Steinhauer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2009
- Messages
- 12,108
- Reaction score
- 136
I read it. So what part supports your claim?
From CNN.com:
Reeves' attorney, Richard Escobar, argued that because Reeves has lived in the area for many years, has a wife and two children and a grandchild, worked in law enforcement and security, attends church and Bible study, and has ailments such as arthritis and bursitis, he should be given bond. The courtroom was filled with Reeves' former colleagues and family members who could speak to his client's "great character," Escobar said, adding that Reeves has "no propensity toward violence."
The attorney tried to persuade Circuit Judge Lynn Tepper that the former police officer was actually the victim in the incident and that Oulson was the "aggressor."
Judge Tepper said "there was no evidence to support that claim", according to a probable cause affidavit. She denied bond and ruled that Reeves should face the second-degree murder charge.
If I was in trouble, I would want my lawyer to spin my life to make me look like a saint.
The only claim I have been making was that the headline to the original CNN story was misleading. In that headline, it read "man shot for texting, ex-cop arrested'.
Reeves did not shoot the guy for texting.