<p>Don’t worry, m2ck. Same experience.</p>
<p>EDIT: Cross-posted with NewHope33. I see now!</p>
<p>Ahh…now I see. </p>
<p>Thanks!!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m thinking what I read said there were only 25 or so patrons in the whole place, so I’m assuming that they wouldn’t be right next to each other, as there would have been a lot of room to spread out. Most likely the shooter was behind the victim, or least likely, on the same row, but a few seats in between them. In my experience, the most annoying texters are the ones sitting right in front of me, if it’s stadium seating. But I’m not familiar with the kind of seating that is standard in a cinebistro.</p>
<p>It’s been reported that the shooter was behind the texter. Was he directly behind (seat behind seat) we don’t know. They could have been seated in a way that the shooter wasn’t perfectly behind the victim.</p>
<p>from one report (don’t know if it’s perfectly accurate), the two were standing facing each other at the time of the shooting. Does anyone know how much time passed between the shooter’s return from his attempt to contact mgmt and the actual shooting? Was it a rather quick argument about “did you tell on me” and then the shooting? </p>
<p>Another report suggests that the victim turned around suddenly and maybe some popcorn in his hand went flying? I’ve only seen that in one report, so that could be wrong.</p>
<p>*The widow of a man who police say was shot and killed in a Florida movie theater for merely texting said Wednesday her “whole world got shattered.”</p>
<p>In a brief press conference in Tampa, Nicole Oulson, speaking for the first time since the shooting last week, held back tears describing how a date with her husband, Chad Oulson, became a nightmare.</p>
<p>“It’s just unimaginable. Me and my husband didn’t get a date night together, much less a whole day together,” she said.</p>
<p>Read more: [Wife</a> of man shot for texting calls his death ?unbearable? - NY Daily News](<a href=“Wife of man shot for texting calls his death ‘unbearable’”>Wife of man shot for texting calls his death ‘unbearable’)*</p>
<p>*A Florida couple said accused movie theater shooter Curtis Reeves angrily confronted them and another man over texting at same theater where the 71-year-old retired cop on Monday allegedly shot a man who refused to put his phone away.
Jamira and Michael Dixon said they were watching “The Hobbit” at the Grove 16 theater in Wesley Chapel on Dec. 28 when a man they said was Reeves snapped at them over Jamira’s texting.
Jamira Dixon said her phone was on silent, but the device’s display light was on.</p>
<p>Read more: [?It</a> could have been us?: Florida woman says accused theater shooter confronted them over texting in same theater 3 weeks ago - NY Daily News](<a href=“‘It could have been us’: Florida woman says accused theater shooter confronted them over texting in same theater 3 weeks ago ”>‘It could have been us’: Florida woman says accused theater shooter confronted them over texting in same theater 3 weeks ago )*</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That might be an excuse to carry but it’s a lame one. I know lots of retired cops and none of them carry. Retired cops aren’t running into people they arrested on a regular basis.</p>
<p>I recall reading that Reeves was in the last row of the theater [Retired</a> Fla. officer Curtis Reeves tells moviegoer to stop texting, then fatally shoots him, police say | NOLA.com](<a href=“http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2014/01/retired_fla_officer_tells_movi.html]Retired”>http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2014/01/retired_fla_officer_tells_movi.html)</p>
<p>
In another article, someone postulated that he might try to claim that was one reason he felt “vulnerable”- that he was in the back row and was less able to get out. Flimsy excuse, and when he returned to the theater he could have moved his seat, even if his food and drink were up in that row (if he’d ordered any).</p>
<p>Have to question if any court would allow his wife to divorce him, even if she wanted to. Since its possible the widow might sue them in civil court, its unlikely a judge would permit the Reeves to essentially move/shield assets that could be part of such litigation.</p>
<p>*** ETA-
Its also possible that he might feel a responsibility to take care of his wife before himself. The vest he was wearing at the hearing is, per reports, a suicide prevention vest.Wonder how it prevents something like a hanging attempt??</p>
<p>If this was a bistro cinema, the story makes even less sense to me. The main reason texting at a movie bothers people is because of the screen light in the dark theater, right? At the dine-in theater I go to, there is lighting around the tray tables at each seat, so an iPhone screen wouldn’t really be a distraction.</p>
<p>MSNBC has this on right now, with widow and lawyers.</p>
<p>[Anti-suicide</a> smock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-suicide_smock]Anti-suicide”>Anti-suicide smock - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I haven’t read anything saying the shooter had much of any assets to worry about. His pension is not subject to garnishment for any judgement unless the law has changed and I am not aware of it.</p>
<p>His wife can divorce him if she wishes. A court would not stop her because of any pending civil action against him.</p>
<p>Shooters defense about to be reported on ABC nightly news.</p>
<p>And yes, it was a bistro type theater. Linked a news report about this upthread somewhere.</p>
<p>NY Times version:</p>
<p><a href=“A Movie Date, a Text Message and a Fatal Shot - The New York Times”>A Movie Date, a Text Message and a Fatal Shot - The New York Times;
<p>If the shooter first kicked the back of the victim’s chair per the NYT article, I don’t see how the shooter can then claim self defense. The shooter would have the right to respond by standing up and confronting the shooter including using fighting words.</p>
<p>That might be an excuse to carry but it’s a lame one. I know lots of retired cops and none of them carry. Retired cops aren’t running into people they arrested on a regular basis.</p>
<p>“On a regular basis” is not the criteria. It would only take ONE TIME for a cop to run into someone (with revenge in mind) for the retired cop to need that gun to protect himself from a “payback” because he was just doing his job years earlier. ONE TIME is enough. </p>
<p>Much depends on whether the retired cop is retired and living in another area than where he worked. </p>
<p>Much would also depend on whether the retired cop worked in an area where there was a lot of violent crime…and still lives in the area.</p>
<p>I imagine that those who retire from my low-crime city would rarely run into anyone. If you rarely faced violent criminals while protecting a “bedroom suburban community”, you wouldn’t likely have that concern when retired.</p>
<p>However, a friend of mine’s husband has been a cop in a high crime city for over 20 years. He’s arrested many serious criminals and has testified at their trials. His situation would be different. </p>
<p>BTW…you may not know whether these retired cops are carrying. I still remember the first time I found out that my friend’s H was carrying (and does carry nearly all the time). His gun was so flat in his front pocket of his JEANS that it could not be seen.</p>
<p>On the death penalty, I can’t see how the state would ask for it because there are requirements about depraved conduct and other aggravating factors. They can’t request it without listing those factors and they don’t exist here.</p>
<p>BTW, I’ve read in a few sources that the shooter kicked the guy’s chair but facts only get nailed down with time.</p>
<p>Kicked the guy’s chair…And then he gets mad when someone throws popcorn in his face and shoots them? Even if he didn’t know it was popcorn, so what. He knew it didn’t hurt.</p>
<p>Maybe this whole “stand your ground” defense is really just an opportunity to talk about the crazy stuff…so then people WILL believe diminished capacity if introduced later.</p>
<p>[Can’t</a> We Do Better? Safety Smocks and Suicide Prevention in MA Prisons | Boston Magazine](<a href=“http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2013/02/01/prison-suicide-safety-smocks/]Can’t”>http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2013/02/01/prison-suicide-safety-smocks/) Ah, the anti suicide vest keeps them from using a shirt or pants to self harm, but what about a bedsheet? Do they get sheets in jail?</p>
<p>Not following how the stand your ground relates to diminished capacity? His atty may try to use the “dont attack anyone over 65” regulation (I know thats not the name, but close enough), though new reporters said this fellow wasnt exactly a feeble frail looking guy. Diminished capacity has to be proven, with medical evaluations. Have not heard anyone suggesting it.</p>
<p>That’s what the suicide blanket is for.</p>