After a tragic theater shooting in Pasco, a Florida woman is set to testify in a hearing where a judge will determine whether the incident meets the criteria for the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law. Nicole Oulson was at the theater with her husband on the day of the shooting. She said that she arrived with her husband Chad a few minutes early and as they were waiting for the film to start, former Tampa Police captain Curtis Reeves rudely confronted Chad and told him to put away his cell phone. “It was not friendly. Very abrupt,” she said.
Nicole went on to explain that Reeves threatened to go get someone in management and her husband ignored the threat, saying something like “Do what you need to do.” At that point Reeves spoke to a manager and then returned. Her husband was no longer on his phone, but she said Reeves continued to give her husband a hard time, even bragging about how he had gotten a manager involved. She said Chad got frustrated and stood up and then things escalated quickly. Reeves shot Chad, killing him in the theater.
Two additional witnesses will also testify in the case. Reeves will take the stand at some point to explain why he shot Chad. From the beginning, Reeves has argued that he was fearful for his life and had no choice but to shoot Chad because he turned violent.
Vivian Reeves has also been called in to testify. She was married to Curtis for almost 50 years prior to the shooting that changed their lives forever. Vivian recalls Chad Oulson on his phone during the previews and she said her husband asked him to put the cell phone away because he was being loud and disruptive. She said that Chad raised his voice and used profanity towards her husband. Vivian said she told her husband that they should move seats, but instead he went and complained to the manager about the disruption. When he came back, he said something to Oulson and confrontation eruption.
Vivian said Oulson stood up and leaned forward. “I thought he was coming over,” she said. Security footage from the theater captures this moment and Oulson seems to grab popcorn from Reeves and throw it into his face. That was when Reeves pulled out his gun and killed Oulson with a single shot.
While Reeves argues that he was acting in self-defense, the state prosecutor is painting him as the aggressor, arguing that the confrontation could have been avoided if Reeves had not repeatedly entered into Oulson’s personal space, providing him.
“There are a lot of intricate pieces to this case,” said Christopher Ligori, a personal injury lawyer in Tampa. “There are two separate stories that are entirely different, but both claim to depict the same event. The judge will have to decide which is telling the truth and whether Reeves was really within his reasonable rights when he pulled out his weapon and fired on Oulson.”
This week, a Florida attorney announced a new lawsuit on behalf of victims in the 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting. The collective lawsuit represents around 50 survivors and family members of those who were killed. The shooting occurred at Orlando’s Pulse nightclub last summer.
The shooting made national headlines as the worse mass shooting in recent history and it drew particular outrage because it seemed targeted at the gay nightclub. There were 49 people murdered and dozens that were injured. The lawsuit seeks damages, claiming negligence, wrongful death, and multiple other counts. The named defendants in the case are shooter Omar Mateen’s wife and his employer.
Attorney Antonio Romanucci is representing the victims in the lawsuit. He told the press that Mateen was working for G4S, an international security company at the time of the shooting. The company knew that Mateen was mentally unstable and still permitted him to carry a gun on the job. He would not have had a firearm license otherwise. “Mateen gave out so many warnings that someone should have reigned this guy in,” Romanucci said. “They should have said, ‘You are not stable. You shouldn’t have a weapon.’”
Mateen’s wife, Noor Salman, is also being sued. Romanucci said that she knew her husband intended to go to the nightclub and commit murder. Salman is already facing federal harges of aiding and abetting and is in jail, awaiting trial. Prosecutors said the woman went with her husband as he cased various locations and planned a terrorist attack. “Rather than warn authorities, she kept it a secret and acted as his accomplice,” Romanucci explained.
In other similar cases, lawsuits have been unsuccessful. Someone attempted to sue the manufacturer of a gun that was used in the Connecticut Sandy Hook shooting, but a judge dismissed the case, citing federal laws that shield gun makers from lawsuits related to criminal use of their firearms. Romanucci believes that suing the employer will be a better option because there are no federal laws that could prevent the lawsuit from proceeding.
A law professor from the University of Connecticut, Sachin Pandya, said attorneys will still have to find specific evidence that places fault with the employer. “You still have to show that what the employer failed to do caused the mass shooting.”
There have been other lawsuits related to the Pulse shooting. Families of three victims have previously sued Facebook, Twitter, and Google, making claims that Mateen carried out the attacks after turning radical through propaganda found on the social media platforms.
Adam Winkler, a law professor at UCLA, said that the lawsuit could be an uphill battle. They will have to not only prove that the employer was directly responsible for the shooting, but also that the wife was a co-conspirator and that by failing to report the attacks, she actually directly caused the deaths and injuries of the named victims.
Christopher Ligori, a personal injury attorney in Tampa, said the case will be difficult, but it could pan out well for victims and their families. “When you have victims of violent crimes, sometimes personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits are the best ways to seek some form of justice.”
There is nothing more heart wrenching than the thought of losing most of your family in a single moment. This kind of sudden heartache is unimaginable to most, but it’s exactly what happened to one Tampa husband after a recent accident. John Bernal is grieving the loss of his family after his wife and two children were killed in a fatal car crash on MLK Boulevard on Wednesday night.
Bernal’s wife, Marianela Murillo, and his two young children, John Jr. and Isabell, were all killed in the impact. His teenage daughter Lina and her cousin Luisa were the only survivors of the accident. The family was on the way back from church when they were hit at a high speed in a head-on collision with Pablo Cortes III. The van immediately erupted into flames, trapping the family inside. Only the two teenage girls managed to escape.
Family members are devastated after the sudden loss. Gisela Martinez sobbed as she talked to reporters at Tampa General Hospital. “My biggest thing is, I hope they didn’t suffer. The car did catch on fire, and there were children in that car.”
Officers do not have any clear answers on the cause of the accident, but witnesses say that street racing was involved. So far, investigators only know that 22-year-old Pablo Cortes III was speeding and lost control of his car. When it collided into the Bernal family’s van, he was instantly killed on impact along with his passenger, Jolie Bartolome.
As family members gathered at the hospital to offer support to Bernal and his surviving daughter, there were many tears. “He’s suffering right now. He’s in pieces. I don’t wish this upon anybody at all. I mean, he is really in pieces,” said one family member.
Bill Winters, a personal injury attorney from Tampa, said that Bernal is living every man’s worst nightmare. “I cannot imagine the level of heartache he must be experiencing. To lose your wife and two small children all in one swift moment is absolutely incomprehensible.” As an attorney that routinely represents victims of car accidents, Winters said that tragic accidents happen all the time in Tampa, but this case is one of the most devastating he has encountered. “My heart goes out to Mr. Bernal and his daughter as they grieve the loss of a wife, mother, son, daughter, brother, and sister.”
If you have lost a loved one in a tragic car accident, legal representation may be available to help you receive compensation. While lawsuits are never a popular option, they can provide important financial assistance to help cover the cost of medical bills, burial expenses, lost income, and property damage. Tampa wrongful death attorneys specialize in helping grieving families consider their options and make an informed choice about whether or not to pursue legal action after an accident. If you’ve recently suffered from a personal injury or a loved one was killed in an accident, contact an attorney to learn more about your rights.
As the time has passed and the technology has developed, it happened that we had experienced complete new phenomena. We felt a completely different dimension and start to live two different parallel universes. The fist in which we were born, that is, in reality, and the second virtual that became the main part of our lives.
What has the development of the virtual brought us?
It is strange how we feel safe in the virtual world. It has become normal to post moments of your personal life with complete strangers and how we are ready to do something that in normal real life we never do. We are posting photos from our everyday life to our Facebook, Instagram profiles and we are competing who is going to get more followers. We feel free to chat with an absolute stranger and not to feel fear at all. We share videos from our everyday life and most important we share our information that in previous centuries we were able to find only on our ID card. The worst thing about this is the fact that we feel completely safe. But is it safe at all? Or the real danger is exactly here?
We all hear about Yahoo fraud one of the biggest in the previous year. It has happened that one of the most powerful companies became a victim of Internet hackers. If such a huge and famous company managed to become a victim of such a fraud, why do you think that you are safe? Why you let yourself to post and share your personal information with complete strangers. The worst thing about internet frauds is the fact that the internet police and security is not developed enough. The Internet has developed too fast, and some countries didn’t manage to adjust its law and regulations. You are not enough protected, or you aren’t protected at all. Everybody can track you and your moves or location.
How to protect your information?
The most important thing you should start when it comes to protection is to read before you click anything. Almost all internet frauds are based on one click. They will not force you to sign and accept something they will trick you. We can compare it with the ocean where the best catch is based on good bait. Every too long agreement is bait because they are count on the fact you won’t read anything and accept their condition. That is almost always the case when it comes to malware. The only way to protect you is to read and stop accepting everything. Another thing you can do is to stop posting all information about you on your social network. The thing is that nobody cares what you are doing every single moment except thieves’ maybe. They would be delighted to know that you are out of your apartment for a holiday.
Modern legal systems of the world have their foundations in one of the four main frameworks. These are civil law, common law, statutory law and religious law. Of course, many of them are a combination of two or more of these basic systems.Every country has a separate and unique historical development which leads to the formation of a unique set of laws. The most widespread of the four are Civil law (also called Continental European law) and Common law.
The history of Common Law is connected mostly to the history of the British Isles. It formed in England, based on the concepts of Anglo-Saxon law with a strong influence of Norman law. Afterward, it spread all around the British Commonwealth and influenced the formation of legal systems of many countries. It is currently in practice on practically every continent (except South America). The defining characteristic of common law is the fact that the main legal source is the judge’s decision in a case – precedent. Of course, common law systems have laws, just like all other legal systems do, but the relationship between precedents, statutes, and laws is very complex.
Civil law, in contrast to common law, has its base in codified laws. Codifications of rules, passed by the legislative powers like kings or parliaments, are the most important sources of law. Most of modern legal systems based on civil law stem from Roman legal tradition. The main codification of Roman law is Corpus Iuris Civilis from 529 A.D. Judges in Civil law systems do not have the authority to create a law like they do in Common law with legal precedents. They are only interpreters and enacters of the codified regulations.
Civil law systems are usually divided into four following groups: French civil law, German civil law, Scandinavian civil law and Chinese law. Each of these has many connections, but also distinct differences. Many countries all around the globe base their legal systems on civil law.
The defining feature of religious legal systems is that they are based on religious scripts, documents, books or even oral tradition. These sources are the only recognized legal sources. However, not all religious legal systems are the same. It is because the methodology used to differentiate legal sources varies. For example, Islamic Sharia law allows precedents and analogy. Therefore, it is close to Common law. On the other hand, Christian Cannon law is oriented towards codification, just like Civil law. There are three main religious legal systems: Jewish Halakha, Islamic Sharia law, and Christian Canon law. Sometimes these are considered to be purely moral guidance rules, but sometimes they have the full power of laws.
The main feature of statutory legal systems is that they are written down and passed on. The lawgiver can be a single ruler or a body of the legislature, such as a parliament. It is contrary to oral or customary law, where regulation is passed to future generations orally.