[bannedontherun]

Originally Posted by jambo101

In case any one is thinking Reeves was a frail and old senior citizen this pic shows him IMO to be quite capable of taking care of himself.
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopo...sley1-0114.jpg

He's so big the Judge had to request a court assistant reposition the camera upwards because she could only see his chin. He chuckled and then the State prosecutor revealed the lady he had stalked over texting weeks earlier had come forward to offer her story. He then got that "kid with his hand caught in the candy jar' look and there's not been much to smile about for him since then.

[Spring Hillian]

Originally Posted by HarryWho?

If that's true, and if I thought like you, and I carried a gun, I would have shot at least a dozen people over the years.

As long as you didnt get convicted and sent to jail for the first 11, more power to you.

I spoke to a friend of mine who has a friend who is a criminal defense attorney in Florida. He was told, and I quote "You are justified in using deadly force, with no duty to retreat, when you reasonably believe that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

I am done arguing this issue. Do what you think is right and I will do what I think is right.

[HarryWho?]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

If he is the person you say he is, why did it take so long for him to do it?


I guess u have a problem with LEO's.


You are a wimp if you would let somebody take your wallet from you. What do you do if he is raping your girlfriend/wife/sister? Do you stand there and say 'thats not nice' and stomp your feet?

Your opinion regarding legal gun carrying people is absurd.

You're a wimp if you meet an unarmed threat with a gun... Wallet? Take it. Touch my wife in a violent manner, one of us will go down. But that wasn't the situation was it? As far as Leos go, those who do their job without prejudice in a professional manner are the salt of the earth. And of course, just like every other profession, there are those who should never have been hired.

[Spring Hillian]

"You are justified in using deadly force, with no duty to retreat, when you reasonably believe that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony."


Have a nice time arguing this point with each other.

[ChuteTheMall]

Originally Posted by bannedontherun

Totally different because robbery is an enumerated forcible felony. Throwing popcorn is not an enumerated forcible felony.

It certainly is a felony, if it actually and intentionally strikes a senior citizen against his will.
It's felony battery of the third degree.

This has already been established several times, notwithstanding your inability to comprehend the specific statutes. Nevertheless, the statues are a matter of record.

784.03 Battery; felony battery.—

(1)(a) The offense of battery occurs when a person:1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
2. Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person who commits battery commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.


784.08 Assault or battery on persons 65 years of age or older; reclassification of offenses; minimum sentence.—

(2) Whenever a person is charged with committing an assault or aggravated assault or a battery or aggravated battery upon a person 65 years of age or older, regardless of whether he or she knows or has reason to know the age of the victim, the offense for which the person is charged shall be reclassified as follows:(a) In the case of aggravated battery, from a felony of the second degree to a felony of the first degree.
(b) In the case of aggravated assault, from a felony of the third degree to a felony of the second degree.
(c) In the case of battery, from a misdemeanor of the first degree to a felony of the third degree.

[HarryWho?]

[quote=Spring Hillian;33444834]

Originally Posted by HarryWho?

Yes they do, and most don't use them or only in a dire situation. If they use them improperly, they should be held to account. And if someone curses you or throws popcorn at you, I suggest you keep your cool or we'll be debating your fate.[/QUOTE

I suggest that if you assault someone be prepared for the consequences of your actions.

And if you consider popcorn a life threatening missle, I suggest you plan on doing time.

[HarryWho?]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

"You are justified in using deadly force, with no duty to retreat, when you reasonably believe that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony."


Have a nice time arguing this point with each other.

Not reasonable. No great harm was threatened or done.

[bannedontherun]

Originally Posted by ChuteTheMall

It certainly is a felony, if it actually and intentionally strikes a senior citizen against his will.
It's felony battery of the third degree.

This has already been established several times, notwithstanding your inability to comprehend the specific statutes. Nevertheless, the statues are a matter of record.

784.03 Battery; felony battery.—

(1)(a) The offense of battery occurs when a person:1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
2. Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person who commits battery commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.


784.08 Assault or battery on persons 65 years of age or older; reclassification of offenses; minimum sentence.—

(2) Whenever a person is charged with committing an assault or aggravated assault or a battery or aggravated battery upon a person 65 years of age or older, regardless of whether he or she knows or has reason to know the age of the victim, the offense for which the person is charged shall be reclassified as follows:(a) In the case of aggravated battery, from a felony of the second degree to a felony of the first degree.
(b) In the case of aggravated assault, from a felony of the third degree to a felony of the second degree.
(c) In the case of battery, from a misdemeanor of the first degree to a felony of the third degree.

Do yourself a big favor and research what an "enumerated" felony is. While you're at it, here's some stuff to put in your search browser: Nelson vs. State of Florida 784.08, Hearns vs. State of Florida 2007 Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer, case law, precedent. Obviously, you didn't watch the bond hearing, this was covered in the bond hearing. Why do you think Mr. Reeves is sitting in county jail right now....because the court doesn't like the guy? If it was a simple as you're saying, Mr. Reeves would be home verbally abusing his wife right now, but he's not. Now I've been nice and pointed you in the right direction, so when you're done researching you can come back and debate armed with some relevant info. Good Day.

[ChuteTheMall]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

As long as you didnt get convicted and sent to jail for the first 11, more power to you.

I spoke to a friend of mine who has a friend who is a criminal defense attorney in Florida. He was told, and I quote "You are justified in using deadly force, with no duty to retreat, when you reasonably believe that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

I am done arguing this issue. Do what you think is right and I will do what I think is right.

The attorney got it right:

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—
A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony

The reasonably believes part is where the lawyers get paid and the juries ponder each case.

One person, such as an experienced retired police officer, may reasonably believe one thing,
while another person,
such as a naïve little old lady who has always relied upon the kindness of strangers,
or a thug out on bail,
or an unlicensed phrenologist,
may reasonably believe something else under otherwise identical circumstances.

It depends not only upon the objective reasonableness of the belief, but whether or not the person in question reasonably believes it.

Even if Reese made a mistake, if he reasonably believed deadly force was necessary, then it is specifically legally justified by statute.

It's still a big IF for the jury to decide.

[bannedontherun]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

"You are justified in using deadly force, with no duty to retreat, when you reasonably believe that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony."


Have a nice time arguing this point with each other.

Except there's just one minor detail you're not looking at. Deadly force is not justified when the defendant is committing his own forcible felony. Here's an example: Bob goes to a bank, pulls out a gun and demands cash from a teller. A security guard pulls out his own gun and tells Bob to drop his gun. Bob doesn't comply and turns and shoots the security officer dead. Later, Bob is arrested and charged with bank robbery and murder. Bob cannot say the killing was justified because at the time Bob was already in the process of committing his own "forcible felony". A little different scenario, but this is basically what Reeves is up against.