man shot for texting in movie theater

[Fishslayer]

I hope this case stays well publicized and not drop out of the news as it will be interesting to watch. There is a lot to be learned off it. In a way the results will be a **** shoot and can go anyway depending on a glib lawyer and how gullable the jury will be. In other words the same case could be tried a dozen times in a row and the outcome might be 6 for and 6 against or hung. The outcome might well prove nothing if it ever happened exactly the same again.

Well, according to the LA DA being "Anxious & in a state of panic" makes it OK to ram the wrong vehicle & dump a couple standard cap mags into it. Maybe he should try that defense...

 

[smithfan4152]

shooting

This could have gone another way, had the texting Father Been a real man, and instead of Goading the shooter, take responsibility for his actions.
Now he has taken responsibility the hard way, who knows had his wife kept her hand out of the way, he may have missed him.
People have been getting pushed over the edge more and more often.
They have rules, Turn off your Phones. Don't text and drive, don't talk on the phone and drive. We are all forced to deal with the idiots that insist on Doing these things, and forced to lose loved ones to there actions.
Losing a few of them to there own actions, well it just levels the playing field a bit.

 

[finesse_r]

I hope the anti-gun crowd don't use this to try and justify disarming policemen or retired policemen.

While this is truly a bizarre occurrence, I kind of hope it gets a lot of publicity. It might go a long way to teaching phone users that there are limits to their use and that there may be benefits to using good manners.

It can be real annoying to pay $10 per ticket to get into a movie and then pay $40 for a few snacks and have some loud mouth sitting near you or someone talking on the phone or in this case I guess texting.

I don't see how texting would bother someone since it is a silent procedure. Unless the man was using a flashlight to see the keys, LOL. This just does not really make a lot of sense.

It sounds like what often happens when two hard headed fools meet. I expect the world is a better place with both of them removed from society. It really is too bad about the man's daughter as she will no doubt suffer and she did nothing to deserve it.

The last theaters I attended (long ago) the previews were so loud and obnoxious, that I don't see how texting on a cell phone could bother anyone. LOL

 

[feralmerril]

Bill, I am about to give up here. I just want to say a 71 year old "professional" ex cop with over 50 years experience behind him is expected to have more self control and knowledge of how to handle situations than a 14 year old kid like I was in that example. I have been in more fights than I could count as a youth. I also have been in a number of touchy situations as a young man and later on my job. Looking back at it I believe I could have shot men at least on three separate occasions and have been vindicated in court. I didn't and am glad I didn't. Now had the victim started throwing punch's instead of words and popcorn it might be a different matter but none of the 25 witness`s so far has reported that.
I am guessing the defense will be that he pulled the gun to scare the man off and that it accidentally went off in the excitement of the moment. In fact, I really believe that just might be the truth of the matter.

 

[brucev]

OK--you have been lucky.
This guy was not so lucky and he was attacked.
What is your point.
Are you saying you would have just stood there and let the man have his way with you.
I am not understanding your apology.
Blessings

Luck? Luck doesn't have anything to do with it. Neither does common sense. After all, if it really were common, everyone would use it. Nope. It's not luck or common sense. It is... being rational and reasonable. It is learning early in life how to "play" so that things don't get out of hand. It is learning from the experience of others that train tracks are a playground best avoided unless one is crossing them in a car or riding them on the train.

Attacked? Who? At this point the only information available indicates that one man took his family to the theater. Another man took his wife to that theater. The second man took objection to the first man texting his daughter. Popcorn was tossed by the first man. The second man then killed the first man. The second man is now in custody. In this case hopefully both what is right and what is just will be one in the same thing.

As to "have his way with you," what I wrote does not leave that matter in doubt. To be specific, I would have taken out my cell phone and called the police to report a assault and battery and request an officer to make an arrest. I would have of course also taken a step back from the man so that he was not in close physical proximity to me. When dealing with people who are upset, acting irrationally, etc., distance is your friend. So is keeping your head and maintaining control of your emotions.

Now, I will admit that I do not constantly read publications that are fixated on crime, etc. I do not fantasize about combat or home invasions, etc. When I go to the store, theater, etc. or when I take the dog for a jog or walk, I sometimes carry a book to read. If we are in an area where poisonous snakes are a problem, I will slip a pistol into my pocket. If I see a rattlesnake on the path, I'll walk around it. If that rattlesnake in in the backyard w/ my children, I will probably shot it. Back in the days when I lived in New Orleans, my wife and I had to deal with several incidents of individuals who tried to break into our apartment/house. I suppose if I had used my shotgun or pistol on them, it would have been justified under the law. In each case I held fire. I've never regretted it. You can't call a bullet back. You can't give a life back. I've never considered that anything was lost.

 

[ky wonder]

I don't usually voice an opinion on cases, rather I enjoy watching them unfold through Discovery, Depositions, Motions and, finally, a Trial.


But, I hasten to add, we have to wait till the facts work their way out in the coming process.

Bob

the real evidence on my part would be heavily weighted by which direction the bullet struck her hand!

palm first she was trying to shield her husband, back of hand she was trying to restain her husband

 

[badge]

It certainly makes the police look bad. And I did not read anywhere that the retired police officer had a carry permit.

That's quite a stretch. He's LONG retired. His actions are HIS actions. You " testy " CCW's whine when painted by the same brush. If what he did was not justified then he will go to trial and be found guilty. If it was, he be exonerated. Real simple.

 

[Rastoff]

the real evidence on my part would be heavily weighted by which direction the bullet struck her hand!

palm first she was trying to shield her husband, back of hand she was trying to restain her husband

Good thought. Too bad we'll never learn the truth on this.

 

[feralmerril]

Oh? Was she right or left handed? What side of him was she on? Was she trying to push him back or down? Maybe she was going to try to back hand the shooter or knock his gun down? You cant prove jack on any take on this one. You might convince some gullable jurist if your a slick DA or lawyer whatever direction you want.

 

[Kensterfly]

If we're going to start speculating on what the wife's hands mean, I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt of being the only sane one involved: Maybe her hand was on her husband's chest as she was trying to restrain/hold him back. Makes more sense than being a superwoman effort of backhanding the bullet away from her husband.

 

[SgtLumpy]

...Attacked? Who? At this point the only information available indicates that one man took his family to the theater. Another man took his wife to that theater. The second man took objection to the first man texting his daughter. Popcorn was tossed by the first man. The second man then killed the first man. The second man is now in custody...

I suggest being cautious in compiling information and then extrapolating from it.

Viewing it from the two individuals involved -

- one man took his family to the theater

Was not known at the time, nor important. Shooter doesn't know that the people sitting with the popcorn thrower is family, nor vice versa. And knowing either would not be a factor.


- The second man took objection to the first man texting his daughter.

The "daughter" part of the story surely wasn't known by the shooter, nor is it important. The texting guy could have been texting the pope or his dope dealer. The shooter was surely taking objection to the other guy TEXTING, not who he was texting.


- Popcorn was tossed by the first man

That part appears to be accurate but may not be the whole story. If I had a bucket of popcorn in my hands and decided to beat your brains out with my hands, I'd either not care where the popcorn flew OR I'd use the flying popcorn and container to add to the confusion, blinding effect, pain/weapon effect (salt in the eyes) etc. We also don't know what the popcorn thrower may or may not have said to the shooter before or during the throwing.

Look it from the reverse...Is throwing popcorn an acceptable response to someone asking you to stop texting in a theatre? Exactly what response would you expect to get from anyone after you threw popcorn in their face? I'm not saying shooting someone for JUST THAT is appropriate, but I am saying that you're asking for trouble throwing anything at anyone. That return response might just be a lot worse than you feel is appropriate. But one way or another, there will surely be a response. Asked to leave, cited by police, butt kicked, shot and killed. None are very glamorous.


Bottom line to me - TWO humans are in a world of trouble here. One worse than the other.

Maybe the guy should have stopped texting after the 1st, 2nd or 3rd request by the other guy or the manager. Or maybe he should have had the common courtesy to not do it in the first place. Won't matter now. He's dead. In the right or in the wrong, he's dead.

"By gawd I'll text whenever or wherever I want to and you'll have to kill me to stop me"

OK. Done. How's that make you feel about your ever-so important "right to text"?


Sgt Lumpy

 

[arjay]

This 60 year old is baffled by people who are offended by texting.Listening to someone babble into their phone is far worse.What I see happening here is an old man who spent his life in an authoritarian position trying to give orders to a stranger and being humiliated for his efforts.Instead of moving to another seat or ignoring it,he was determined to assert his authority,lost it and killed the guy.I'm betting early stage dementia played a role in this.

 

[feralmerril]

I am reminded here of a old family story that hapened long ago before I was born. My mom was like 5 years old so it must have been about 1919. Grandpa ran a large country general store along with his partner and family. Both familys lived over the store. Late one night someone woke grandpa up by I think, throwing gravel at the upstairs bedroom window. They needed gas. Grandpa got up to pump them gas and it was two holdup men. They walked him back in the store to open the safe. The partner and his wife heard the comotion and partner Heine came down the stairs with a pistol in hand. Gussie his wife was above and behind him on the steps. They ordered Heine to throw up his hands. Heine did and Gussie snapped the gun right out of his hand! Sometimes women aint got no sense! She actualy came down the steps with the gun and proceeded to beat one of the robbers over the head with the pistol!
One of the robbers shot her through the upper arm. They got away.
Later that night they hit another store and one was found dead at the door shot to death. Grandpa and Heine were called to identify the dead one. The other got away. Years later both familys left wisconsin and went to california together and started up another store.
One day grandpa and Heine were downtown LA riding a street car and ran into the other robber. This was years later! They reconised him and got him arrested. He cracked to a life of crime but it sounded like he didnt get much time. He said when he climbing over a transome over the entrance door that night his gun accidently went off killing his partner.
With what I was told and read in a saved newspaper account it sounded like they may have been returning soliders at the end of world war one as both were said to be wearing long army greatcoats.
Anyway, never under estimate what a fiesty woman can do! I met grandpa`s partners on a trip to california with my folks in the mid 1950s and again in about 1972 and heard the story again. Gussie died a couple days later.

 

[Kensterfly]

.I'm betting early stage dementia played a role in this.

Now we're giving medical diagnoses?? There's too much speculation already.

 

[arjay]

Nothing has come out about the shooter having a pattern of abuse as a Leo,nor have there been any witnesses saying it was self defense.Ive watched more than a few people slip into dementia.Some become passive,some become very agitated.

 

[Faulkner]

I don't think the victim should have been shot . . . although I think a good tazing would have been justified.

 

[bdsorcic]

Very Sad! Smart thing to do would be to exercise some common sense and move to another seat! If I don't like some one in front/back or next to you you should just move to another seat. No need to lose your head over such a small/stupid thing. Only 25 people were in the theater that afternoon, so plenty of other choice spots were available.

 

[williamlayton]

Brucev
You just might get that chane one day---and die because yo think the police can get there and protect you before he kills you.
How in the world is he gonna get away much less step back when he is in a theater with no where to go.
the man is 71 and nimble is not in the dictonary for a 71 year old man---much less fighting.
Baffeling

 

[blujax01]

That's quite a stretch. He's LONG retired. His actions are HIS actions. You " testy " CCW's whine when painted by the same brush. If what he did was not justified then he will go to trial and be found guilty. If it was, he be exonerated. Real simple.

You might want to back down off the throttle a little and read the post above mine. The previous poster said it was a bad day for CCW holders, a statement with no facts to back it up. What was factual is that the shooter is a retired cop. I was simply correcting an incorrect statement made by someone else.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Before y'all start throwing popcorn....