. Turns out, postponements have repeatedly pushed the expected "Stand Your Ground" hearing. Richard Escobar, the shooter's lawyer, says is only partly because of waiting for crime lab enhancements of a security cam video that captured some of the action in the darkened theater. Another factor has been even more time-consuming, he said: "One hundred seventy-two witnesses." What? The theater was full of people who could have seen or heard something relevant, Escobar said Monday. "We've deposed over 150 witnesses." Keep in mind, this is not even necessarily preparation for trial. Escobar still hopes there won't be one. He is preparing for the February hearing at which he hopes a judge will dismiss the charge. Wow. It has often been explained that a key point of Stand Your Ground is avoiding the need for massive and expensive legal work and getting charges dropped quickly if a judge thinks the shooting was justifiable as self-defense. What's the point if it takes three years to have the hearing, and if the prep is as massive as that for a trial? Plenty, at least as a defense lawyer sees it. In essence, Escobar gets two possible shots to win. But unlike some simpler cases, preparing for the "Stand Your Ground" hearing in this theater case is much like preparing for trial, he said. The hearing itself will likely last two weeks, he said. If the case still goes to trial one day, it will take even longer, he predicts. But that won't be any time soon. No matter who wins at the hearing, the other side may well appeal. Reeves will be 74 by then. If the hearing does not go his way and if his appeal also fails, I have a suggestion for his defense team: Come up with another delay or two, and then argue Reeves is not competent to stand trial because he no longer has any memory of the shooting. Maybe I won't either. - Tom Lyons can be reached at tom.lyons@heraldtribune.com.. Ex-cop ‘who killed theater texter’ menaced moviegoer previously
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Distracting the victim by throwing something in his face before you attack is a common tactic, one which Reeve (an ex-cop) was well aware of. Sure, Reeve could have waited to see if he was actually attacked before defending himself. But in this case, the victim was 71 years old and the attacker was 43. Would the victim still be able to defend himself after the first punch was thrown? John Steinbeck once said, “Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.”
No. The key point of Stand Your Ground is to avoid charges being brought by the prosecutor to begin with. If the prosecutor wishes to grandstand and make a big deal out it, yeah, you're going to have massive and expensive legal work. Then either the judge, or the jury, will rule self-defense. If this guy wasn't 71 years old, I'd would consider 2nd degree murder. But Florida protects it's senior citizens because they are more vulnerable to physical injury if attacked. As proof, Florida’s Statute 784.08, "prescribes harsh, inflexible penalties for those caught assaulting or battering someone age 65 years or older."
He tossed some popcorn at the prick. Oh wait - the ex-cop remembered the mantra that was drilled into him. "He feared for his life". Cowardly scumbag was also texting at the same movie and had previously harassed other theater-goers at a different theater. The sick bastard was a ticking time bomb. And the guy's a prick because he asked him not to use his cellphone in the theater? I see. In your world we should all be good little sheep and let others just walk all over us. I mean, that's what you would have done, right?
Uh-huh. And that's the lesson to be learned here -- you never know who you're dealing with. So be polite and considerate of others. The world doesn't revolve around you.
Distracting the victim by throwing something in his face before you attack is a common tactic, one which Reeve (an ex-cop) was well aware of. Another way, more effective, to kill someone is to approach them from behind while the target is walking down the street, then shoot or stab them in the back. So by your logic, people should be permitted the 'fear for my life' defense for shooting anyone walking behind them. It was an argument in which Reeves was a party. Throwing the popcorn would make it a possible civil matter, not criminal, and you don't shoot people over civil disputes, or when someone gets mad at you.
Never heard of the "knockout game", huh? Maybe you think it's preferable that some senior citizen is killed rather than violate the "rights" of 4-5 youths to sneak up behind him and punch him in the side of the head? I don't. Put me on the jury and the geezer walks.
Never heard of the "knockout game", huh? So you *do* believe that shooting anyone walking behind you is legit self defense because they might do the knockout "game". You better carry several boxes of ammo the next time you go to the store. You'll need it.
Of course. And I'm sure if Oulson was the cop and he shot Reeves, and all else happened as reported, you'd make sure Oulson would walk because the "geezer" deserved it. Because a love affair with cops is a wonderful thing.
If I am in fear for my life, you betcha.
Big difference. As I said in my post #2, if a 71 year old believes he's about to be attacked by a 43 year old, he can't wait for the punch. It may kill him. What kind of person bullies a 71 year old anyways?
If I am in fear for my life, you betcha. If true then you are a professed danger to society and need to be taken off the streets immediately.
A person who is tired of being bullied by a 71 year old.
Only to those who make the mistake of fucking with me.
Reeves (71) claimed he pulled his gun and fired because he believed Oulson (43) was attacking him and about to beat him up.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
"It has often been explained that a key point of Stand Your Ground is avoiding the need for massive and expensive legal work and getting charges dropped quickly if a judge thinks the shooting was justifiable as self-defense."
#3. To: misterwhite (#1)
Distracting the victim by throwing something in his face before you attack is a common tactic
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.
#4. To: Deckard (#3)
"He tossed some popcorn at the prick."
#5. To: Deckard (#3)
"The sick bastard was a ticking time bomb."
#6. To: Deckard (#3)
#7. To: misterwhite (#1)
#8. To: Pinguinite (#7)
"So by your logic, people should be permitted the 'fear for my life' defense for shooting anyone walking behind them."
#9. To: misterwhite (#8)
#10. To: misterwhite (#8)
I don't. Put me on the jury and the geezer walks.
#11. To: Pinguinite (#9)
"So you *do* believe that shooting anyone walking behind you is legit self defense because they might do the knockout "game".
#12. To: Pinguinite (#10)
"And I'm sure if Oulson was the cop and he shot Reeves, and all else happened as reported, you'd make sure Oulson would walk because the "geezer" deserved it."
#13. To: misterwhite (#11)
"So you *do* believe that shooting anyone walking behind you is legit self defense because they might do the knockout "game".
#14. To: misterwhite (#12)
What kind of person bullies a 71 year old anyways?
#15. To: Pinguinite (#13)
"If true then you are a professed danger to society ..."
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]