Shooting at "Lone Survivor" in Florida

[catfish86]

Curtis Reeves is the gun control crowd's dream...some jerk with a gun that shot somebody for no real reason. He should be in prison and should not be out on bail. There is no question he killed a man and according to the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing, his claims of self defense don't hold water. He is a menace pure and simple. Yes he also had a habit of being the text police in the movie theater. Trying to justify Reeves' actions simply makes our opponent's point seem valid.

If you read the link about the couple he previously harrassed for texting in the same theater you see your common jerk who gets off on making other people do what he tells them.

[Mustang380gal]

Hearings are not trials. Not all of the evidence is presented at hearings.

Give it a rest. You decided 3 hours after the story broke that he was akin to the devil incarnate.

Remember the saying "there but for the grace of God go I". Any of us may be in a self-defense situation, and it may not go as well as we would like. Even if we survive, life as we know it will be over.

Those of us in a concealed/open carry community ought to be the last people to be rushing to judge someone who claims self-defense.

[carmen fovozzo]

In life, when someone does something to hurt you or you're cause and things that you believe in ,the natural thing to do is to judge that person.....That is what I am doing on this thread along with others..

Some on this thread seems to side with the shooter for now, some of us on this thread do not side with the shooter on this thread for now......We should be able to post with out being scolded by either side.. As long as we follow the rules of this forum, being on one side or the other, should not get us a scolding by our Leaders..IMO

[schmieg]

Hearings are not trials. Not all of the evidence is presented at hearings.

Give it a rest. You decided 3 hours after the story broke that he was akin to the devil incarnate.

Remember the saying "there but for the grace of God go I". Any of us may be in a self-defense situation, and it may not go as well as we would like. Even if we survive, life as we know it will be over.

Those of us in a concealed/open carry community ought to be the last people to be rushing to judge someone who claims self-defense.

I agree on all counts, but it's hard to accept the self defense claim for the threatening act of being hit with popcorn.

[Mustang380gal]

In life, when someone does something to hurt you or you're cause and things that you believe in ,the natural thing to do is to judge that person.....That is what I am doing on this thread along with others..

Some on this thread seems to side with the shooter for now, some of us on this thread do not side with the shooter on this thread for now......We should be able to post with out being scolded by either side.. As long as we follow the rules of this forum, being on one side or the other, should not get us a scolding by our Leaders..IMO

Carmen, I am not taking any side. We don't have all of the facts. Until we do, and that will happen at trial, there is not enough known to make a judgement.

Constant negative posting is against the TOS. Coming on a thread with no new reports to rehash old negativity is not needed. My job is to keep things civil. If a bit of a scolding to try to keep things civil is off-putting, that's on you.

I agree on all counts, but it's hard to accept the self defense claim for the threatening act of being hit with popcorn.

I am looking forward to this going to trial. I want to hear what words were exchanged. I also want to hear if he was trained that thrown objects are a ruse to blind someone to a real attack. At this point, we do not know what his mindset was.

[catfish86]

So you are saying the defense had better evidence but decided not to present it at the immunity hearing? None of the witnesses other than Reeves or his wife gave any creedence to the self-defense claims. There is absolutely zero evidence that anything other than popcorn was thrown in the shooter's face. No reasonable person would believe that having popcorn thrown in your face justifies killing somone. That was the judge's ruling. People like Reeves are the reason prisons are built.

[carmen fovozzo]

Street smarts come to mind. Nothing surprises me any longer.

[DontTreadOnMe]

So you are saying the defense had better evidence but decided not to present it at the immunity hearing?

That's an interesting point. Even if they do, I'll bet the prosecution would be allowed to point that out to the jury, to impugn that testimony and thereby his credibility if they raise any "state of mind" defenses at the trial that weren't brought up during the immunity hearing.

I remember during the Zimmerman proceedings his lawyers saying something about not wanting a self-defense immunity hearing b/c they didn't want to expose their tactics and evidence to the prosecution at that point. Maybe this kind of thing is what they were talking about.

[Mustang380gal]

So you are saying the defense had better evidence but decided not to present it at the immunity hearing? None of the witnesses other than Reeves or his wife gave any creedence to the self-defense claims. There is absolutely zero evidence that anything other than popcorn was thrown in the shooter's face. No reasonable person would believe that having popcorn thrown in your face justifies killing somone. That was the judge's ruling. People like Reeves are the reason prisons are built.

Not all of the evidence has been released. The media mess up more than they get right. According to Branca, the judge made some significant errors in the hearing, which may yet be appealed. Therefore, we still do not know enough facts.

I sincerely hope that you are never in a self-defense situation, judged to be guilty by all before the ink is dry on the newspapers.

You seem to be so locked into your own opinion that you are unwilling to see anything but your opinion.

[Mustang380gal]

This is turning massively repetitive. This is done until the next hearing or the trial.