Popcorn Toss Is Key In Trial of 2014 Florida Theater Shooting
To prosecutors, the triggering event in the argument was the tossing of a bag of popcorn — and that's not enough to claim self-defense.
February 15, 2022 at 11:27 AM
4 minute read
The role of a tossed bag of movie popcorn played a central part Monday as a trial opened for a retired Florida police captain who fatally shot a man in a theater eight years ago.
The question isn't whether Curtis Reeves shot and killed Chad Oulson at the theater on Jan. 13, 2014. It's whether Reeves felt threatened enough by Oulson to justify firing his .380-caliber handgun after the two argued over Oulson's cellphone use in the theater.
To prosecutors, the triggering event in the argument was Oulson's tossing of a bag of popcorn at Reeves — and that's not enough to claim self-defense.
"What the evidence will show you is that Chad Oulson was shot and killed over tossing popcorn," Assistant State Attorney Scott Rosenwasser told jurors in an opening statement. "That's no reason to kill another person."
The defense, however, contends that Reeves, then 71, was in declining health and feared the 43-year-old, larger Oulson would punch or otherwise assault him — and may have thrown his cellphone at the older man. Defense attorney Dino Michaels said Reeves also understood risk and sensed danger from his 27 years with the Tampa Police Department.
"This isn't about popcorn," Michaels told the jury. "You're going to see there was an attack before the popcorn was thrown."
Reeves, now 79, faces a potential life sentence if convicted of second-degree murder and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. The trial, expected to last about three weeks, is being heard by a jury of four men and two women with four alternates.
Nicole Oulson, wife of Chad Oulson, was struck in the hand by the same bullet that killed her husband. She testified Monday that the two men bickered over the cellphone dispute and at one point Chad Oulson stood up, causing her to put her left hand near his chest to guide him back to his seat.
That's when the shot was fired, she testified, nearly severing a finger.
"I felt like my hand was blown off," Nicole Oulson said. "He took a couple of steps and then collapsed. I knew he was way worse than me."
The case has been delayed for years as Reeves sought protection under Florida's "stand your ground" law that allows use of deadly force in the face of mortal danger or fear of serious injury. Reeves has been on house arrest during most of that time.
A judge ruled against him, but Reeves appealed. Lawmakers meanwhile changed the law to shift the burden of proof to prosecutors, but the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the changes didn't affect cases such as Reeves' retroactively.
The shooting happened after Reeves and Oulson, and their wives, went to a matinee showing of the Mark Wahlberg film "Lone Survivor" at a theater complex in Wesley Chapel, a suburb of Tampa.
Oulson was using his cellphone during previews before the movie began, prosecutors say, in part to check on his young daughter at a local daycare. Reeves demanded that Oulson stop using the phone and was met with a curse-filled response, Michaels told the jury.
"Chad Oulson was annoyed when Curtis Reeves tells him to put his phone away. He stays annoyed," Michaels said.
Nicole Oulson testified she did not hear any profanity from her husband in the exchange.
"He said, 'What's your problem? The movie hasn't even started yet,'" she said, quoting her husband.
Reeves went to theater management about Oulson's phone use, returned to his seat and that's when the argument resumed, the popcorn was tossed and Reeves shot Oulson in the chest, according to trial evidence.
Much of the confrontation was captured on grainy theater camera video, but it has no sound. Dozens of witnesses have been listed for trial but it's not clear how many will actually testify.
Rosenwasser, the prosecutor, said the evidence will prove that Reeves was incensed by Oulson's cellphone use and couldn't let it go.
"He appeared to be agitated and angry," Rosenwasser said. "This was an intentional and purposeful shooting."
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDisbarred Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Lawsuit Against Miami-Dade Judges
3 minute readDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readChicago Midsize Firm Will Combine With Miami Boutique To Form Antitrust Powerhouse
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Armstrong Teasdale's London Creditors Face Big Losses
- 2Texas Court Invalidates SEC’s Dealer Rule, Siding with Crypto Advocates
- 3Quinn Emanuel Has Thrived in China. Will Trump Help Boost Its Fortunes?
- 4Manufacturer Must Provide Details Surrounding Expert’s Livestreamed Inspection, Fed Court Rules
- 5Waterbury Jury Awards $2 Million Verdict Against Eversource
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250