Defense Motion Granted In Theater Popcorn Shooting

(Correction: This article as originally published incorrectly named Judge Susan Barthle as having granted the defense motion to not file depositions. This has been changed as of June 8, 2016 to correctly name Judge Anthony Rondolino. Apologies for this oversight)

Florida Sixth Circuit Court Judge Anthony Rondolino has granted a motion by the defense in the theater shooting that allows attorneys for retired Tampa police captain Curtis Reeves to not file depositions from witnesses and others who may be deposed in relation to the case. Judge Rondolino’s May 24 ruling ensures that any pre-trial depositions will no longer be available for public scrutiny.

Reeves, 73 years-old, is charged with second-degree murder and second-degree battery for fatally shooting 43-year-old Chad Oulson and wounding Oulson’s wife, Nicole. The incident took place inside the Wesley Chapel Cobb movie theater in Pasco County on January 13, 2014.

Florida Wesley Chapel Theater
Florida Wesley Chapel Theater

Reeves is claiming self-defense under Florida’s stand your ground law, saying he fired on Oulson after the younger man threw an “unknown object” at him, which turned out to be a box of popcorn, and presumably a cell phone.

SEE: A Theater Shooting You May Have Forgotten About

The defense motion, filed April 29, asserted that the case had become a matter of public interest, and that news reports had contained incorrect, mischaracterized and/or otherwise inadmissible information. State prosecutors had responded by filing motions of their own against the defense motions.

Reeves’ attorneys had claimed that public access to depositions would violate the privacy of those who are deposed, and that media coverage leading up to any trial could potentially prejudice any prospective jury or harm Reeves, so he wouldn’t get a fair trial.

They also claimed that forcing them to file the depositions would cause a “wholly unpredictable and potentially devastating chain reaction in the media,” because the depositions contain “prejudicial, inadmissible, inflammatory, irrelevant, inaccurate, unreliable, demonstrably incorrect & false statements.”

Reeves’ attorneys argued that there was there was no possibility of media outlets not publicizing these things, which could possibly prejudice any potential jurors should the case go to trial.

Advertisements

One thought on “Defense Motion Granted In Theater Popcorn Shooting

  1. I don’t know about tainting the jury pool, but depositions should not be filed in the case because those deposed do have a right to privacy. We saw in the Zimmerman case, and the civil case involving the parents of Kendrick Johnson, that those siding with the defendants get personal information from depositions, dox the witnesses, and set out to intimidate and embarrass them and their families.

    In the Johnson v. Bell case, it was not the media that released the depositions but rather, a known White Supremacist who purchased the depositions through the clerk of the court and publicly released them.

    Liked by 1 person

What do you think?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s