<p>I find it amazing that there is video of the shooting in a dark theater to begin with. I would think that there would be video of the lobby or parking lot before I would ever imagine there was video in the dark theater.</p>
<p>“By the way, I have seen a man die of a heart attack on a public street. Up close and personal. I watched my father die. Unpleasant experiences, and these weren’t gruesome scenes, per se. But it didn’t cause me to stop functioning. EMT’s, police, fire and safety personnel see accidents and gruesome scenes. They are tragic, for sure, and probably traumatic for some.”</p>
<p>Jym…you’re misunderstanding me. I saw my mom die. however, I didn’t CAUSE her to die. If I CAUSED someone to die, I wouldn’t be able to function.</p>
<p>As for police…actually, only a small % of police ever have to shoot anyone.</p>
<p>"His defense has produced character witnesses who describe him as a sweet, genteel religious man.
"</p>
<p>There are people who can be quite pleasant and CHARMING to 99% of the people they know…neighbors, friends, co-workers. They can be ugly to spouses and/or children.</p>
<p>My FIL was awful to his sons. Yet, the community had no idea. He owned a business, he was president of his college’s alumni club. I’m sure these folks would be shocked to hear how he was to family members who “upset him.” </p>
<p>The camera in the theater was an infrared camera that can show imaging in total darkness. It was dark in the theater, folks there couldn’t have seen with their naked eyes in dark what was picked up by camera. If a big young guy threw an iPhone full force at Reeves in the dark…Reeves might not have known what he got hit with because he didn’t see it coming…he might have instinctively thought he had been shot…who knows.</p>
<p>Just for fun…have a stranger throw an iPhone at you from a few feet away and hit you in the temple or chest…bet it doesn’t feel good.</p>
<p>I don’t think the videos should have been released to general public before trial. Everyone has seen the tapes now and has formed an opinion and the tapes are inconclusive…good luck finding an impartial jury anywhere down the road for a trial.</p>
<p>Again, Reeves has made admissible statements that he was hit by popcorn and maybe by a cellphone. He can’t claim he didn’t know what was coming because we actually have his words on videotape saying this. </p>
<p>But that doesn’t mean he knew it at the time, necessarily. I’d guess he recognized the popcorn but he could have learned the whack was a cellphone after the shooting.</p>
<p>Reeves probably figured out by the time he was talking to investigating cops that he hadn’t been shot. Who know what he first thought hit him when he got hit by an object like a iPhone thrown at him?</p>
<p>“defense needs to prove that Reeves was in fear for his life. That’s a big hill to climb with a cellphone toss.”</p>
<p>right, and I think they may also need to demonstrate that he had no way to get away…which wasn’t true.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I had the dubious experience of being hit in the face by an iphone tossed from a similar range once as an accident because a younger relative was carelessly horsing around. </p>
<p>However, I’m doubtful the impact I felt is in any way comparable to being shot. Especially after hearing about what being shot was like from some military vet neighbors and cops during my formative years. </p>
<p>Not to mention none of the videos I’ve seen show a cell phone was thrown. Could anyone provide links? The only source for the cell phone tossing is from the shooter and the defense. While the deputy testified that was what the shooter said he was hit with, the deputy himself didn’t witness it firsthand. </p>
<p>". If a big young guy threw an iPhone full force at Reeves in the dark."</p>
<p>Do we really think Oulson purposely threw his iPhone at him? I’m thinking that that would be odd. It could break, Reeves could grab it and not give it back, etc. I hope the improved video provides insight as to that. </p>
<p>I’m also wondering why an excop wouldn’t have used his gun to say, “now hold it right there” or something like that if he “feared” something. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even doing that is a disproportionate escalation of force as the mere act of pulling out a gun and pointing it at someone is considered assault at best…and possibly worse under most jurisdictions. </p>
<p>There’s also the factor that there’s a reasonable presumption by the one being targeted that if one pulls out a gun, there’s the possibility the user intends or is about to use it which adds to the threatening nature of that very act. </p>
<p>Had the dubious experience of being stuck up with two guns pointed at my head during my adolescent years. While it was happening, I knew if they got jumpy or something, my life could have ended right then and there. </p>
<p>Once a gun is introduced into the equation, all bets are off. </p>
<p>Someone in a rage could throw an iPhone no problem.</p>
<p>Just to beat it to death…an iPhone weighs about 4 ounces without a protective case on it…about one ounce less than a 5 ounce MLB baseball. A thrown baseball or iPhone can kill or seriously injure someone,…especially someone 71 years-old.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>True. However, one can say the same thing about many other everyday objects if there’s enough force propelling them. And that amount of force required is likely to be much more than one mustered by man just a few feet away. </p>
<p>And again, do we really know for sure a cell phone was thrown? </p>
<p>The only source of that information so far is from the shooter himself and the defense team. Have they released better video footage showing that? Links?</p>
<p>My indication that it likely happened is the widow’s attorney’s refusal to deny it. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Based on what’s known so far, we can’t rule out possibilities her attorney did so because while the widow didn’t see it happen, that doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t occur and he didn’t want to be caught with his foot in his mouth in the event it did happen. </p>
<p>Her vantage point, the speed, and ensuring chaos of the whole situation was such she could have easily missed it…or it didn’t happen and she may not be sure. </p>
<p>There’s also the factor the shooter’s wife testified she didn’t see anything thrown or her husband being hit right before the shooting…and that the deputy overheard her saying the shooting wasn’t justified and he told her to “shut the f up”. </p>
<p>Yes, anything is possible. Did the widow actually say she didn’t see it happen? Because when her attorney was asked if it happened he said, “We can’t answer that.” A little cagey imho.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Very possible she’s not sure because of the chaos and the attorney wisely concluded it’s best not to answer until they have more information. </p>
<p>Especially considering we don’t definitively know whether a cell phone was actually tossed or not. I haven’t seen any video clearly showing that though I’d be interested if anyone has and could provide some links. </p>
<p>I don’t think that’s cagey…especially considering she was seated with her husband in a lower row in front of the shooter and didn’t turn around until a short moment before the popcorn toss/shooting happened. </p>
<p>Incidentally, while the speed and chaos meant the shooter’s wife may have also missed the cell phone tossing if it had occurred, she had a comparatively better vantage point considering the victims were seated in front of her and thrown objects are likely to have been silhouetted more prominently against the bright screen playing the previews. </p>
<p>Possibly. But if they were fighting and she was holding her husband back it’s hard to imagine a scenario where she would not notice a cell phone launch. I doubt she was watching the previews at that point. Maybe, she missed it. Maybe, her attorney knows it’s better if she missed it. It could end up he said, she said with no evidence unless he had a lump on his head. We’ll have to wait and see.</p>
<p>Also, if the video showed the cell phone was tossed and it happened right when the gun was pulled out or just as the shooting occurred, the prosecution could easily turn the tables on the defense by arguing that this was Chad’s attempt at self-defense, however futile it may have been. Hence sequence of when it happened is very important. </p>
<p>If that’s the case, the defense’s trump card ends up being little more than a joker. </p>
<p>DadX,
I cant find the earlier post with the video links (cannot wait til post #s return!!) but I found this one <a href=“http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2014/feb/07/bail-hearing-curtis-reeves-continues-movie-theater/”>http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2014/feb/07/bail-hearing-curtis-reeves-continues-movie-theater/</a> THe only footage that seems to be missing that I can tell is the time when Reeves was out of the theater, soam guessing its the motion activation thing. In this link, the weird thing is that at about 3:07 the camera zooms in, and then it goes from black and white to color! THats a little creepy. Am guessing that the theater lights were turned on and perhaps that may contribute to the images changing color, but then at about minute 4 or a little later, it zooms back out. This continues and the color changes to sepia tone. Wonder if someone was manually controlling the camera, or if this an automatic setting??</p>
<p>As for these cameras inside theaters, whoa-- hope teenagers dating are taking note!!! Best not do anything you wouldn’t want you mother to see!</p>
<p>m2ck,</p>
<p>Many in the military have seen action and been involved in shootings. Some have PTSD symptoms, some don’t. </p>
<p>As for peoples characters, of COURSE people present differently in public than behind closed doors. This should be a surprise to no one.</p>