<p>*Plenty of people with “decades of experience” doing something screw up. Pilots crash planes. Doctors kill patients. *</p>
<p>I don’t think I’d put the above into the same category unless the actions were done on purpose (which is rare). Pilot error and crashes are “accidents” and “human mistakes”…same for most doctor errors. Unless the doctors or pilots are intoxicated/drugged, the tragedies are usually the result of (innocent) human error.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t call what happened in that theater (shooting a gun over texting/popcorn) as “human error.” If such behavior is human error, then we can’t call it a crime. </p>
<p>I think this was a crime. The judge at his hearing said words to about the same effect.</p>
<p>Agree, mom2. I was trying to make the point that the shooter having decades of experience using good judgment was not an excuse for his actions in the theater.</p>
once again trial in the court of public opinion :rolleyes:</p>
<p>There is a difference between a discussion of thought vs “wild”, tabloid-style unsupported theories/accusations. As an example, while maybe its a possibility (just as maybe the off duty cop was in the bathroom is a possibility) we have NO evidence at this point that his wife is an abused or otherwise intimidated spouse. Why raise such conjecture?<br>
And maybe the off duty cop wasn’t paying attention because he was texting on his phone ;)</p>
<p>He’s going to pay for something. Has he even spoken to the family expressing his condolences? Even if does get off scotch free, I would hope he would sincerely reach out a hand.</p>
<p>There is quite a difference, indeed. It is clear not everyone can distinguish them when they’re too busy pointing the finger. :)</p>
<p>Seems some might have a unique familiarity with and personal perspective on finger pointing Niquii.
How about lets get back to topic.</p>
<p>There are a few of us here who have tried to stay with what has been published by more reliable sources. And then there are the assumptions that he must be demented, mentally deranged, alcoholic, an authoritarian ego maniac wife beater. Maybe he is- but WE DO NOT KNOW.</p>
<p>Just remember to take your advice and not wrongly accuse people of this thread. You have no right to do so and it is insulting and discouraging.</p>
<p>OMG, I thought I was reading about George Zimmerman shooting Trayvon Martin again. Only time will tell and what legal acrobatics the shooter’s lawyer can perform.</p>
<p>“Confrontation initiated by the shooter, who left the theatre to speak to a manager after he first confronted the victim and who then returned and confronted the victim again.”</p>
<p>Sorry, I was misinformed. What was reported was that when Reeves returned from his search for the theater manager, Mr. Oulson re-initiated the confrontation with “Did you go tell on me?” Probably fabrication by the reporter.</p>
<p>Niqquii-
If you have something useful to contribute to the discussion, especially since you attend school in the area and might be privvy to what pops up on the local news, that would be lovely.</p>
<p>jyym, since you have knowledge of all the legitimate stories and evidence on this case it would be much more beneficial to this thread for you to post it. You’ve been doing a great job weeding out and policing this thread thus far.</p>
<p>Can’t be sure what percentage of life consists of ‘speculation’ but it’s sure to be up there with at least the predictable results of unprotected sex.</p>
<p>Also find the reluctance to call the shooter a head case odd. Legal beagles and their possible defenses aside, shooting a guy in a theater, that wasn’t beating your head against the floor, seems far enough outside the bounds of normal behavior that it seems a moot point.</p>
<p>Maybe the victim was, in fact, beating Reeves bloody and we’re just waiting for the pictures?</p>
<p>I take that to mean you have nothing useful to contribute niquii. So be it. </p>
<p>There is a difference between discussing the comments and discussing the posters. Lets stick with the former.</p>
<p>Now, trying again to get back to topic:
I happen to know the person who I strongly suspect will be asked to do the forensic evaluation on Mr. Reeves. Oh but to be a fly on the wall during that examination!</p>
<p>There are many individuals with mental health issues who would find that terminology disrespectful. I guess its because I work in the field. Dunno. It just rubs me the wrong way.</p>
<p>Sorry jym … just trying to get the thread back on topic. It’s just that I don’t know how to do that without asking posters to speculate on what might have motivated this tragedy. Maybe if I called it “educated speculation” or “life-based speculation?”</p>