(about the 2014 shooting) ...
Re:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/he ... ar-AATQXI7
"Reeves was so irked by the white light emanating from Chad Oulson’s device that he got up to notify a manager
at a Tampa-area matinee. Oulson, 43, eventually threw popcorn at Reeves, authorities say. Then Reeves,
a retired police officer, pulled out a handgun and fired into the other man’s chest."
It's easy to overlook in this retired police officer's inappropriate response to tossed popcorn
is that his professional training included such instinctive response to objects thrown at him
... especially in the dark.
What's intriguing about this phone "provocation" is that cell phones are usually not visible
unless they're being used ... and this suggests that the owner was sending/receiving texts,
thus that light would be visible to someone sitting behind the owner. And a moving light
in a dark theater would indeed be distracting.
(after the jury trial) ...
Re:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... urder.html
"A jury declined to convict Curtis Reeves, 79, who in 2014 fatally shot Chad Oulson, 43, during the argument
over the dad messaging his babysitter on his phone during the movie previews."
"Defense lawyer Dino Martin told the jury that Reeves is an frail, elderly man who feared for his safety"
"Reeves sought protection under Florida's 'stand your ground' law that allows use of deadly force
in the face of mortal danger or fear of serious injury."
Apparently, Reeves' professional career trained him to expect compliance to an order,
his shooting was insticnt (especially in a dark room with in-your-face aggression),
and many elderly live in Tampa where "stand your ground" is popular.
"Stand your ground" was probably intended for more serious aggression,
but acquittal was necessary to keep enforcing the law (IMO).
Rod