Attorneys In Stand Your Ground “Popcorn Shooting” Want To Stop Access To Court Records

Wait a minute! I thought that stand your ground hearings are decided by judges; not juries. If Reeves’ defense attorneys sincerely believe they can prevail in a SYG immunity hearing, why are they concerned with tainting the jury pool? Another thought is that case documents are not free to the public. It is generally the media who obtains documents filed in the case and they only pay for documents that have significance and not depositions.

End Stand Your Ground

Attorneys for the former cop charged with killing a man & shooting the man’s wife in what is called the “popcorn shooting” have filed a motion to stop public access to court records as a stand your ground hearing approaches. They claim that media coverage leading up to the trial may prejudice prospective jurors.

Retired Tampa Police Department Captain Curtis Judson Reeves, 73 years-old, is charged with second-degree murder and second-degree battery in the shooting death of 43-year-old Chad Oulson and wounding of Oulson’s wife, Nicole. The incident happened inside a movie theater in Pasco County on January 13, 2014 during an argument.

SEE: A Theater Shooting You May Have Forgotten About

Reeves is claiming self-defense under Florida’s stand your ground law, saying he fired on Oulson after the younger man threw an “unknown object” at him, which turned out to be a box of popcorn, and presumably a cell phone. Circuit Court Judge Susan L…

View original post 236 more words

Posted on 05/05/2016, in Cases, Conceal Carry & SYG, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 13 Comments.

  1. I do remember this incident and in this case this was just plain murder by an arrogant ahole.

    Liked by 6 people

  2. “Escobar maintains that the forced filing of depositions from witnesses, law enforcement, & others will “cause a wholly unpredictable and potentially devastating chain reaction of media coverage, and that the deposition transcripts contain “prejudicial, inadmissible, inflammatory, irrelevant, inaccurate, unreliable, and demonstrably incorrect and false statements,” and that there is “no realistic possibility that news media will refrain from publicizing this,” prejudicing potential jurors.”

    These people are crazy

    Liked by 4 people

    • yahtzeebutterfly

      That was quite the mouthful from Escobar with all of those adverbs and adjective spilling out.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Mindyme,
      “Crazy” is right. Escobar’s argument is not credible. When have we seen the media present and report on depositions? We didn’t see that in Zimmerman’s nor Dunn’s trials. The media seldom even presented motions on their websites. It was O’Mara who setup a website and put motions on it.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Oh, Dunn is appealing his conviction, I think I read. I don’t see that working for him.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Hey Mindyme! Yes, he has filed an appeal and yes, I don’t think that is going to work for him

          Here is a copy of Dunn’s appeal brief. It is huge and practically throws everything, including the kitchen sink, against the wall. It doesn’t appear that attorney Phillips has made the State’s brief available. Oral argument is scheduled for June. Dunn’s argument to reverse his conviction and sentencing in a nut-shell is that the judge should have instructed the jury to give consideration to Dunn’s fear. As I understand from media reports, the State has challenged that by stating that after the Durango pulled off, Dunn got out of his car and continued to fire, which evidenced malice.

          Liked by 2 people

          • butterflydreamer2

            Yep, I agree, I don’t think that is going to work for him. Who was really in fear, the boys trying to get away from him as he got out of his car and continued to fire, or him, who was found to be the only one with a gun? And don’t forget he had pizza and a few drinks after and didn’t bother to call 911.

            Like

            • Butterflydreamer,
              Wayne Davis, the foreman of the jury for Dunn’s retrial gave an interview. He was asked if Dunn’s actions after the shooting had any significance.

              Wayne Davis said;

              “He left and everybody else came back. He never called, he never called anybody to the scene, that he saw a gun, that he was in danger — just left,” he said.

              We asked, “So if he called 911 that night, do you think it would have been a different case?”

              “For me it would have factored in if he was guilty or not,” said Wayne Davis.

              That was a key point at trial, and it might also be important in the appeal because a person afraid for their life, who thinks they saw a gun, calls the police and tells them. Dunn’s actions indicate a man who tried getting away. Had that witness not gotten Dunn’s license plate number, the case might still be an unsolved case today.

              Liked by 1 person

      • And why should his client get special treatment? If you don’t want your trial to be so publicized dont have a trial. Simply plead guilty & take your punishment.

        Like

Your comments are welcomed.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: