Excessive or Well Deserved?

Off Topic
393

Battered woman syndrome falls in line with extreme emotional distress. It can mitigate murder to manslaughter in many situations. Further, extreme emotional distress doesnt have to be an instant response. It can brood, meaning the woman can suffer from systematic abuse and then defend herself at a time when there is no immediate threat.

I havent watched the video in over a day, I thought the guy returned to the front of the restaurant (not back to his register obviosly) but if that’s not the case, my mistake.

His calculated and vicious beating of the woman after she was down was not a mistake though. He was tryign to kill her

394

[quote]Chushin wrote:
BG,

I was under the impression that multiple attackers legally constituted a “life threatening” attack, and legitamized the use of a weapon for defense.

Was I wrong, or did the calculus change because the attackers were women?[/quote]

This is a technical legal question and I’ll answer you from my professional experience. My problem professionally is that when traveling from one State to another (and not knowing the technical rule of law for each State, but knowing the law “generally”), and possibly being involved in God-knows-what kind of incident (all kind of shit can and does happen), my rule of thumb is to err on the side of caution and restraint, but be very deliberate.

In a questionable situation, I’m going to give some quarter, exercise some restraint but mostly overall I’m avoid and evade with a client. I do not expect the cashier to adhere to any such standard.

Whether two female attackers are “life threatening” is in the eye of the beholder to a large extent. His state of mind, and his fear are considered, but they must be reasonable beliefs and reasonable fears and his response must be “reasonable”. It can’t be any “possible” fear, it has to be grounded in reality.

It’s why I said earlier, that you CAN make an intelligent legal argument that the two females, in this environment (the city) and given their fearlessness and postures that they posed a potential threat of serious harm. Further, you could make the argument that by the very basis that two females were even willing to attack a man, that a reasonable presumption is that they were armed.

The only analogy I can think of right now as to the latter is if today some 150lb 16 year old gets in my face threatening me, my only reasonable presumption would be that he was armed and dangerous. This would be a reasonable presumption on my part, especially someplace like Camden NJ or Philadelphia.

Take the 16 year old and two different scenarios. One, we’re in the burbs playing ball, there is some rough play and he gets aggressive and is talking shit. I clock his ass. Probably illegal. Take the same 16 year old and we’re on the avenue in Camden NJ and he approaches me talking shit, in my face, being threatening. I clock his ass.

He’s 16. I’m in a tough spot. But I have a better defense in the latter scenario b/c I can claim I feared he had a weapon. That fear is not unreasonable, whether I was right or wrong. To make a long story short, in the cashier’s environment and with his background, I think it was reasonable to fear that either or both of these two women had a weapon - at the very least a box cutter, which is a favorite weapon of choice for many of these thug bitches in the city.

So, I’m okay with his retreat and I’m okay with his wielding a weapon. I think both were legal under the circumstance and I think it was a reasonable assumption that the women intended harm and posed a potential threat. I think the first hit or two was legal. Once they were down (subdued) however, I do not think any of the hits were legal and that’s where he moved from self-defense to felony assault.

When they were down, they clearly did not present the SAME threat he could rely upon when the incident started. 6-7 seconds pass between their going down and his resuming the assault. At this point, it’s pretty clear they are unarmed. The fact is, they were unarmed. However, the actions of the coworker remove pretty much any doubt about any threat they posed when they were down or their being armed.

The appropriate posture once they are down is to move back. If they try to resume the attack, you put their ass back down. In a professional protection setting, if I had to put someone down like that, once they are down, I’m getting out of dodge. That’s the SAFEST course of action.

You cannot, under any social or legal analysis, defend his continuing to strike them while they were down after 6-7 seconds. You cannot. It violates common decency in any neighborhood or any background, and it violates the law. “I couldn’t turn it off” is NOT a legal defense, it’s a one way ticket to jail - for white people, black people, brown people, yellow people, rich people, and poor people. Go to jail. Go directly to jail. Do not pass go.

Now, I spent a lot of time answering your question b/c it’s not a simple question. Would the same two women attacking me constitute a deadly threat? I don’t think I could pull that defense off. And frankly, two unarmed women coming after him is a tough sell too, but I think he could have sold it had he not continued the assault.

Two full grown men attacking you? Yes, that’s absolutely a threat of severe bodily injury. Even a single larger man.

The law does not require that you take a beating. The law provides you the ability to ensure you do not take that beating. But the law does not permit you to become the assailant. I know it sounds real grey and like you need a fucking legal degree to defend yourself but the reality is that you can get yourself in trouble if you do not exercise some restraint. Restraint is NOT pummeling someone while they are down - especially if they are unarmed.

395

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:

No, when someone leaves where they are presently standing and returns to about the same area, but this time with a weapon, it’s a very safe assumption that he left to retrieve something to defend himself with.

It’s also a safe to assume that he didnt have the plan to run out of the back door but on his way saw the metal rod hanging next to the door and had an epiphany to return to where his attackers were to show them how well he defends himself from their incessant slaps. [/quote]

Now you got him returning to the same area? Nope. The same area was the cash register he was working. He did not return there. The she-thugs chased him into the kitchen. This twistin’ stuff you got goin’ on has to stop. C’mon man.[/quote]

Exactly…but let’s not act like this is new to him. Twistin’ shit is his middle name.

The guy did retreat to the kitchen…in an EMPLOYEE ONLY part of the facility. The women chased him back there so he grabbed a weapon.

At no time did he leave, grab a weapon and come back to the same spot to attack someone.[/quote]

I think that’s a fair statement. But you need to concede he was not “cornered” in the kitchen. At no time was he “cornered”. Never.

396

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

You and I BOTH know that in our youth we’ve had moments where we haven’t shown restraint. We HAD to in order to survive and thrive where we grew up. And we don’t disagree - I agree that he will be convicted of assault with intent at the very least. I see that plain as day, just as you do. I am only pointing out that just about ANYONE who has grow up as he (we) did and has been in the system will not have the restraint to “switch it off”. Not as his age. We have the gift of age, experience and perspective. We’ve “grown up”. LOL But we’re the exception, not the rule.

I also know that if every moment of BOTH OUR lives were caught on camera, we’d BOTH probably be behind bars. So forgive me if I don’t see the issue as black and white and that he “doesn’t deserve to walk among us”. “Deserve” for me is a slippery slope. I agree that there is enough evidence to KEEP him from walking among us for a few more years (plus whatever back up time he has hanging over his head for violating parole).

But do you think for a second that those girls that attacked him would have given him any quarter when HE was down? I don’t know about you, but I’ve been on the receiving end of a stomp down and they don’t stop when “you’ve had enough”. You know what I’m talking about. If every conflict in the hood was measured by the standard of “the law”, 90% of the people there would be in jail. I’ve been to jail, and I just don’t see it as the answer.

I don’t think we have a disagreement about this incident: we both agree there is evidence to put him in jail. I was only waxing philosophic on some of the Cultural/Economic/Educational/Societal issues as to WHY I see this outcome as kind of inevitable. Sad, but inevitable nevertheless. [/quote]

There have been many times I failed to exercise restraint and in each and every instance I understood I was crossing a line. And yes, my ass should have went to jail more times than I can count. But, as I said earlier (and here’s the BIG distinction), it’s the difference between the “I don’t give a fuck” attitude and “knowing right from wrong”. You and I, and this cashier, knows right from wrong.

The people from those neighborhoods we are too familiar with know right from wrong. But let’s be honest and we both know it; what we’re dealing with here is “I don’t give a fuck”. “You violated me and now I’m going to violate you, damn the consequences”. And that’s really the crux of my rebuttal to this social argument. I think the social argument as it pertains to this incident is invalid.

However, all those social issues you raise we both know are true. Your philosophical waxing is strong given your background and experiences.

By the way, you do know this cashier is 32 right? Does that change it for you?

And let me continue for a moment b/c some people here ignored it when I said it previously b/c they probably do not have an eye for it or do not understand it, but I know that both you and I do. This cashier IS dangerous. He is an exception. He is very comfortable with violence. He can dial it up from 0-60 faster than that Hyabusa I want. The average person, from whatever neighborhood, is simply NOT built like that.

Can we blame the system for making him like that or perhaps even honing it? I’m not sure. I know lots of bitch asses go in and come out bitch asses. The don’t come out harder or tougher. He shot someone when he was what? 18-21? We can’t blame prison for that. He did this during an ARGUMENT. Shit happens all the time in the hood. And not every kid is pulling out the hammer and letting some hot ones go.

So can you really blame his environment? The point I’m making is that this kid is dangerous. You know it. I know it. I know the difference and so do you. This kid will throw down, with NO hesitation. That and his poor impulse control make him a danger that DESERVES to go to jail.

I don’t know who or what failed him. And I know we don’t rehabilitate people in our system. But at the end of the day, he’s gotta go away. Yes, it sucks he didn’t invite this upon himself. I hate it. But what world do you (not you AC) all live in where NO ONE EVER FUCKS WITH YOU? If not these two hood rat bitches, it will be someone at work, a coworker, another customer, someone back in the neighborhood. Someone somewhere WILL test you.

My philosophical wax /

397

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Battered woman syndrome falls in line with extreme emotional distress. It can mitigate murder to manslaughter in many situations. Further, extreme emotional distress doesnt have to be an instant response. It can brood, meaning the woman can suffer from systematic abuse and then defend herself at a time when there is no immediate threat.

I havent watched the video in over a day, I thought the guy returned to the front of the restaurant (not back to his register obviosly) but if that’s not the case, my mistake.

His calculated and vicious beating of the woman after she was down was not a mistake though. He was tryign to kill her [/quote]

I know we agree on this in large part, but I do think you’re exaggerating a bit.

I think it’s a stretch to claim he was trying to kill them. I’m not even sure it was “calculated” in any sense. I think he lost his fucking temper. And people go to jail all the time for losing their temper. And whether you lose your temper of your own doing, or whether someone set you off, matters not when have crossed a legal line.

He was faultless until those women went down. And as much as it’s a stretch to say he was “calculating” or intended to kill them, it’s an equal stretch by X to keep using the counter as some defense relative to their threat level once their down. They are DOWN. DOWN.

Who the fuck is a threat when they are DOWN???

And again, slowly - if they had a weapon (and they didn’t), don’t ya think the coworker trying to stop the attack is going to get the fuck out of dodge and/or help restrain them?!

DOWN. NO WEAPON.

At least acknowledge that.

If they get to their feet, and still feel froggy, you got a point. But really, you have NO point just b/c the counter is in your way and you have to extinguish EVERY AND ANY potential in an effort to justify the cashier.

“Reasonable” is a foundational block in our legal system. It even applies when a verdict is considered - “Reasonable doubt”. And “reasonable doubt” has NEVER been defined to mean ANY POTENTIAL doubt.

X, I’m still waiting for you to inform me which standard of law you want applied to people with the cashier’s background if it pertained to a crime against your mother/teacher. Do you want them “graded” on a curve? Do you want to argue that b/c of his background, assaulting your mother/teacher was the only way he knew how to deal with the situation?

398

What sentence is he likely to receive if convicted?

399

[quote]therajraj wrote:
What sentence is he likely to receive if convicted?[/quote]

Aggravated Assault (felony assault) in NJ is up to 5 years. I’m not sure about NY.

They will likely reach some plea. I’m pretty sure he’ll do some time. His prior conviction won’t help matters. And I’m not sure if he’s on parole which would further fuck him.

His best bet is to argue all the things that have been argued in this thread and get the best possible deal. He has some measure of public support, the witnesses are Mick Dee’s coworkers who are known to move around, leave jobs, be unreliable and maybe unavailable for trial, and the two “victims” aren’t exactly likeable and probably have criminal records too. So, on balance, I think all sides benefit from a deal but I do think he goes in for some time. How much time is anyone’s guess.

I’d be VERY surprised if this sees a courtroom and jury.

400

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Battered woman syndrome falls in line with extreme emotional distress. It can mitigate murder to manslaughter in many situations. Further, extreme emotional distress doesnt have to be an instant response. It can brood, meaning the woman can suffer from systematic abuse and then defend herself at a time when there is no immediate threat.

I havent watched the video in over a day, I thought the guy returned to the front of the restaurant (not back to his register obviosly) but if that’s not the case, my mistake.

His calculated and vicious beating of the woman after she was down was not a mistake though. He was tryign to kill her [/quote]

Well, I have a problem with that. So “battered women” get a pass, right? What about children who grew up being battered? What if they happen to male? Is a male child better equipped to deal with being abused than an adult woman? (I am in no way suggesting that ALL women who are battered only suffered as adults, nor am I condoning the behavior - I am merely arguing against the double standard).

I know a little something about extreme emotional stress (AKA Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome) because I’ve HAD it. My mother’s third and fourth husbands both had it (Both were Combat Marines who did multiple tours in 'Nam) and they often confused me with “the enemy” while they were beating the shit out of me before I was old enough to fight back. One of them had a neat little religious twist to it and actually tried to “cast my demons away”, but I digress.

Suffice it to say, that growing up like that, being on my own at sixteen and surviving alone on the streets of Baltimore, being incarcerated from age 18 to 22 where I was stabbed five times and finally returning home (to my aunt’s house - my mother wouldn’t have me) one could say that violence was a pretty big part of my personality.

Having actually EXPERIENCED that perspective, I can assure you that the word “calculated” belongs nowhere in your assessment. When shit goes down, you aren’t “calculating” the best odds, or weighing in your mind the consequences. The rational part of your brain is switched off. You are purely in survival mode. That’s a wonderful little part of our brain that EVERYONE has, but likes to pretend that we don’t. Each one of us is capable of murder. Each one of us is capable of a blind, mutilating rage that doesn’t stop until the object/threat that we fear/hate is still and bleeding. In fact, we may STILL continue to bash/stab/pummel the corps until our arms are tired if sufficiently threatened. I also used the word “object” up there because in that state, that’s what they are: an OBJECT, not a person - we humans have a unique ability to “DE-humanize” our enemies. They are a threat and we have to survive. WE ALL HAVE THIS IN US. The difference is that when you grow up/spend significant time in an abusive/dangerous/stressful environment the THRESHOLD is lower. That’s it.

Now I’m not making excuses for him. I’m not saying any of this to give him a pass. As I told BG in my post up there, I agree that he went back hit them again while they were down, and if he can’t control that, then he SHOULD be separate from the rest of us. But he wasn’t “Calculating” in what he did. You cant sit here and know what he was thinking. He was in a state of rage triggered by an attack and fueled by adrenalin - that doesn’t just “disappear” five to seven seconds after an attack. It can take HOURS to recover from a serious fight or flight response. I’ve personally experienced DAYS of hyper alertness and being on a “hair trigger” following certain incidents in my life.

It’s easy to sit in judgement of someone and analyze what you or “a reasonable person” would do. But for the MOST part, these are SEVERELY emotionally damaged, abused people. It’s a SYSTEMIC issue that permeates just about every low-income/low-education area in our country. It’s VERY predictable - THAT’S WHY SO MANY OF THEM ARE INCARCERATED. So unless you are FROM that, you really can’t comprehend what his state of mind was.

For the record, I’m not trying to get personal or disagree with you “just because” - I totally respect you and am very grateful for the knowledge you’ve dropped on this site. Peace.

401

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

You and I BOTH know that in our youth we’ve had moments where we haven’t shown restraint. We HAD to in order to survive and thrive where we grew up. And we don’t disagree - I agree that he will be convicted of assault with intent at the very least. I see that plain as day, just as you do. I am only pointing out that just about ANYONE who has grow up as he (we) did and has been in the system will not have the restraint to “switch it off”. Not as his age. We have the gift of age, experience and perspective. We’ve “grown up”. LOL But we’re the exception, not the rule.

I also know that if every moment of BOTH OUR lives were caught on camera, we’d BOTH probably be behind bars. So forgive me if I don’t see the issue as black and white and that he “doesn’t deserve to walk among us”. “Deserve” for me is a slippery slope. I agree that there is enough evidence to KEEP him from walking among us for a few more years (plus whatever back up time he has hanging over his head for violating parole).

But do you think for a second that those girls that attacked him would have given him any quarter when HE was down? I don’t know about you, but I’ve been on the receiving end of a stomp down and they don’t stop when “you’ve had enough”. You know what I’m talking about. If every conflict in the hood was measured by the standard of “the law”, 90% of the people there would be in jail. I’ve been to jail, and I just don’t see it as the answer.

I don’t think we have a disagreement about this incident: we both agree there is evidence to put him in jail. I was only waxing philosophic on some of the Cultural/Economic/Educational/Societal issues as to WHY I see this outcome as kind of inevitable. Sad, but inevitable nevertheless. [/quote]

There have been many times I failed to exercise restraint and in each and every instance I understood I was crossing a line. And yes, my ass should have went to jail more times than I can count. But, as I said earlier (and here’s the BIG distinction), it’s the difference between the “I don’t give a fuck” attitude and “knowing right from wrong”. You and I, and this cashier, knows right from wrong.

The people from those neighborhoods we are too familiar with know right from wrong. But let’s be honest and we both know it; what we’re dealing with here is “I don’t give a fuck”. “You violated me and now I’m going to violate you, damn the consequences”. And that’s really the crux of my rebuttal to this social argument. I think the social argument as it pertains to this incident is invalid.

However, all those social issues you raise we both know are true. Your philosophical waxing is strong given your background and experiences.

By the way, you do know this cashier is 32 right? Does that change it for you?

And let me continue for a moment b/c some people here ignored it when I said it previously b/c they probably do not have an eye for it or do not understand it, but I know that both you and I do. This cashier IS dangerous. He is an exception. He is very comfortable with violence. He can dial it up from 0-60 faster than that Hyabusa I want. The average person, from whatever neighborhood, is simply NOT built like that.

Can we blame the system for making him like that or perhaps even honing it? I’m not sure. I know lots of bitch asses go in and come out bitch asses. The don’t come out harder or tougher. He shot someone when he was what? 18-21? We can’t blame prison for that. He did this during an ARGUMENT. Shit happens all the time in the hood. And not every kid is pulling out the hammer and letting some hot ones go.

So can you really blame his environment? The point I’m making is that this kid is dangerous. You know it. I know it. I know the difference and so do you. This kid will throw down, with NO hesitation. That and his poor impulse control make him a danger that DESERVES to go to jail.

I don’t know who or what failed him. And I know we don’t rehabilitate people in our system. But at the end of the day, he’s gotta go away. Yes, it sucks he didn’t invite this upon himself. I hate it. But what world do you (not you AC) all live in where NO ONE EVER FUCKS WITH YOU? If not these two hood rat bitches, it will be someone at work, a coworker, another customer, someone back in the neighborhood. Someone somewhere WILL test you.

My philosophical wax /[/quote]

I thought he was younger. That DOES change it for me a little bit - he was (or should have been) seasoned enough to know that he was crossing a line. My “systemic argument” still stands though! LOL

403

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]overstand wrote:
^^ That example came to mind because I just saw a preview on the Discovery channel for a show about women who murdered their abusive husbands and formed a support group in prison.

And this is from Wikipedia:

Again, battered woman syndrome is not a legal defense, but may legally constitute:

-Self-defense when using a reasonable and proportionate degree of violence in response to the abuse might appear the most appropriate defense but, until recently, it almost never succeeded. Research in 1996 in England found no case in which a battered woman successfully pleaded self-defense (see Noonan at p198). After analysing 239 appellate decisions on trials of women who killed in self-defense in the U.S., Maguigan (1991) argues that self-defence is gender biased.
-provocation;
-insanity (usually within the meaning of the M’Naghten Rules); and
-diminished responsibility.

Basically women have tried to argue battered woman syndrome, but it rarely works. If anything, this further proves the point. It’s a lot easier to argue in defense of a woman who’s been abused for years versus a guy who’s never met his attackers, and that shit STILL doesn’t fly in court.

[/quote]

LOL.

The fact that a woman can use it at all and has is enough.

If Francine Hughes can claim she went crazy, this man should be able to as well, right?[/quote]

Francine hughes was brutalized for years and years. she tried many times to leave her abusive husband. going anywhere she could. he would always find her and beat her worse. this guy deserved everything he got. He beat this woman worse than anything you can imagine. No person should ever have to put up with that.

If your daughter was getting brutalized like that, would you tell her to just take it. Oh, and she tried going to the police on numerous occasions. They never took her serious. She did what she had to do for the safety of her life and her kids lives.

404

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
What sentence is he likely to receive if convicted?[/quote]

Aggravated Assault (felony assault) in NJ is up to 5 years. I’m not sure about NY.

[/quote]

He’s going to get assault with a deadly weapon. [/quote]

They may throw that at him for good measure and leverage but like I said, this has “let’s make a deal” written all over it. This is not even big news except the vid went viral. The NY Post had 3" on it and no photos. Not really big news in the NY media.

EDIT:

There is already a weapon charge on him.

405

According to the above he’s on parole so he’ll likely do that last year in addition to any other agreed sentence for this new deal. He’s 31 years old. He is NOT a kid.

406

At .39 the first hit when they are down
.41 second hit when they are down
at .45 after standing over them and looking down and PAUSING, hits them again
.46 another hit
He PAUSES some more
.54 another hit is heard off camera
.55 another hit off camera

SIX hits on the down unarmed women.

What fucking video are some of you looking at?!

407

http://news.yahoo.com/wash-woman-accused-using-power-saw-husband-034153324.html

I figured this was semi relevent here, the woman is accused of cutting her husbands neck and shoulder with a power saw, the interesting thing is she is only gettign charged with domestic violence, what about attempted murder she tried to cut his head off while he was asleep

408

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Battered woman syndrome falls in line with extreme emotional distress. It can mitigate murder to manslaughter in many situations. Further, extreme emotional distress doesnt have to be an instant response. It can brood, meaning the woman can suffer from systematic abuse and then defend herself at a time when there is no immediate threat.

I havent watched the video in over a day, I thought the guy returned to the front of the restaurant (not back to his register obviosly) but if that’s not the case, my mistake.

His calculated and vicious beating of the woman after she was down was not a mistake though. He was tryign to kill her [/quote]

Well, I have a problem with that. So “battered women” get a pass, right? What about children who grew up being battered? What if they happen to male? Is a male child better equipped to deal with being abused than an adult woman? (I am in no way suggesting that ALL women who are battered only suffered as adults, nor am I condoning the behavior - I am merely arguing against the double standard).
[/quote]

A young man who commits a violent crime after growing up in the situation you describe will have his story heard during the sentencing phase of his trial. He has the chance to raise that issue DURING the trial, but that would essentially require him to admit guilt. Not many people choose that route at a trial. If found guilty the judge would consider the kid’s family background. So while it may not be a statutory mitigator like battered woman sydrome is (and maybe it should be, I dont have the experience to say) a judge can consider it and hand down an appropriate sentence.

I dont agree that extreme emotional distress and PTSS are the same thing. My intuition tells me that PTSS is closer to an insanity DEFENSE than it is to eed MITIGATION.

I believe all of that, to a degree. But I dont believe that a person who reacted the way this guy did simply from being slapped and chased is anything but damaged individual. The fact that he killed someone as an adult reinforces my opinion. I know nothing of is upbringing. And too many people grow up in absolutely horrid situations that dont react this way for me to assume that his response is the norm even among that category of people.

[quote]
Now I’m not making excuses for him. I’m not saying any of this to give him a pass. As I told BG in my post up there, I agree that he went back hit them again while they were down, and if he can’t control that, then he SHOULD be separate from the rest of us. But he wasn’t “Calculating” in what he did. You cant sit here and know what he was thinking. He was in a state of rage triggered by an attack and fueled by adrenalin - that doesn’t just “disappear” five to seven seconds after an attack. It can take HOURS to recover from a serious fight or flight response. I’ve personally experienced DAYS of hyper alertness and being on a “hair trigger” following certain incidents in my life.[/quote]

This wasnt a serious fight. He got slapped and felt insulted. I know the blind rage youre talking about. Allowing yourself to succumb to it in a situation like this makes you a bad person that is not capable of intermingling in this society.

He is a grown man that got smacked by a woman. This happened in a public place with more than a few other people around. Can you imagine what the result would be if this took place somewhere secluded? This guy is a killer through and through.

I dont believe that he decided that morning that he was going to attempt to kill the next person that disrepected him but he clearly has no reservation to taking extreme measures to handle a relatively mundane conflict. I agree that he may be a ticking time bomb for whatever reason but that doesnt excuse hulk raging, at all. An adult man that is not diagnosed as a mental retard has to have control of his ‘off switch’. It is essential.

I only said that he calculated the beating AFTER she was down. It was a conscious decision to inflict extra damage on her (after self defense became a non issue). He was trying to teach her a lesson at that point. That cant be tolerated in a civilized society.

Your stuff about how society produces this sort of person is relevant as a social issue but irrelevant as a legal matter. The law will never be perfect. Which is why judges have leeway in the sentencing. In this case though, as a repeat violent felony offender, it’s hard to imagine he doesnt get the statutory max for aggravated assault. And I wouldnt be shocked if the prosecutor goes after attempted murder.

Shitty parents will always exist. Poverty will always exist. Some people are just unlucky from birth in that regard.

409

The criminal complaint can be found here.

Notice the language “defendant continues to swing the metal rod in the direction of said individual when the individual is down on the ground”.

410

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Battered woman syndrome falls in line with extreme emotional distress. It can mitigate murder to manslaughter in many situations. Further, extreme emotional distress doesnt have to be an instant response. It can brood, meaning the woman can suffer from systematic abuse and then defend herself at a time when there is no immediate threat.

I havent watched the video in over a day, I thought the guy returned to the front of the restaurant (not back to his register obviosly) but if that’s not the case, my mistake.

His calculated and vicious beating of the woman after she was down was not a mistake though. He was tryign to kill her [/quote]

Well, I have a problem with that. So “battered women” get a pass, right? What about children who grew up being battered? What if they happen to male? Is a male child better equipped to deal with being abused than an adult woman? (I am in no way suggesting that ALL women who are battered only suffered as adults, nor am I condoning the behavior - I am merely arguing against the double standard).
[/quote]

A young man who commits a violent crime after growing up in the situation you describe will have his story heard during the sentencing phase of his trial. He has the chance to raise that issue DURING the trial, but that would essentially require him to admit guilt. Not many people choose that route at a trial. If found guilty the judge would consider the kid’s family background. So while it may not be a statutory mitigator like battered woman sydrome is (and maybe it should be, I dont have the experience to say) a judge can consider it and hand down an appropriate sentence.

I dont agree that extreme emotional distress and PTSS are the same thing. My intuition tells me that PTSS is closer to an insanity DEFENSE than it is to eed MITIGATION.

I believe all of that, to a degree. But I dont believe that a person who reacted the way this guy did simply from being slapped and chased is anything but damaged individual. The fact that he killed someone as an adult reinforces my opinion. I know nothing of is upbringing. And too many people grow up in absolutely horrid situations that dont react this way for me to assume that his response is the norm even among that category of people.

[quote]
Now I’m not making excuses for him. I’m not saying any of this to give him a pass. As I told BG in my post up there, I agree that he went back hit them again while they were down, and if he can’t control that, then he SHOULD be separate from the rest of us. But he wasn’t “Calculating” in what he did. You cant sit here and know what he was thinking. He was in a state of rage triggered by an attack and fueled by adrenalin - that doesn’t just “disappear” five to seven seconds after an attack. It can take HOURS to recover from a serious fight or flight response. I’ve personally experienced DAYS of hyper alertness and being on a “hair trigger” following certain incidents in my life.[/quote]

This wasnt a serious fight. He got slapped and felt insulted. I know the blind rage youre talking about. Allowing yourself to succumb to it in a situation like this makes you a bad person that is not capable of intermingling in this society.

He is a grown man that got smacked by a woman. This happened in a public place with more than a few other people around. Can you imagine what the result would be if this took place somewhere secluded? This guy is a killer through and through. I dont believe that he decided that morning that he was going to attempt to kill the next person that disrepected him but he clearly has no reservation to taking extreme measures to handle a relatively mundane conflict. I agree that he may be a ticking time bomb for whatever reason but that doesnt excuse hulk raging, at all. An adult man that is not diagnosed as a mental retard has to have control of his ‘off switch’. It is essential.

I only said that he calculated the beating AFTER she was down. It was a conscious decision to inflict extra damage on her (after self defense became a non issue). He was trying to teach her a lesson at that point. That cant be tolerated in a civilized society.

Your stuff about how society produces this sort of person is relevant as a social issue but irrelevant as a legal matter. The law will never be perfect. Which is why judges have leeway in the sentencing. In this case though, as a repeat violent felony offender, it’s hard to imagine he doesnt get the statutory max for aggravated assault. And I wouldnt be shocked if the prosecutor goes after attempted murder.

Shitty parents will always exist. Poverty will always exist. Some people are just unlucky from birth in that regard. [/quote]

okay…let’s be fair here.

He did not just get slapped and insulted. They both hopped the counter to pursue him. They didn’t slap him, stand their ground and he went running off to find a weapon, return to the counter and commence the ass whipping. THEY pursued him. He had every reason to perceive some level of threat.

Be fair.

411

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
What sentence is he likely to receive if convicted?[/quote]

Aggravated Assault (felony assault) in NJ is up to 5 years. I’m not sure about NY.

[/quote]

He’s going to get assault with a deadly weapon. [/quote]

Yea, same thing. Assault 1 in NY. B Felony.

With a prior felony conviction (if it’s in the last 10 years) he is facing 10-25.