Contrary to the court of public opinion here at DU I am in total agreement with the bottom line
in the article where the judge states ( no matter what my ruling on this motion Mr. Reeves ,nothing changes about the fact you are presumed innocent.
I really don't think Cheney shot his hunting partner the lawyer intentionally. And at the same time I do not think under the circumstances at that time the former vice president's concentration of thought was 100 percent as it should have been in time in place. I think he was preoccupied and that to a given he shouldn't have been out there on a hunting expedition because he was not all together there . He was not 100 percent in time in place. He knew full well the first law of gun ownership in that guns were created for one reason and that reason is to kill.
And when one is out hunting with that gun ,there is but one purpose or intent. This goes on into carrying the weapon loaded for bear and the responsibilities thereof. Out in the field hunting for game is not the place to talk business such as it is on the golf course. And thats a fact. We know that it is impossible to think of two things at the same time. And on the hunt one does not wonder off in thought to Dairy Queen thinking about a basket burger with some fries carrying a loaded gun readied for firing.When the hunters level of concentration is divided,that is when gun accidents do happen.
One has to know when to pack it in and say today is not my day out in it.That has to do with responsible choices .
I would consider the possibility Reeves did not intend to fire his weapon of premeditated thought. And I would consider it possible given his training as an LEO that he drew his weapon as a precaution as he will have if he were still active on the police force. And I am perfectly aware that he is no longer an officer of the law and there is much in question as to what is or isn't justifiable under Florida laws.
The prosecution summed it by saying if he had left his gun in his car than we wouldn't be here.
And if a criminal had broken the window out of that car, than robbed that gun, than later used that to kill somebody ,than the prosecutor will have said ,if he had left his gun at home ,we wouldn't be here and on and so to no end.
Again the object was created for one reason.
As of yet there has been no release of physiological or psychiatric evaluations on Mr. Reeves and I wouldn't rule out undiagnosed PT SD .
His wife said he has never shot anybody before-, if he never did that ,than what happened even to Reeves shouldn't have happened.He said so,he said he didn't believe he fired his weapon. And that does say something even if we choose not to believe it.
In short there is far more to this than meets the eye.
= new reply since forum marked as read
