Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
lol She will not be charged. Keep dreaming, buddy.
Dreaming? I'm not claiming to know what the DA will do, and I haven't claimed to know.
Simple question - do you understand that she committed a crime by attacking him? The legality of that situation isn't even debatable, it's well settled law.
Grabbing someone from behind and throwing them to the ground certainly qualifies as a violent attack.
If you absolutely insist on viewing it out of context - which you are.
As for possible charges against her - would have happened already. She will not be charged.
And "well settled law" - according to your username, you aren't a JD. I'm 2/3 of the way there. Few prosecutors would charge this woman. The only ones who would are overzealous ones.
And "well settled law" - according to your username, you aren't a JD. I'm 2/3 of the way there. Few prosecutors would charge this woman. The only ones who would are overzealous ones.
Nope, not a JD. But I've studied self defense law pretty extensively. But hey, you want to credential drop, so put up or shut up. What legal principle is it that will allow her to attack someone from behind, after he had ended his assault, without that being a new assault perpetrated by her?
Put that 2/3 of a JD to good use and educate us all. . .
I'm doing nothing of the sort. But feel free to explain why you believe otherwise.
That's completely irrelevant. She clearly committed a crime. Not even debatable.
What matters in situations like this when prosecutors make charging decisions is context. It is not just about "does her conduct technically fit what the statute says is a crime?" Prosecutors have discretion for a reason, that reason is cases like this. The right person was charged.
See, this is where my "credentials" come in and where your lack thereof shows. With experience working in prosecutor's offices and just being in classes discussing legal theories and statutes all day, I know how it works in the real world. It isn't always so black and white. This woman didn't wake up that day and say, hey, I'm going to go to work and drag some random guy to the ground in a "violent assault" . But clearly the dude who groped her thought about what he did before he did it. He touched her first, she reacted. Again, the right person was charged here, even if what she did maytechnically have violated a statute.
And I guarantee you if she WERE to be charged, a jury would acquit her after seeing that video. Because a prosecutor's case would be weak because of what this guy did to her JUST before she pulled him down. And because most people don't think like you. You're the type of person who would ticket a person going 1 mph over the speed limit if you had the power.
The guy clearly touches a butt cheek in passing. He wasn't diving for dollars, hitting vaginas or anything other than what the video truly shows. In the office workplace, not coming from a client, it would be sexual harassment. Nothing penetrated anything.
I don't know about your town, but I don't see our society enabling sexual predators. A drunk guy coping a feel on a pretty waitress in passing may never graduate to become a pedophile or rapist.
I think she should have told a bouncer or management. She put her employer at risk for a liable suit if the guy was seriously injured. She obviously was not injured at all. She stood up for herself, but there was nothing defensive about her actions.
This post is just another example how society views the female body. She wasn't injured? Must a woman be seriously injured before people recognize the violation?
DO NOT PUT YOUR HANDS ON WOMEN.
Yes, society is enabling sexual predators by downplaying sexual battery like this.
And I'll take your word for it that you are intelligent.
It's hot just about everywhere. Plenty of us live in high humidity areas. Regardless, skin and hot food really aren't supposed to be next to each other. As a customer, I don't want to see someone's under butt or that much skin next to my food. If you're schlepping hot pizza around, you're going to drip pizza sauce and cheese on yourself. It happens. If it's hot and lands on exposed skin, you will get burned.
People represent themselves through their clothes. Her's do not leave a positive impression. Even though I don't like the guy, I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling for the waitress either. Her reaction was almost an overreaction. It was too quick for what transpired making me think she's mad at the world for something. You don't have to agree. That is my impression of her. Her clothes do play a part in that.
And it's none of your business how she dressed. I wouldn't really care between the two of you as far as servers go. I mean, I enjoy scantily clad women as much as the next guy but I'm fine with some wearing combat boots, turtle neck and rubber kitchen gloves. That you splash food on yourself often enough it's necessary is concerning, but as long as you're spilling it on yourself and not me it's not a huge deal. Hopefully enough of the food makes it to the table I'm not getting half a soup.
I know that reading comprehension is challenging for some, but do try to pay attention. There were two separate assaults. He would be perfectly within his rights to use violence to stop the assault on him.
This should be called a stop-watch analysis of the event. I understand why the grabber's assault on the waitress was over once he turned away - hence my agreement that the waitress' response does not constitute "self-defense."
But why in the world not apply the same stop-watch analysis to the grabber? He, like the waitress, was totally caught by surprise and again like her had no time to react during the events. Once down on the floor, her only action was to lecture him then turn away to request assistance. She made no further attempt to touch (or kick) him.
What violence would you have the grabber do to stop the waitress' "assault" for by the time he realized an action had occurred it was already OVER. Watch clicked stop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd
I'm doing nothing of the sort. But feel free to explain why you believe otherwise.
That's completely irrelevant. She clearly committed a crime. Not even debatable.
Here, we have crossed from a discussion of criminology into the realm of philosophy: "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"
We know the tree is down (in the forest). But does the result of that fall (the sound) exist if it is not HEARD?
We know the grabber is down (on the restaurant floor). But is the cause of how he got there (the waitress' action) a crime if there is no record of a crime. No VISUAL.
For until the waitress is charged by a prosecutor there is NO criminal record of her so-called "crime." Without that record (much less a conviction) her action does not legally exist. Nada. There is a void. Legally, it did not happen and no LEXUS search no matter how diligently done can create the existence of a crime.
The event, as shown on YouTube, happened but not the missing crime.
That can only be created by a prosecutor.
Last edited by EveryLady; 07-24-2018 at 08:53 PM..
And it's none of your business how she dressed. I wouldn't really care between the two of you as far as servers go. I mean, I enjoy scantily clad women as much as the next guy but I'm fine with some wearing combat boots, turtle neck and rubber kitchen gloves. That you splash food on yourself often enough it's necessary is concerning, but as long as you're spilling it on yourself and not me it's not a huge deal. Hopefully enough of the food makes it to the table I'm not getting half a soup.
I didn't go looking into her business. She left the house dressed like that. Then she made the national news.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
