FL Retired cop, shoots texting wanker

[fintstone]

I don't know...I think the video really changes things. The old guy is just sitting there and the younger, bigger guy is standing up and coming over the seat with his hand raised as if to strike the old guy (after slapping the popcorn out of the man's hand and throwing his cell phone at him. It is happening very fast. I think there is every indication that he is attacking the old guy (roid rage?). I know that at that point I would consider myself being assaulted and would have probably punched the guy in the nose (self defense)...or if old, unhealthy, scared for my life and armed...defended myself appropriately...just as the old guy did. When armed, you do not have the luxury of waiting until they are on top of you beating your face in...as they can/will take your weapon and use it on you or someone else. The old guy did exactly the right thing and will likely get off if his lawyer has any skill whatsoever. The videos contradict all the silly, "shot him over popcorn" and the "seats are too high for the old guy to be threatened" claims. The fact that the old guy sent a text 15 minutes earlier is just spin for headlines and public opinion (sympathy). You attack a senior citizen as he did (or anyone)...you should expect that they defend themselves just like anyone else. They have no obligation to wait until they are seriously injured to fight back.

[EMJ]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I don't know...I think the video really changes things. The old guy is just sitting there and the younger, bigger guy is standing up and coming over the seat with his hand raised as if to strike the old guy (after slapping the popcorn out of the man's hand and throwing his cell phone at him. It is happening very fast. I think there is every indication that he is attacking the old guy (roid rage?). I know that at that point I would consider myself being assaulted and would have probably punched the guy in the nose (self defense)...or if old, unhealthy, scared for my life and armed...defended myself appropriately...just as the old guy did. When armed, you do not have the luxury of waiting until they are on top of you beating your face in...as they can/will take your weapon and use it on you or someone else. The old guy did exactly the right thing and will likely get off if his lawyer has any skill whatsoever. The videos contradict all the silly, "shot him over popcorn" and the "seats are too high for the old guy to be threatened" claims. The fact that the old guy sent a text 15 minutes earlier is just spin for headlines and public opinion (sympathy). You attack a senior citizen as he did (or anyone)...you should expect that they defend themselves just like anyone else. They have no obligation to wait until they are seriously injured to fight back.

Slow Friday? Both the shooter and his wife both stated that there was absolutely no justification whatsoever for him shooting the victim. None. But yet you're still here defending him? I think it would be more interesting to hear what situation you've found yourself in that makes you feel you have to justify a murder such as this. There's clearly some history. Or you simply just want to play the contrarian to make it through a slow day.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by AFC-911

Why? You jealous you're not getting it up the ass too?

No, I am not jelly... Are you?

[slakjaw]

But I didn't murder anyone for no reason and don't deserve to be raped to death like the old POS this thread is about. I would bet everything I own this old POS has a graveyard somewhere full of hookers that he has killed over the past 50 years.

[AFC-911]

No, but you are making a lot of assumptions.

How about you wait for the trial before you condemn him? Especially for **** that isn't even close to being grounded in reality.

[ossiblue]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I don't know...I think the video really changes things. The old guy is just sitting there and the younger, bigger guy is standing up and coming over the seat with his hand raised as if to strike the old guy (after slapping the popcorn out of the man's hand and throwing his cell phone at him. It is happening very fast. I think there is every indication that he is attacking the old guy (roid rage?). I know that at that point I would consider myself being assaulted and would have probably punched the guy in the nose (self defense)...or if old, unhealthy, scared for my life and armed...defended myself appropriately...just as the old guy did. When armed, you do not have the luxury of waiting until they are on top of you beating your face in...as they can/will take your weapon and use it on you or someone else. The old guy did exactly the right thing and will likely get off if his lawyer has any skill whatsoever. The videos contradict all the silly, "shot him over popcorn" and the "seats are too high for the old guy to be threatened" claims. The fact that the old guy sent a text 15 minutes earlier is just spin for headlines and public opinion (sympathy). You attack a senior citizen as he did (or anyone)...you should expect that they defend themselves just like anyone else. They have no obligation to wait until they are seriously injured to fight back.

That video is like looking at cumulus clouds on a spring day--you see what you want to see by using your imagination.

There is nothing in that clip that changes anything, IMO. The victim is not leaning over to a degree that is inconsistent with trying to grab something, or having just grabbed something, out of the lap/hand of the shooter. The position of the hands? This is a frame by frame analysis and once you do that, you take a particular moment in time and motion out of context, and create a whole new "scene." You have eliminated the real time element of the event which changes the interpretation of a single image. This is the standard tactic of the defense attorney in this case--taking a single frame and blow it up to poster size. Naturally, anyone reaching over the back of a seat, into the row behind, to grab something, will lean forward, arm extended. This video changes nothing. It's an example of focusing down to one split second of motion video and creating a whole defense around an out of context single image. When you look at the video in motion, the shooting takes place almost simultaneously with the throwing of the popcorn--action, reaction. The full context of each image needs to be considered and that is motion video.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by AFC-911

No, but you are making a lot of assumptions.

How about you wait for the trial before you condemn him? Especially for **** that isn't even close to being grounded in reality.

How about you relax. I AM waiting for the trial. He will be found guilty it is just a matter of time. WTF is your problem!

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by EMJ

Slow Friday? Both the shooter and his wife both stated that there was absolutely no justification whatsoever for him shooting the victim. None. But yet you're still here defending him? I think it would be more interesting to hear what situation you've found yourself in that makes you feel you have to justify a murder such as this. There's clearly some history. Or you simply just want to play the contrarian to make it through a slow day.

Just observing the obvious. Nothing personal about it...I am not sure why you want to make personal.

Obviously, in retrospect, it is easy to say that it was not any reason to kill someone (why not just take a beating and call 911 afterward...assuming you survive?)...but what counts is what was happening at the split second where the man had to choose to shoot or not and what thoughts went through his mind.

Florida law considers attacking a senior citizen to be a forcible felony. Since Florida law also allows deadly self-defense to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony...isn't all the fellow needs to do is show he was attacked or about to be? Looks pretty clear in the video that he had reason to believe that was the case.

What situation have you found yourself in that justifies bullying and physically assaulting old men in theaters for no reason?

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by ossiblue

That video is like looking at cumulus clouds on a spring day--you see what you want to see by using your imagination.

There is nothing in that clip that changes anything, IMO. The victim is not leaning over to a degree that is inconsistent with trying to grab something, or having just grabbed something, out of the lap/hand of the shooter...

Actually it changes a lot. It shows the seats really didn't provide protection as some claimed. It shows the older man not angry, but acting relatively normal and pleasant (smiling when he reported the younger man's not following the rules). Finally it shows the phone being thrown at the older man and the position of both men (one in an agressive stance and the other submissive). Plenty of reason for the older man to feel threatened). What kind of guy stands over you (a stranger) in a theater and slaps your popcorn out of your hand and throws a cell phone at your face? Certainly not a rational one. What do you assume the next time his hand goes toward you (since he is out of ammunition to throw)?

[URY914]

Get ready for it.
The old man will walk.

[masraum]

The guy was being a bully and a dick, and there's no telling how far he was willing to take it. I'm not going to stand around and let someone beat my ass if I have al alternative. If you don't want violence escalated, don't start violence.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by URY914

Get ready for it.
The old man will walk.

Hopefully

[fintstone]

Sure looks that way in the video. The video really makes a difference as it shows that most of the "witnesses" were really not paying attention or were in a position where they really could not observe what really happened...and the press was just stirring the pot when they tried to make it about texting and popcorn when it was really about a younger man assaulting an older one who appeared defenseless. All the old man needs is reasonable doubt. It should be pretty easy for the defense. The old guy's biggest worry is probably a civil suit.

[krichard]

New video clearly shows the old man baited the victim into a confrontation so he could shoot him.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by krichard

New video clearly shows the old man baited the victim into a confrontation so he could shoot him.

LOL...nice try...like "the gal in the short skirt baited the rapist". Obviously assault and battery on a poor old man for "telling on you" for not following the rules is a pretty severe reaction.

[EMJ]

Originally Posted by fintstone

Just observing the obvious. Nothing personal about it...I am not sure why you want to make personal.

Obviously, in retrospect, it is easy to say that it was not any reason to kill someone (why not just take a beating and call 911 afterward...assuming you survive?)...but what counts is what was happening at the split second where the man had to choose to shoot or not and what thoughts went through his mind.

Florida law considers attacking a senior citizen to be a forcible felony. Since Florida law also allows deadly self-defense to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony...isn't all the fellow needs to do is show he was attacked or about to be? Looks pretty clear in the video that he had reason to believe that was the case.

What situation have you found yourself in that justifies bullying and physically assaulting old men in theaters for no reason?

Not making it personal at all. What you say is "obvious" - self defense - is not obvious in the eyes of the law because the assailant is in jail awaiting trial for murder. He baited the guy and shot the guy. Keep referencing the law. Morally, the shooter is wrong. You won't admit it because you want to keep the thread going, but that's just the way it is. It is not an "obvious" case of self defense.

[EMJ]

Originally Posted by fintstone

What situation have you found yourself in that justifies bullying and physically assaulting old men in theaters for no reason?

None. The video proves without a doubt just how unjustified the shooting was. Might want to find some honorable cause to advocate.

[krichard]

Originally Posted by fintstone

LOL...nice try...like "the gal in the short skirt baited the rapist". Obviously assault and battery on a poor old man for "telling on you" for not following the rules is a pretty severe reaction.

LOL nice try. You just have man love for the old guy and see what you want. He baited and murdered the victim. Clear as day on both videos.

[URY914]

Originally Posted by EMJ

None. The video proves without a doubt just how unjustified the shooting was. Might want to find some honorable cause to advocate.

Wait, what video are you looking at?

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by EMJ

Not making it personal at all. What you say is "obvious" - self defense - is not obvious in the eyes of the law because the assailant is in jail awaiting trial for murder. He baited the guy and shot the guy. Keep referencing the law. Morally, the shooter is wrong. You won't admit it because you want to keep the thread going, but that's just the way it is. It is not an "obvious" case of self defense.

Of course it is obvious...just like the Trayvon Martin case was. Most people here called that wrong as well (and much misinformation was posted as in this thread)...cause it was all about iced tea and skittles causing a 12 year old to be hunted down and executed because he was black...by a white Hispanic, Jew who was a Nazi. The reason Reeves is in jail is because everyone wants to keep their jobs (unlike in the Martin case where they didn't charge Zimmerman at first), because the press has, and will continue to make this a circus. They will just let the jury take the blame so they don't have to.

How does a 71 year old man "bait" a younger man into assault and battery? What planet do you guys live on? Do you assault people who say things you don't like (because they "baited" you)?

I only posted because of the other silly posts (more silly than the original ones that claimed the killing was about popcorn. That the older guy had texted earlier was some sort of indictment. Seriously? Why does anyone post about anything here? Because they find it interesting? Seems like there are lots of other posts in this thread besides mine (including yours). Why are you posting...because you want to "keep the thread going?"