DADE CITY, Fla. — On Thursday, we heard from who is probably the most important witness in this trial: Curtis Reeves. He spent the entire day on the stand, answering questions from the defense and prosecution.
During questioning from the prosecution, attorneys pointed out several discrepancies in statements he made Thursday versus what he originally told detectives on the day of the shooting.
At one point, the prosecution even asked Reeves if he was tailoring his testimony to what the video shows. Reeves said no.
Below, you’ll find detailed updates about Reeves' testimony today and the questions he was asked. Closing arguments will start Friday and then the jury will start their deliberations.
3 p.m. update:
After a break, the prosecution brought out the surveillance video to ask Reeves some more questions. The prosecution then went through Reeves’ testimony, pointing out that none of what he has said shows up in the video.
“You can’t see it because it didn’t happen,” Prosecutor Scott Rosenwasser says to Reeves. Reeves reasons that you can’t see a phone thrown at him because Chad Oulson is not on the screen.
The prosecution discusses how the cameras in the movie theater are activated by motion. There is a period of time in the recording when the camera doesn’t pick up anything. Reeves had explained at this point, Nicole Oulson was holding her husband back as he was trying to attack Reeves. The prosecution points out that the camera didn’t capture any of this because it never detected any motion.
The prosecution also asked why Reeves doesn’t spill his popcorn or react to being hit in the face with an iPhone. Reeves explains that when you’re in a life or death struggle, you’re focused on defending yourself.
In one of the final questions from prosecutors, Reeves is asked if he second-guessed his testimony, especially at the part where he says he got hit.
“I second-guess every step of that encounter,” Reeves responds.
The defense followed up with several questions about the photographs shown to the jurors and then rested their case.
2 p.m. update:
After lunch, it was the prosecution’s turn to ask Curtis Reeves questions. They started by talking about his background and training in de-escalation. Reeves agreed with the prosecution that when police draw guns on an armed individual, they give that individual every possible chance to put that weapon down.
Turning to his physical abilities, the prosecution questioned him about why he chose to climb 10 feet up into a tree to hunt if he has trouble accomplishing simple tasks.
“I think that I know what my capabilities are and I felt comfortable doing that,” Reeves responded.
Much of the time was spent questioning Reeves about the shooting in the movie theater. The prosecution asks why Reeves had to talk to Chad Oulson, instead of going to the manager in the first place.
“I think the whole contact I had with him was an attempt at de-escalation,” Reeves explained.
Prior to questioning from the prosecution, video evidence had shown a flash, which the defense explained as Oulson’s phone being thrown at Reeves. On Thursday, the prosecution pointed out the reflective shoes Reeves was wearing and that the flash moves with Reeves’ leg. They suggest the flash is actually Reeves’ shoes.
Reeves agrees with the prosecution that he initiated the two initial points of contact with Oulson. After talking to the manager and returning to the theater, Reeves says he apologized to Oulson for telling the manager about his phone. The prosecution points out that Reeves never mentioned this apology to Detective Proctor on the day of the shooting.
Throughout Reeves’ testimony, he says he doesn’t know what exactly happened with the popcorn. He had previously told Proctor that when Oulson jumped up, the popcorn fell. He had also told Proctor that Oulson was “virtually on top” of him.
Reeves explains to the prosecution that what he meant by “virtually on top” was that Oulson was standing over him. The prosecution points out that police officers strive to be extremely accurate with the wording when it comes to statements and police reports. Reeves says he believes both versions of his story are similar.
In his initial statement to police, Reeves said that he had his arm out, touching Oulson to hold him back, and he said something like, “Woah, woah, woah, no, no, no,” before being hit by Oulson. Thursday, he said he was hit before all of this happened.
The prosecution says Reeves has added a second attack to his testimony to justify the shooting, citing his statements as “very different.”
Reeves says, “I don’t have an explanation.”
The prosecution points out to Reeves that he says he was hit, but there is no evidence on photos of his face of any bruises or other indicators that he had been hit hard enough to be dazed. The prosecution asks Reeves if this is what he wants the jury to believe, and he says yes.
11 a.m. update:
After a brief break, the defense turned toward questioning Curtis Reeves about the shooting.
Reeves says he first waited for his son in the lobby before buying popcorn and heading into the theater. Once he and his wife, Vivian, were in the theater, they decided to sit in the middle of the top row. Before the previews started, Reeves says he sent a text to his son telling him where they were sitting.
Once the previews started, Reeves said he was watching the previews but said the light from Chad Oulson’s phone was shining in his face. Reeves adds he waited a while before saying something to Oulson. He describes leaning over and requesting that Oulson turn his phone off.
Reeves says Oulson’s response included profanity, telling Reeves to get out of his face. Reeves describes Oulson as being “mouthy.” That’s when he got up to go speak with the manager.
The defense asks if Reeves was mad about the situation. He says no, and that he wasn’t “grumpy” when he went to speak with the manager. When talking to the manager, Reeves says he apologized, explained the situation and told the manager he didn’t feel comfortable talking to Oulson again.
Once Reeves returned to the theater, he says Oulson was staring at him as he returned to his seat. As he sat down, he describes Oulson as talking loudly but doesn’t know exactly what was said. He says at that point, there’s a blurred movement toward his right eye and almost immediately Oulson was out of his seat.
“Then everything went kind of fuzzy,” Reeves explains. He tells the defense he thought he had been hit at that point. “It was like a flash, between me and the screen, it was very close to me.”
Reeves adds that when Oulson was standing up, Oulson was swearing at him. He says the “f-word” was a big part of Oulson’s vocabulary.
Reeves then describes Oulson trying to come over his seat. He adds he doesn’t know if Oulson got onto the seat, but Reeves says he was sitting down and looking up at Oulson. He describes Oulson as mad, displaying “explosive behavior, both verbally and physically.”
“He was a threat that was very close to me,” Reeves explains. He says he tried to create distance from his wife because he wanted to make sure Vivian was safe. He adds he thought Oulson was out of control and notes his wife, Nicole Oulson, was hanging onto her husband’s arm or shoulder.
Reeves describes the event as happening very fast. He says he fired one shot from his pistol and put his gun down as Oulson was no longer a threat. That’s when he says he realized his glasses were knocked and that’s why “everything was so blurry.”
Reeves says during his entire career as a police officer, he had never seen anyone act the way he says Oulson acted.
“In my mind, it was the blink of an eye,” Reeves describes. “I shot Mr. Oulson because I thought he was going to seriously injure me or potentially kill me.”
10 a.m. update:
Curtis Reeves is the first witness of the day to be called to the stand.
To start off questioning from the defense, Reeves discussed his time as a police officer with the Tampa Police Department. He covered topics like the training he received, and the situations he has dealt with.
During his time as a police officer, he spent five years in the homicide division. When asked by the defense if he dealt with homicides involving firearms, Reeves responded, “Just about any tool you could imagine.”
After working in homicide, he started working on theft cases. In either 1976 or 1977, Reeves says he was promoted to sergeant. After being promoted, he was sent back to patrolling the streets.
“I took advantage of anything that was available,” Reeves explained. He says he took many courses to learn as much as he could and finished college around the same time he had been promoted. He agrees with the defense that most police officers at the time did not have college degrees. He explains he was going to college and was working as an officer at the same time.
Reeves is then questioned by the defense about his time as a sergeant. He says he had the skills to evaluate men that worked underneath him and trained officers to make them the best they could be. He adds he would help officers when they needed help and could identify strengths and weaknesses in officers.
Reeves is also responsible for starting the first SWAT team for TPD. He explains the process of starting the team, saying it took about six months to a year to select officers. Reeves adds he was also responsible for training those officers, but those that were selected were highly skilled.
In 1980, Reeves was promoted to lieutenant. He tells the defense and jurors that he could have anywhere from four to six squads working underneath him.
“I got in trouble more for being on the streets than anything else,” Reeves said. He adds his position as lieutenant was more administrative.
In 1984, he was promoted to captain and managed entire districts of officers. He also became a firearm instructor, and later a coordinator for firearm instructors.
After retiring from law enforcement, he started working as the head of security for Busch Entertainment. During his time there, he says the objective was to de-escalate situations and make sure guests had pleasant experiences.
After discussing his background, the defense turned to questions about Reeves’ health. Reeves agrees with previous medical experts about his deteriorating condition, saying he has good days and bad days. He adds he started using a cane in the latter part of 2014.
Around the house, he says he still takes out the garbage, mows the lawn, trims the hedges, power washes the house, picks up tree limbs, and does other chores. However, he adds he has lost strength in his hands and sometimes can’t open things like a jar of peanut butter.
----
Thursday could possibly be the last day for witness testimony in the trial of movie theater shooter Curtis Reeves. The day is starting with Reeves taking the stand in his own trial.
Judge Susan Barthle has previously said she wants the trial wrapped up by Friday.
On Wednesday, we heard from all kinds of experts, ranging from experts in crime scene reconstruction to police training and the use of force. All of these witnesses were called by the defense.
Throughout the day, the prosecution objected to certain aspects of testimony, and at one point, attempted to exclude an entire testimony from Dr. Michael Knox, a crime scene reconstructionist. Barthle allowed the jurors to hear his testimony with some limitations.
Below, you’ll find detailed updates from each testimony. He faces charges of second-degree murder and aggravated battery and could face a minimum of 25 years in prison if convicted of second-degree murder with a firearm.