Is this the kind of scenario that "Stand Your Ground" was intended to cover.

Warrigal

SF VIP
I thought is was about defending yourself against intruders/assailants in your home.

Lawyer for Curtis Reeves to invoke 'stand your ground' law
Anna M. Phillips, Times Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 28, 2015


b4s_curtisreeves102915_16186922_8col.jpg

Curtis Reeves is charged with murder in a 2014 movie theater shooting.

The lawyer for Curtis Reeves, the retired Tampa police captain accused of shooting and killing a man in a Wesley Chapel movie theater last year, said Wednesday that he plans to use Florida's "stand your ground" self-defense law to have the criminal charges against Reeves dismissed.
The decision to pursue this legal strategy has been widely anticipated ever since Reeves was charged with second-degree murder and claimed that he had acted in self-defense.

In 2005, with strong support from the National Rifle Association, Florida's Legislature became the first to pass a "stand your ground" law, which allows people to use deadly force when they fear death or great bodily harm. If, after a hearing, a judge determines that the incident meets the criteria in the law, the shooter is "immune from criminal prosecution and civil action."

In 2012, when the Tampa Bay Times examined the "stand your ground" law, reporters found that a majority of those who invoked the law to avoid prosecution had been successful. Nearly 70 percent had gone free.

"I think we have a pretty solid stand your ground case," said Reeves' attorney, Richard Escobar, adding that he plans to file a formal motion within the next few weeks. A five-day hearing has already been scheduled for Jan. 25.

Reeves, 73, was arrested in January 2014 and accused of shooting Chad Oulson, 43, a man he had criticized for sending text messages in a movie theater. Oulson was shot once in the chest and died. His wife, Nicole, who was sitting next to him during the matinee, was grazed by a bullet, prompting an additional charge of aggravated battery.

From the outset, Escobar has argued that video taken from inside the movie theater will show that Oulson attacked Reeves first and that his client genuinely feared for his life. Under the law, a defendant must be able to show that he had a "reasonable belief" in a threat before using deadly force, not that the threat actually existed.

Escobar's list of potential witnesses includes a retired FBI agent who specializes in use-of-force cases and a retired Jacksonville Sheriff's Office detective and crime scene investigator who wrote a book about the 2012 killing of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed black teenager fatally shot in Sanford.

The trial of George Zimmerman, who was acquitted of Martin's murder in 2013, renewed national criticism of Florida's "stand your ground" law, which erased the duty to retreat from violent confrontations.

Although the trial brought new scrutiny to Florida's pro-gun politics — and added to its "Gunshine State" notoriety — in the past few decades, roughly half of the states have passed "stand your ground" laws or statutes similar to it. An additional nine have established through case law that there is no duty to retreat.

Critics of the laws argue that they have made it more difficult to prosecute criminals and have emboldened those with guns.

I'm gobsmacked by the fact that it happened in a Wesley Chapel movie theater. I wonder what the Wesleys would have made of this.
 

Always the best way to handle a dispute... pull out your gun and blow the other guy away... done... Oh... and them claim you feared for your life.
 
Better than pleading insanity, or maybe not...
 

was that Oulson guy armed with a gun also... ?? Because if not then I think "fearing for your life" might be a bit dramatic... Fearing for a black eye would be more like it. Yeah.. he may have been punched.. BUT is the equal response to KILL someone.. Would Reeves have died? Likely not..
 
In a theatre how would you know whether someone was armed or not?
Or do you simply assume that they are because, after all, you are carrying so everyone else must be too?
 
In a theatre how would you know whether someone was armed or not?
Or do you simply assume that they are because, after all, you are carrying so everyone else must be too?

My question is... in a crowded, dark theater... if someone starts shooting people.. and everyone stands up and starts shooting.. how does anyone know who they are shooting at?
 
******* Wild West City...sigh...
http://www.brownells.com/handgun-parts/sights/sight-sets/tritium-handgun-sights-prod13165.aspx

But like you say, a dark theater and everybody starts shooting, I don't even know what the safest way to get out of such a situation. You would think hit the ground and crawl. But then you could get trampled. Hiding still on the floor somehow might leave you a target too. If you can see the exit and can run fast enough, but then you're out in the open. Crazy we have to consider such things.
 
Can we get back to the case?

I've found another detail

Reeves, 73, a retired Tampa police captain, is accused of second-degree murder in the death of Chad Oulson, 43, in January 2014. After arguing with Oulson about use of a cellphone to send a text message during film previews in a Wesley Chapel, Fla., theater, Reeves allegedly shot him to death.

A bullet grazed Oulson's wife, who was sitting beside him.Richard Escobar, Reeves' attorney, has said video from inside the theater shows that Oulson threw his cellphone at Reeves, striking him in the face, before the gunfire. Reeves' wife and other witnesses said they did not see a cellphone thrown.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2015...ed-in-Florida-theater-shooting/8991446140643/

The dead man was apparently shot in the chest. Does that sound like he was advancing on the shooter?

On the other hand, this account presents a different picture

Security videos from the theater showed Oulson, who was sitting in front of Reeves, grab Reeves’ popcorn and throw it at him. The video, shown in court during a bail hearing last year, showed Reeves then pull out a handgun and shoot Oulson.
“Another aspect of the case is that (Reeves) was 71 at the time of this attack,” Escobar said. “When I was 30 or 35, I could probably take a punch, but I’m 58 now and would not do very well if a 40-year-old man attacked me. Your body can’t take that kind of punishment.”
http://www.tbo.com/pasco-county/acc...-will-use-stand-your-ground-defense-20151029/

Cell phone or popcorn? Which sounds more likely? How many people would throw their own cell phone at someone complaining about it being used to text in a theatre?

What surprises me is that if the stand your ground argument is accepted, all charges will be dismissed. There will be no trial. Will witnesses be called without a trial happening?
 
Thank goodness, this would never happen in Ozzieland!
Why?
Movies so expensive here, attendance can be very poor (counted only 12 persons in theatre the other day!)!
More likely a knifing or rape!
 
Thank goodness, this would never happen in Ozzieland!
Why?
Movies so expensive here, attendance can be very poor (counted only 12 persons in theatre the other day!)!
More likely a knifing or rape!

You're right about the expensive cinema prices Susie although sometimes it's worth it to see some films on the big screen.

Never heard of anyone being knifed or raped in the cinema.
 
Duty to Retreat

"Florida's "stand your ground" law, which erased the duty to retreat from violent confrontations."


The Duty to Retreat law is absurd, in a situation having lethal possibility. A gun is pointed at you, and the law requires that you "retreat"? What, to be shot in the back?

Absurd. imp
 
"Florida's "stand your ground" law, which erased the duty to retreat from violent confrontations."


The Duty to Retreat law is absurd, in a situation having lethal possibility. A gun is pointed at you, and the law requires that you "retreat"? What, to be shot in the back?

Absurd. imp

Was a gun pointed.... or a box of popcorn... It's really easy to mistake one for the other..
 
Reeves provoked the man it seems to me, then thinks he can get a free pass to execute the guy, because he "feared for his life". Retired police captain, you'd think he would have enough of a pair of balls to be able to deal with another guy in public.
 
Apparently the theatre was pretty empty.

Reeves’ attorney has maintained all along that video recorded inside the Wesley Chapel movie theater will show that Oulson attacked the older man first — causing Reeves to fear for his life.

Defendants must show they had a “reasonable belief” that they were threatened before using force — even if no such threat actually existed.

Reeves told investigators that he feared for his safety when he was struck in the face with an object that was later determined was popcorn, but his defense attorney suggested may have been a more dangerous object.

Pasco County Sheriff Chris Nocco, who is investigating the fatal shooting, dismissed that claim, saying there was no evidence of another object – and besides, he said, Reeves could have just found another seat.

“It was an empty movie theatre,” Nocco said. “If he was scared, why didn’t he move seats?”

The sheriff said all the detectives who were at the scene agreed that the state’s controversial self-defense law did not apply in this case.

“From our investigation, it seems simply that the agitation of someone using their cell phone to text has caused this,” Nocco said. “The suspect was sitting there, they had an argument about texting, the victim turned around, threw something, a shot is fired and the next thing you know a man is dead.”

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/10/ret...ning-down-moviegoer-who-threw-popcorn-at-him/

Does the lack of other people in the theatre act in favour of the man who thought he was being threatened?
Also, if the man in front of him was texting, couldn't he have moved to another seat where that wouldn't be such a problem?
I've done that more than once to avoid people who talk or rattle lolly wrappings without consideration of other people.
 


Back
Top