So Curtis Reeves shoots and kills a man for doing exactly what he had been doing just a few minutes earlier -- texting a family member.
To: null and void; bobby.223; Alaska Wolf
2 posted on
03/13/2014 12:12:12 PM PDT by
sport
To: Uncle Chip
Texting in not what this case is about. It is about a homicide caused by a physical attack. There was no gun drawn or used when anyone was texting. This happened after an angry man lunged at another man, grabbed his popcorn and threw the popcorn container into his face at close quarters. It remains to be seen if self defense or SYG laws will protect the shooter.
Saying he shot him because he was texting while leaving the physical attack out of the picture is creating a lie by omitting the act that triggered the shooting.
To: Uncle Chip
"His attorneys say Reeves acted in self-defense. Reeves told police that Oulson hit him in the face, possibly with a cellphone. Other witnesses, including Reeves’ wife, say they never saw Oulson strike Reeves."
To: Uncle Chip
Curtis always had this thing about being “the only one who should be able to text”’,certain friends revealed in interviews.
To: Uncle Chip
“I’m about 2 shoot this guy in front of me 4 texting. LOL! SMH!”
7 posted on
03/13/2014 12:28:13 PM PDT by
gdani
To: Uncle Chip
Why I have Netflix ....Movie theaters are trashy these days.
9 posted on
03/13/2014 12:33:44 PM PDT by
Dallas59
(Obama: The first "White Black" President.)
To: Uncle Chip
The victim did not respect the former cop’s authoritah.
To: Uncle Chip
One expectation for me, another for thee....
OR
Texting is not a privilege for peasants, only for lords and knights of the realm!
50 posted on
03/14/2014 1:10:55 PM PDT by
Altariel
("Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson