Quote from CNN Article
Bond denied for ex-cop who allegedly shot texting dad at movies

It would not surprise me if this guy uses a legal defense of "self defense".

Unfortunately for Mr Reeves, there were over 100 witnesses, including a Sumter County sheriff's deputy who stepped in to subdue the shooter. Another unfortunate fact for Mr Reeves, the victim was two rows away. The only thing that got thrown was popcorn.

Mr Reeves can hire a defense attorney and try the "self defense" strategy, however these attorneys don't come cheap. Reeves could also lose his policeman's pension if he becomes a convicted felon.

The entire situation is very sad and a tragedy for all.

:agree: How true!

Originally Posted by LndLocked View Post
A husband and father of a young girl DIED .... your attempt at humor is decidedly not funny

I consider myself above average in the sharpness factor .... and I have no idea what you mean??????????????????????????

Just heard on the news at 5:00 that the Sumter County sheriff's deputy was sitting only five seats away from the shooter, so it seems that he will be the star witness. Also reported that the gun jammed after one shot, so conceivably more people could have been killed.

Mr Reeves has a defense counsel who represented him in court today when bond was denied. He promised another bond hearing will be held next week.

The saddest news was the victim was texting his three-year-old daughter's babysitter when he was killed.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought I read that he went out to his car and got the gun and came back in and shot. Why didn't that give him time to think about it and hopefully listen to his wife?

My father was also a police officer. He never shot anyone nor do I recall anyone in his department over the 25 years that he worked there ever shoot anyone. Yet, they all had guns. I

No, but they are definitely good things to think about when killing an innocent person with a gun or otherwise.

I agree that the alleged shooter must have had dementia or some other mental problem. Shooting a man for texting is not the reaction of a sane person. And I think that will be the defense.

I challenge your statement, highlighted above, that "People die every day from someone carrying a concealed (legal) gun."

Please provide the source of your statistics.

(It would be unacceptable to include those shot lawfully by police officers or by private citizens stopping the commission of a crime.)

Thank you.

.

I don't know that he can lose his pension for simply being convicted of a felony.

He was not a member of the Florida Retirement System. The Tampa Police Department Pension System is funded by contributions from the employees.

It is still subject to Florida law concerning public retirement systems, which requires the forfeiture of pension benefits for conviction of certain crimes, but homicide is not one of them. They are more concerned with bribery, extortion and other violations of fiduciary duty while still employed. I could not find a provision for taking the pension of a retiree.

When I retired, under the Florida Retirement System, about a decade ago, a retiree could lose his pension for conviction of a crime involving "moral turpitude." That included homicide. I haven't been able to find that provision with an on line search now.

I just don't know.

I wonder how many lives are saved every year by legal gun owners ?

Illegal to text in a movie theatre? Could you tell me what statute that is? I would like to read it.

A study ordered by President Obama found that gun ownership actually saves lives and those who have a firearm at their disposal improve their chances of survival and reduce their chance of injury in the event they are confronted by a violent criminal.

White House Study Finds Guns Save Lives: "Consistently Lower Injury Rates Among Gun Using Crime Victims"

It is estimated that 3 million people use a gun to defend themselves from harm every year. This means that over 8,000 Americans every day act with potentially deadly force to prevent injury or death to themselves or a family member.


.

I am sure that Lou was just trying to be facetious in his post. Texting in a theater is rude - not illegal.

I really wonder why anyone would carry a pistol to the movies. How paranoid?

Two points: This theater chain asks that you not text during the movie. In this case, the movie had not started yet and the victim was texting during the previews.

Also, it was reported on the news tonight that Mr Reeves had a similar altercation with a woman last month over her texting at the same theater. Of course, that one didn't end with a shooting, but the woman reported that Mr Reeves followed her to the ladies room, harrassing her over her texting.

It might seem to a casual observer, that he was vowing to put an end to texting at this theater, one way or another.

It's not quite that simple. You might find it enlightening to read the 3,655 word law on the subject.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

.

Before I provide the statistic I have a bet:

If less than 365 people were murdered (in the U.S) from legal guns last year I will pay YOU XXXX. If more than 365 people were murdered from legal guns last year you will pay ME XXXX.

What shall we make the XXXX?

I know you won't take that bet at any price.

PS: and yes we will not count those stopping a crime (police or otherwise). I'm talking about the number of people arrested and charged with murder whose gun was legally registered to them.

For the last year I could find stats (2011), there were almost 9000 murders from guns. You really think less than 365 (4%) were legally purchased?

I am sorry Carl, but this data will have to be ignored.
It does not fit the narrative of the gun grabber.

The shooter has apparently lost his mental balance, as humans sometimes do. He is an individual and should be thought of as one, rather than as representing all other gun owners. Lots of law enforcement in my family, and they have always told me that not all officers are created equal.

This is not only a gun conriol issue, but the mental health of those in possession of a firearm, and other weapons.

I worked with a guy who was an auxillary police officer and it was scary, this person had a gun to use. Very argumentive, to the point of not trusting him, to do the right thing.

My personal opinion is, that he shouldn't have been that upset, as the movie hadn't started yet. If it was during the viewing of the movie, I could see one being annoyed, if another person was being disruptive. An over reaction, by the P.O., to what was happening. IMHO

When, will all this madness, end????

"SLOW DOWN" nobody except the people on totv have found this ex-officer guilty of anything -- wow -- does anyone know the real story NO - i thought this was america and innocence until PROVEN guilty---- And i stand by my statement THANK YOU

In my opinion and in the opinions I would guess of almost 100% of people hearing about this and the opinion of the court who has already said no bail this is obviously someone who did something VERY wrong. I don't think anyone can think of any "real story" that could justify someone shooting someone they did not know in a darkened movie theatre.


The responses to the posts quoted was that an attempt at humor triggered justifiable anger in the face of this very horrible (alleged) incident.

I agree with your thought that he might have had some age related dementia. I thought that right from the beginning. Many become belligerent and act out of character......not their normal selves.

I also thought he might have been on some type of new pharmaceutical which also "might" have affected his behavior or anger tolerance level.

At our age, none of us like the constant ringing of cell phones or need to text.......but it is what the younger people do. It is NOT A REASON TO TAKE A LIFE.

When I saw that family photo of the wife, the husband and their three year old daughter, I immediately thought of our son, his wife and their 2 and a half year old daughter, and one year old daughter.

I can just see "Daddy" perhaps answering a text that the babysitter and 2 year old sent to mommy and daddy at the theatre. You should see these young toddlers work their way around a cell phone, I-pad, etc......just a matter of fact thing for them. They learned to navigate from babyhood.

Who knows really if the daughter texted him first (with the help of her babysitter) or the dad promised to let the little girl know when they arrived at the theatre. It's all instant communication and constant communication among that age group nowadays.

A very very sad and tragic story. Yes, the 71 year old will get a life sentence....no matter how many years the judge gives him. But, the young dad is dead, for no good reason.......the mom's hand is injured and who knows what nerve damage was done via the shot through her hand when she was trying to protect her husband, a natural instinct.....and the beautiful little girl is fatherless.

Too many angry outbursts all over our country nowadays, for no good reasons.

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE --- That is the American way
As far a my attempt at humor - I am sorry for those who do not see it that way- but I find it humorous - that too is the American way - and you have the right to disagree - that too is the American way and I thank you for your feedback-

Although texting can be annoying, so is talking. Wonder if someone will pull a gun out to shut up some incessant talker.

As for dementia or whatever reason, could he not just be a fed up cranky old man? with a gun?

He has a right to justice! It probably will be in the hands of a jury. They will make the decision about guilt.

But I am not inclined to make theoretical excuses for the shooter or give the slightest benefit of the doubt myself.

A man is dead. A wife no longer has a husband. A daughter no longer has a father. Parents no longer have a son.

Put yourself in the victims shoes! What if it was your spouse, child, or parent?

Move along...nothing to see here....just 'standing his ground'.
And better be silent when ur eating that popcorn. :doh:

In 2006-There were only 54 murders in Australia by firearms, 184 in Canada, 73 in England and Wales, 5 in New Zealand, and 37 people in Sweden. In comparison, firearms were used to murder 11,344 in the United States.
Just saying... We have a gun problem.

Oh but he actually is. Who better equipped with training and experience? If he can completely lose control and shoot someone because he is annoyed, then what chance do mere mortals have.

It seem rather obvious, one shooter, one dead guyl

Do ya think?

I'm still waiting..........................and they will defend the event.

The assailant is already setting up his stand your ground defense. Under Florida's law, which our legislature had the opportunity to revise and did not, a person may use deadly force in a situation where they fear for their own safety. Here is the exact language

"He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony"

Thus the "right" to use deadly force can be based on the belief that either death/great bodily harm might be imminent OR a forcible felony is about to happen

Here is the Florida definition of forcible felony:

“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

and lastly under Florida law a battery ..

The offense of battery occurs when a person:
1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
2. Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.

A battery when the victim is aged 65 or older is a felony
784.08 Assault or battery on persons 65 years of age or older; reclassification of offenses In the case of battery, from a misdemeanor of the first degree to a felony of the third degree.

Thus if this shooter believed that he was preventing a battery on an elderly person (himself) his belief may be enough to get him off. Note that the definition does not require that the battery has taken place nor is taking place only that the shooter believes such an event is imminent. There is nothing in the law about who started the incident only about the state of mind of the person choosing to exercise his Florida right to stand your ground. If the shooter reasonably believed that he was about to be struck then one interpretation of this law is that he had a right to use deadly force to prevent the battery of a person aged 65+. A good lawyer can certainly make this argument and a judge can rule without the question going before a jury.

If he did get off, he would not be the first to successfully use SYG as a defense.

Apparently it has become a common defense tactic.

Yes, and if someone tells you to stop, stop and take it out to the lobby. Don't throw popcorn in the person's face.

Everyone wonders what would have or could have been if the retired captain didn't have a gun. How about asking what would have happened if the nasty texter had just stopped being nasty. Sometimes bad things happen to people who are nasty.

And the retired captain, 71, had been retired for over 20 years. He, like many other retired people, may have been taking multiple prescription drugs which may have impaired his judgement. He might have been taking drugs for depression but, then again, nothing would have happened if the popcorn-jerk had stopped being a jerk.

An incident where she made him feel uncomfortable by texting and when he "glarred" at her, she felt uncomfortable too. Then, because she felt guilty, she imagined that he was following her.

Can you imagine her testimony in court?

Lawyer: What exactly happened that day?

Woman: Well, I was texting and he glared at me.

Lawyer: How did you know he was looking at you? Did you look at him because you thought you might be bothering him?

Woman: All I know is that every time I looked at him, he was looking at me.

Lawyer: Who looked first?

Woman: He did! He wouldn't let me text in peace. What is this world coming to when you can't text in a movie theater without someone looking at you?

That would be very damning testimony. :thumbup:

...and someone being rude to you is reason to kill them?

nra

[QUOTE=Villages PL;812485]Yes, and if someone tells you to stop, stop and take it out to the lobby. Don't throw popcorn in the person's face.

Everyone wonders what would have or could have been if the retired captain didn't have a gun. How about asking what would have happened if the nasty texter had just stopped being nasty. Sometimes bad things happen to people who are nasty.

And the retired captain, 71, had been retired for over 20 years. He, like many other retired people, may have been taking multiple prescription drugs which may have impaired his judgement. He might have been taking drugs for depression but, then again, nothing would have happened if the popcorn-jerk had stopped being a jerk.[/QUOTE]

Like getting killed? Wow!
So we just go off and kill jerks? Wow!