Tampa Bay Times coverage of the hearing.
day 1 coverage
I’ve been googling and trying to figure out why this bond hearing turned into a mini trial. A lot of witnesses were called, police interviews played and the surveillance video was played. I was curious about this.
The judge mentioned an Arthur hearing and used the phrase proof evident presumption great.
Google finally got a hit. STATE v. Arthur
If I’m reading this right. The state had to show overwhelming evidence of guilt. So much that the judge was justified in denying bond. That’s why they had a mini trial for two days. The judge needed to see the entire case to make this judgement.
That doesn’t bode well for the defense. They better find a better strategy before trial.
A easier explanation of proof of guilt is evident or presumption of guilt is great. A very interesting legal concept. I keep learning every time I follow a trial.
http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/sc05-739/05-739comments.pdf
Not doubting you necessarily, but do you have a cite for this?
It’s hard to imagine a 71 year old ex cop surviving for long in that environment.
This gibes with what I’ve always heard. And what inmate wouldn’t like a shot at a symbol of The Man who put him in the pen?
IMO the reason bail was denied was that he has already snapped and killed someone over a common social interaction. What happens to the next retail clerk he thinks short changes him?
From the linked article,
That’s murder right there. The self defense argument just took a serious hit.
Your honor, my client was merely offering to help Mr. Oulson with his aim. He pulled out what he thought was his smart phone, with the intent to add Mr. Oulson as a contact, and tragically reached for his pistol by mistake.
Dang, that’d be some good lawyerin’ right there.
Reeve’s statement will be very hard to overcome. The prosecutor said in court that statement made it 2nd degree murder instead of manslaughter.
Reeve’s wife really hurt him too. You have to listen to her audio interview. She sounds so scatterbrained and unaware of what will happen to her husband. She did say the victim scared her, but not very forcefully. She didn’t make clear the threat she felt and that threat is what is needed for self defense. The deputy even testified he heard her chewing out Reeves saying, “there was no need to shoot him”. His own wife’s comment will probably be the most responsible for him spending the rest of his life in prison.
Just for comparison. Zimmerman had the same Arthur hearing and he got bail. The judge must really feel this is an easy conviction to deny Reeves bail.
They showed a surveillance video from the studio which directly contradict the statements Reeve made to the police.
"Retired Florida police captain charged with killing man in movie theater for texting released on bail
Pasco County Judge Pat Siracusa set Curtis Reeves Jr.’s bail at $150,000. He said Reeves, 71, must remain home except to go to church, the doctor’s office or the grocery store. He also must surrender firearms."
Special treatment because he was an ex-cop?
Or maybe because he’s old. Or, most likely, a combination of both.
This is such a mess.
I don’t think he should have been let out on bail,I think he is a danger to others.
I doubt that he is a danger now. He’s essentially under house arrest and barred from contact with firearms.
I just hope he is duly convicted and dies in prison.
What’s a mess is the whole trend towards widespread open and concealed carry.
This case and the Zimmerman case is a harbinger of times to come. Every minor conflict will now become an opportunity for deadly force.
Reeves deserved bail. He’s been a cop most of his adult life and served his community. He’s no danger to anyone. Especially since he’ll be under house arrest. He won’t be mingling with the public.
I don’t know what will happen at the trial. But in the US people are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Reeves shouldn’t spend a year in jail waiting for trial. If he’s convicted then they can send him to prison.
I’m not so sure about this; past events have made this statement debatable.
Why does it take 4 months from the bail hearing until he’s actually granted bail or not?
I believe he was originally denied bail and that denial was appealed. That process can take time.