(Former) Cop shoots man for texting during movie previews

I'll admit, I'm biased as hell on this one.

I do hold cops, and former cops, to a higher standard, especially when it comes to when to pull your weapon. And as one who carries, I can't fathom getting into an altercation with someone in such public way, in a public place and pulling my firearm, especially over texting. I'll leave first and demand my money back for management not enforcing their own policies.

So what if the guy was a dick and was irritated that he told management. It still doesn't justify shooting.

I'd wager to say that the company's posted policy regarding no firearms is going to trump anything this former cop says, including self-defense, especially with so many witnesses. Not only did he shoot the guy, but he shot his wife too. He's screwed for this one.

 

Read my post bottom of page 2...you're not getting it at all. This has nothing to do with texting, it has everything to do with defending yourself from an attack.

 

I like cops (for the most part) but some of the ones I met who are no longer cops should not have been allowed to carry a rubber spoon much less a gun.

Shoot, there's a couple who are cops now that I've met that shouldn't be allowed to be a security guard at a lumber yard.

 

He is going to have to convince a jury that he had a reasonable fear for his own life. From the information released so far, I think that is going to be a hard sell. As an LEO, he will probably be held to a higher standard as far as knowing when lethal force is justifiable. The venue of the shooting is irrelevant in respect to the homicide charges.

 

I completely get it, and have gotten it since the beginning of this discussion.

Was he attacked? None of the articles indicate this was the case. The eye witness accounts even comment on the fact that the shooter was visibly irritated when he came back from visiting management. They do say there was an altercation, but they never actually say if there were punches thrown, who started it, etc. A few mention popcorn was thrown, but they don't even know who did it.

Just because the guy was an asshole texting in a movie, it doesn't make him a criminal.

Was the shooter actually in fear for his life? I think its going to be a little hard to justify, especially with so many witnesses. Could the circumstances present reasonable doubt to a jury in court? I'm thinking this is going to be a hard sell, in the wake of the Colorado theatre shooting, and the Trayvon Martin case (Florida), especially when the man knowingly violated the theatre company's stated policy of no firearms.

 

This frames the scenario similar to Zimmerman vs Martin to me. Two knuckleheads that continue to escalate a situation until of them is dead.

 

I haven't skipped it. Its not clear how it started, or to what degree it went. Is sticking their finger in your face reason enough to shoot them? What about throwing popcorn? Its a hard sell to a jury. Unless the guy had a weapon, or was physically trying to choke out the old man, I see it hard to establish that he feared for his life.

This is where bias kicks in. Aren't cops trained to evaluate clearly whether to pull their firearm? To me, it sounds like the old man was cranky to begin with, got more irritated when he visited management and they didn't do anything, and just f@%king snapped when the guy said something to him. How dare he question his authority! He's a former cop AND he knows the guy was violating theater policy!

 

Exactly.

 

I have only read one or two reports earlier this AM on Fox and CNN. Without further clarification of events, it appears the old guy handled the first part of the encounter in a responsible manner. If those early reports are accurate, the initial escalation was on the head of the deceased. The final reaction was way over the top unless the deceased initiated phisical confrontation. The old guy had been retired for 20 years from the police force so acting as if he was current on training is a bit silly.

 

That's fair... I guess I figured some training/instincts never go away...

 

Wouldn't have happened if guns were banned.

 

You can bet that his past training will be brought up in court, ancient history or no.

 

Anyone have metal detectors/wands at movie theaters in their area? I could see it coming, along with even higher ticket prices.

 

So does amusement park cop trump Community Watch on the LEO competency scale

 

That would've been my expectation.
Physical skills decline with age but once you understand a process, that understanding usually stays with you. That's true of all kinds of training.

 

In the courtroom, attorney competency is the overriding factor. If this guy scores Zimmerman's prosecution team, he's in the clear.

 

Maybe if the state uses the same prosecutor.

 

You guys are thinking about the wrong side of that argument. His training will go in his favor "He's a retired cop. He understands the use of force. He did it for a living. He was protecting himself and had no choice but to pull his weapon." That will be an easy sell to a jury, especially if a few witnesses corroborate the young guy starting the physical part.

 

Dirtbag will die in prison where he belongs. Luckily we probably won't have to foot the bill for long cause the inmates will take care of that for us. Thanks in advance guys.