Curtis Reeves Found Not Guilty

[Double Naught Spy]

Y'all may remember the discussion from 2015 of the conflict between theater goers that escalated from words to bag of popcorn throwing to gunfire by retired police 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 thread...
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=568540&highlight=curtis+reeves

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

 

[Koda94]

I do remember that discussion, it took so long to go to trial and for some reason it wasn't exactly headline news like other self defense trials but when I finally saw the trial was unfolding I remembered that old discussion here.
I'm still processing the outcome, I wasn't certain either way if he would get acquitted but it seems as if the jury felt it was reasonable for Reeves to feel in danger from being assaulted.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Eight years in process, 3-1/2 hours for the jury to acquit. Reeves had a good attorney.

 

[12-34hom]

Forfeit life over text message?

Skating on some thin ice. The time it took to get to trial, his age, profession all probably had a bearing on this verdict. Just goes to show that one should mind ones own business while in public. Never know who might be lurking, another trigger to be tripped. 12-34hom.

 

[roscoe]

Civil trial to come, I am sure . . .

 

[Metal god]

I wasn't certain either way if he would get acquitted but it seems as if the jury felt it was reasonable for Reeves to feel in danger from being assaulted.

I watched a good bit of the trial and like the Rittenhouse prosecution they simply did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt . I think is was less the jury felt Reeves had the right and more the prosecution did not prove he didn't .

The defense was great on cross but there case was not as good as could have been and there closing was a joke . They spent an hour and a half of there closing drilling down the poor investigation by police . Even if correct , this was a self defense case and any poor investigation after the fact did not have a great deal to do with if Reeves committed lawful self defense . Sure you bring it up but maybe not spend HALF your closing on that . That's why I think it was more the failure of the prosecution then the defense showing Reeves feared for his life . An interesting aspect of the law in FL is that a assault on a person 65yrs old or older is an automatic felony . This means several of the things Chad Oulsen did that day were felony's including grabbing the popcorn from mr Reeves and tossing it back in his face . There was other testimony Mr Oulsen had made physical contact to Reeves face either with hand/fist or phone either with phone in hand or throwing it at Mr Reeves . I'll add there did not seem to be any conclusive proof that happened but at the same time there was no proof it didn't and Mr Reevs did have a small abrasion around one of his eyes .

Point being Mr Oulsen had committed at least one felony assault on Mr Reeves and likely more then that before being shot . That 65 or older law may have played a big factor in the verdict .