Comments by "John" (@John-kv7jo) on "What makes some self-defense cases more successful than others? | COURT TV" video.

No the jury just believed the lies of an old man. The phone never hit him in the face. There was no life or death struggle. The jury were a bunch of idiots. Anyway Nicole will have to rely on God for justice.
3
@stevekake3359 It hit him but not on the face.
1
@sl3966 They proved the self defence case was moot. There was no threat of great bodily harm or death from a phone toss and popcorn. This was a biased, idiotic jury who believed the lies of an old man. How do we know that Curtis Reeves was a lying devil? When he claimed there was a life or death struggle, the motion camera would have picked it up. The state of cross showed he was a liar but the jury chose to believe a liar.
1
@sl3966 The jury saw the video/s and there was no imminent danger. Does popcorn constitute grievous bodily harm or imminent death? No. Therefore the jury believed the lies of Curtis and found him not guilty.
1
@stevekake3359 The state went above and beyond and showed this was a case murder not self defence. The phone never hit Curtis in the face and there was no life of death struggle. The idiotic jurors chose to believe the lies of an old man.
1