Curtis Reeves Found Not Guilty - Followup from 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.
Double Naught Spy

Double Naught Spy

Sus Venator
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
12,346
Location
Forestburg, Texas
We have had a bunch of threads here that addressed this 2015 case of the conflict between theater goers that escalated from words to bag of popcorn throwing to gunfire by retired police SWAT captain Curtis Reeves. Well, apparently Reeves feared for his life (or so is claimed) and the jury believed him and found him not guilty. Chad Oulson was unarmed (aside from the popcorn).

Old threads...
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?search/11043559/&q=curtis+reeves&o=date

Court ruling news...
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/25/us/curtis-reeves-murder-trial-jury-deliberations/index.html

https://www.tampabay.com/news/pasco...rue-jurors-hear-man-killed-over-popcorn-toss/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...led-man-fight-phone-movie-acquitted-rcna17794
 
Well when you are a bully you get what you got when you do what you do.
 
Kleanbore said:
Disparity of force. Fit person against invalid defender,
Click to expand...

Fear of disparity of force. Aside from the popcorn, none was used. There was not attack occurring. He shot because he was scared. Apparently, that is okay.

JCooperfan1911 said:
Lesson of the day:

Don’t mess with old guys.

My $0.02.
Click to expand...

Don't mess with scared former SWAT Captians.
 
Double Naught Spy said:
He shot because he was scared... Apparently, that is okay....
Click to expand...

Apparently so. I was shocked at the outcome. I figured it was a pretty open and shut case/easy conviction. (I suspected that was why it took so long to go to trial, too.)

I mean, the defendant's own wife said, moments after the shooting, "you didn't have to do that." (To which he replied "shut up right now" (because he knew he screwed up).

Total miscarriage of justice. Cases like this undermine the entire "good guy with a gun" argument.

As far as bullying goes, who was the bully here? The guy who decided he was going to enforce his will on another's use of a cell phone, or the guy who threw the popcorn? Stupid all the way around.
 
Not at all sure it was a miscarriage -- after reading multiple versions of what went down (Rashomon anyone?)
But am a bit surprised at both verdict in this day & age, and the speed of the jury in its findings.

(They apparently saw things very clearly that we haven't quite been permitted to see in the mass media....)
 
Given my experience in courtrooms ( 22 years a cop, all those years ago...) any outcome is possible... Heck, occasionally I actually saw justice (but not nearly often enough).

As a general principle I'd try to avoid deals where you might end up in court as a result - it's no fun at all... No matter how it plays out.
 
In a fairly empty theater, I would have found another place to sit.
When bullies collide, someone is bound to get hurt.
Grouchy old man couldn't abide having his (supposed) authority challenged.
Macho middle-aged man-child didn't want anyone telling him what he shouldn't do in polite company.
Reeves's attorney tried to run out Reeves's life clock. The jury saw a 79 year old retired cop but the fight was eight years in the past and the failing old man was in better condition.
 
"Setting an extremely bad precedent."
Looking at this case, spending 2015 to 2022 with the legal system (a sword of damocles) hanging over one's head, is not a fate I would court.

"... [the jury] apparantly saw things very clearly that we haven't been permitted to see in the mass media ..."
Ain't that the truth. And a lot of the activist media narrative in any case is surmise, speculation, "poetic truth".

Edited: I followed the links. The defense and prosecution quotes sound like both presented their cases ablely. What the truth is, I don't know, I did not see all 10 days of presentations nor did I participate in jury deliberations.

As popcorn guy, I would not have said anything to cell phone guy unless he was *still* on the phone *after* the movie had started and frankly I probably would have moved first time I saw him on the phone to avoid the annoyance. As cellphone guy, if I wanted to check on the childsittter, I done it maybe while waiting in ticket line or in the lobby. If I knew I had annoyed someone, even if they were an arrogant derriere beret about it, it's simpler to say sorry my oops than get into a territory marking dispute.
 
Last edited:
lemaymiami said:
Given my experience in courtrooms ( 22 years a cop, all those years ago...) any outcome is possible... Heck, occasionally I actually saw justice (but not nearly often enough).

As a general principle I'd try to avoid deals where you might end up in court as a result - it's no fun at all... No matter how it plays out.
Click to expand...
Watching family members from afar, court seems expensive as all get out too.
 
Two males in the throws of Kahneman's System 1 emotional reactions. Both lost, one more that the other. I feel sympathy for both of their families. Not for them, I have to say.
 
This is a shocking legal outcome. I am reminded of harold fish who had stronger grounds and went down for murder.

IMO this is evidence the court syatem is a raw gamble and the strength of your case or lack thereof might matter less than where you are and what that means for your jury pool.

I hope no one reads of this case and takes notes on where the line for justification lies.
 
Carl N. Brown said:
.... I followed the links. The defense and prosecution quotes sound like both presented their cases ablely. What the truth is, I don't know, I did not see all 10 days of presentations nor did I participate in jury deliberations....
Click to expand...

Yes, I'll venture to guess that no one who has posted in this thread, indeed no one reading this thread, sat in the courtroom, listened to the testimony of the witnesses, listened to the arguments of counsel, saw the physical evidence introduced, and listened to instructions of the judge. So no one has all the information the jury had when it made its decision.

So all the blather about a miscarriage of justice is founded on guesswork and not data. The facts are that we all have insufficient data with which to reasonably draw that conclusion, and so there's no way we can reasonably assess the rationality of the jury's verdict.

We just don't know, and we can't know with the limited data we have so far.

On the other hand, it would be very interesting to continue this discussion with some real data. Certainly the jury's verdict seems inconsistent with what most people probably expected from reading media reports of the incident. Why? What did the jury hear that we, in the public, didn't?

But we need actual data to make such a discussion worthwhile.
 
Attorney Andrew Branca provided a daily summary of the testimony on his ":Law of Self Defense" web site and YouTube channel. He generally will not predict an outcome because juries are so unpredictable, however he did say the expert witnesses and the defendant's attorney made a compelling case for a not guilty verdict. I recommend his site, and highly recommend his book.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Former store owner not guilty of assault
Replies
1
Views
1K
mole
M
A
  • Locked
First person charged under Florida 'red flag' law found guilty
Replies
11
Views
730
GEM
G
D
  • Locked
(MI) Man found guilty in killing of rattlesnake
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Jim NE
Jim NE
D
  • Locked
Four of eleven cops convicted in Miami
Replies
2
Views
1K
DeltaElite
D
J
  • Locked
Hate Crimes...
2 3 4 5
Replies
107
Views
3K
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top