Now, I know what some will say, "The guy was down and she kept kicking." But really, if 'Crime of the moment' and 'Crime of passion' are both lesser crimes because they are a reaction to extraordinary and unpredictable circumstances, how can one blame a victimof an assault for losing control in the heat of defending herself?
This wouldn't fly in the states. For all the talk people give about our gun laws, at least we can defend ourselves without having to worry about being made the bad guy.
Now, I know what some will say, "The guy was down and she kept kicking." But really, if 'Crime of the moment' and 'Crime of passion' are both lesser crimes because they are a reaction to extraordinary and unpredictable circumstances, how can one blame a victimof an assault for losing control in the heat of defending herself? This wouldn't fly in the states. For all the talk people give about our gun laws, at least we can defend ourselves without having to worry about being made the bad guy.
I agree it is fucked up that is has been fined, but the article claims she kept kicking him in the head post conciousness... You can't deny that is too far? Although I wouldn't have fined her, but maybe gave her a good telling off.
I would say that he was already unconscious, so kicking him in the head was too much, but if I were her, I would have freaked the hell out and stomped on his skull until it mush, so I can't blame her.
Yeah the girl should not get fined. Here in Canada I knew a guy whose dad got charged because he beat up a home intruder with a baseball bat. Some time the law works with us and sometimes it works against us.
Now, I know what some will say, "The guy was down and she kept kicking." But really, if 'Crime of the moment' and 'Crime of passion' are both lesser crimes because they are a reaction to extraordinary and unpredictable circumstances, how can one blame a victimof an assault for losing control in the heat of defending herself? This wouldn't fly in the states. For all the talk people give about our gun laws, at least we can defend ourselves without having to worry about being made the bad guy.
I agree it is fucked up that is has been fined, but the article claims she kept kicking him in the head post conciousness... You can't deny that is too far? Although I wouldn't have fined her, but maybe gave her a good telling off.
An hysterical 19-year-old isn't someone I would expect to make the best choices. Let's be logical:
-She did not put herself in the position to be attacked. -The attacker put her in that position against her will
It was the attackers decision to initiate the assault, whatever he got out of it he deserved and then some. I don't think it's the actions that should be judged but the intention.
There's no fair sportsmanship in crime. The moment you decide to do something like attack someone, you go into that accepting the fact that you might not come out alive. Personally I can understand the girl being so frightened that she doesn't realize that the guy is unconscious and won't be getting back up. You just keep on kicking until you're sure you're safe.
Masked man stalks teenage girl home. Let's be realistic people, if she had been knocked unconscious, she'd have gotten a lot more then a simple beating,
Legal system be damned, I'm all for creepy rapists getting the shit beaten out of them.
So did her boyfriend tell police that she kept hitting the guy? How did the police get that information? If I were her I would have lied and it would been a case of 'he said/she said' on the part of her versus the attacker.
I get where this comes from, she probably shouldn't have kept hitting the guy. But she is also not trained in defending herself. She's not a cop who would know when to stop. She's a scared little girl and that attacker took a chance by attacking her. I don't think there should be a fine.
She didn't go far enough. I'd like to give him an 'Irreversible' with the butt of a fire extinguisher.
I fear that you mean this.
I don't care what you fear. You're HandsomeDead.
I am overreacting. You'll never be in a position to enact your grim view of justice. I'm not exactly the best moral compass, but I find it unsettling when kneejerk reactions prompting for death are acceptable.
@Fajita_Jim: So did her boyfriend tell police that she kept hitting the guy? How did the police get that information? If I were her I would have lied and it would been a case of 'he said/she said' on the part of her versus the attacker. I get where this comes from, she probably shouldn't have kept hitting the guy. But she is also not trained in defending herself. She's not a cop who would know when to stop. She's a scared little girl and that attacker took a chance by attacking her. I don't think there should be a fine.
There were witnesses, so her lying wouldn't have done anything.
Masked man stalks teenage girl home. Let's be realistic people, if she had been knocked unconscious, she'd have gotten a lot more then a simple beating, Legal system be damned, I'm all for creepy rapists getting the shit beaten out of them.
@Fajita_Jim: So did her boyfriend tell police that she kept hitting the guy? How did the police get that information? If I were her I would have lied and it would been a case of 'he said/she said' on the part of her versus the attacker. I get where this comes from, she probably shouldn't have kept hitting the guy. But she is also not trained in defending herself. She's not a cop who would know when to stop. She's a scared little girl and that attacker took a chance by attacking her. I don't think there should be a fine.
There were witnesses, so her lying wouldn't have done anything.
Ok, I guess I didn't catch that part. I think she went too far. But, the attacker also knew the stakes before he attacked her. That's what might happen when you live that lifestyle. He has no one else to blame for what happened to him other then himself. Fining the girl, to me, almost looks like fining someone for self-defense. I know that at some point she was no longer defending herself and was assaulting him but where do we draw that line? She was clearly over it but what if there is a more complicated case where it is unclear if the continued attacking was self-defense? I just worry that this sets a bad precedence.
She didn't go far enough. I'd like to give him an 'Irreversible' with the butt of a fire extinguisher.
I fear that you mean this.
I don't care what you fear. You're HandsomeDead.
I am overreacting. You'll never be in a position to enact your grim view of justice. I'm not exactly the best moral compass, but I find it unsettling when kneejerk reactions prompting for death are acceptable.
Obviously I'm not going to kill the guy, you dipshit. Hyperbole.
Kicking him multiple times in the head after he is unconscoius is maybe a bit much. But on the other hand it's easy too say that she overreacted because you or I wasn't the one getting attacked and it's impossible to know how you would react in that situation. Also the attacker could just NOT have attacked her.
She didn't go far enough. I'd like to give him an 'Irreversible' with the butt of a fire extinguisher.
I fear that you mean this.
I don't care what you fear. You're HandsomeDead.
I am overreacting. You'll never be in a position to enact your grim view of justice. I'm not exactly the best moral compass, but I find it unsettling when kneejerk reactions prompting for death are acceptable.
Obviously I'm not going to kill the guy, you dipshit. Hyperbole.
I never said you would, but as you're a spastic, I'm not surprised you missed my point.
Kicking him multiple times in the head after he is unconscoius is maybe a bit much. But in the other hand it's easy too say that she overreacted because you or I wasn't the one getting attacked and it's impossible to know how you would react in that situation. Also the attacker could just NOT have attacked her.
In such circumstances the reasoning part of the brain actually shuts down, and what's left is more of a reptilian brain pattern. People under high stress do the same thing, and it's why stressed-out people make poor decision-makers.
Now imagine fighting for your life at your front door.
She didn't go far enough. I'd like to give him an 'Irreversible' with the butt of a fire extinguisher.
I fear that you mean this.
I don't care what you fear. You're HandsomeDead.
I am overreacting. You'll never be in a position to enact your grim view of justice. I'm not exactly the best moral compass, but I find it unsettling when kneejerk reactions prompting for death are acceptable.
Obviously I'm not going to kill the guy, you dipshit. Hyperbole.
I never said you would, but as you're a spastic, I'm not surprised you missed my point.
Oh what a world we would live in where everybody has to take what's being said on the internet at face value. Once again, you're HandsomeDead, I don't really give a shit what you have to say, and I'm not giving you any more of my time.
I remember reading an article in passing of a man who was the only one to intervene in a situation where an elderly woman was being mugged and beaten up. From what I remember the defender knocked the guy out with one punch to the temple then gave the woman her hand bag back, and when police showed up at the scene of the crime to find the defender had made a citizens arrest and was sitting on the mugger's back holding the mugger's hands firmly underneath his bodyweight.
The police arrested the mugger AND the defender, they were both charged with GBH (Grievous bodily harm) and sent to the same prison for a years imprisonment. Yes BOTH of them.
Completely insane!
I think the man that defended the lady was released shortly afterwards but still had to pay the attacker for damages.
Kicking him multiple times in the head after he is unconscoius is maybe a bit much. But in the other hand it's easy too say that she overreacted because you or I wasn't the one getting attacked and it's impossible to know how you would react in that situation. Also the attacker could just NOT have attacked her.
In such circumstances the reasoning part of the brain actually shuts down, and what's left is more of a reptilian brain pattern. People under high stress do the same thing, and it's why stressed-out people make poor decision-makers. Now imagine fighting for your life at your front door.
That's not entirely true. The frontal cortex doesn't shut down in those circumstances. It is just easy to be swept up by emotions in those scenarios.
Although my gut feeling is that the girl shouldn't get in trouble, it's hard to say when I wasn't a witness. Stories like this one are so often missing the fine details that truly define a situation, and the smallest things are very important in how these cases play out in court. What I'm saying is, if for instance the guys tongue was lying out of his mouth halfway across the street and the girl was yelling how she was going to kill him between front flip kicks (exaggeration, obviously) then as much as it sucks for her, the legal system will probably work against her there. Words like "hysterical" in news articles are like messages in a game of telephone: They are vague interpretations of the actual situation that happened. But yeah, my gut feeling is that she should be let off easy.
The attacker could obviously see shortly into the future. What he saw was himself being beaten unmercifully by this lady, so he thought "OH NO YOU DON'T!" and tried to gain the opening strike.
Unfortunately, it didn't go as planned and in his unconscious beating he realized that you can't change time after all.
Geez guys, no need to make an issue out of this common misunderstanding.
Although my gut feeling is that the girl shouldn't get in trouble, it's hard to say when I wasn't a witness. Stories like this one are so often missing the fine details that truly define a situation, and the smallest things are very important in how these cases play out in court. What I'm saying is, if for instance the guys tongue was lying out of his mouth halfway across the street and the girl was yelling how she was going to kill him between front flip kicks (exaggeration, obviously) then as much as it sucks for her, the legal system will probably work against her there. Words like "hysterical" in news articles are like messages in a game of telephone: They are vague interpretations of the actual situation that happened. But yeah, my gut feeling is that she should be let off easy.
While I would want to think like this, all I can really think is:
If a fully grown man stalks a girl haf his age to her house and (supposedly) attacks here with a fucking balaclava on, I don't care what the fuck she does to him. Bummer she got fined.
I don't think beating a man until he's unconscious, and then continuing to kick his head after he's down should count as self-defense.
They guy stalked her...and was probly going to rape/kill or something awful her. She acted out of self defense. Its not like she got a gun and blasted the gun 10 times in the nuts. That clearly would have been over kill. She just kept kicking...She shouldnt be fined.
Kicking him multiple times in the head after he is unconscoius is maybe a bit much. But in the other hand it's easy too say that she overreacted because you or I wasn't the one getting attacked and it's impossible to know how you would react in that situation. Also the attacker could just NOT have attacked her.
In such circumstances the reasoning part of the brain actually shuts down, and what's left is more of a reptilian brain pattern. People under high stress do the same thing, and it's why stressed-out people make poor decision-makers. Now imagine fighting for your life at your front door.
That's not entirely true. The frontal cortex doesn't shut down in those circumstances. It is just easy to be swept up by emotions in those scenarios.
When I say 'shut down' I'm obviously not implying a complete cessation of activity. The 'Fight or Flight' response activates the Sympathetic nervous system which is autonomous, and it's not solely a physical phenomena; the beta wave increases in frequency exponentially, for instance.
Kicking him multiple times in the head after he is unconscoius is maybe a bit much. But in the other hand it's easy too say that she overreacted because you or I wasn't the one getting attacked and it's impossible to know how you would react in that situation. Also the attacker could just NOT have attacked her.
In such circumstances the reasoning part of the brain actually shuts down, and what's left is more of a reptilian brain pattern. People under high stress do the same thing, and it's why stressed-out people make poor decision-makers. Now imagine fighting for your life at your front door.
That's not entirely true. The frontal cortex doesn't shut down in those circumstances. It is just easy to be swept up by emotions in those scenarios.
When I say 'shut down' I'm obviously not implying a complete cessation of activity. The 'Fight or Flight' response activates the Sympathetic nervous system which is autonomous, and it's not solely a physical phenomena; the beta wave increases in frequency exponentially, for instance.
Though that may be true one's reasonable nature is not thrown out the window when one is going through a Fight or Flight response. Further, that response is not a viable excuse for bad behavior. At least not to me and probably in court.
Though that may be true one's reasonable nature is not thrown out the window when one is going through a Fight or Flight response. Further, that response is not a viable excuse for bad behavior. At least not to me and probably in court.
Ones reasonable nature can easily be overcome. Threaten a baby with its mother around...she won't be thinking about what she's doing to you, she's just reacting to the stimuli of her child being in harms way.
Or how about people who have to be held back from burning (like totally consumed) buildings because their loved ones are inside? It's not reasonable to run into a burning building where there's no hope of anyone (including yourself) getting out, but people do. Why? Because 'Fight or Flight' takes over and they're thinking of just one goal: Safety (for themselves or others) and all other logic is thrown to the wind.
Though that may be true one's reasonable nature is not thrown out the window when one is going through a Fight or Flight response. Further, that response is not a viable excuse for bad behavior. At least not to me and probably in court.
Ones reasonable nature can easily be overcome. Threaten a baby with its mother around...she won't be thinking about what she's doing to you, she's just reacting to the stimuli of her child being in harms way. Or how about people who have to be held back from burning (like totally consumed) buildings because their loved ones are inside? It's not reasonable to run into a burning building where there's no hope of anyone (including yourself) getting out, but people do. Why? Because 'Fight or Flight' takes over and they're thinking of just one goal: Safety (for themselves or others) and all other logic is thrown to the wind. So I disagree.
Though we can agree to disagree (which I'm fine with) on the matter I don't think the courts allow for such an option.
Once the threat is over, you can't attack anymore. When the attacker is unconcious, if you attack them, you get get in trouble. Your suppose to get away and call the cops. Or it's not self defense. That's something i've learned from krav maga. If you disarm them, you can't stab or shoot them either with their own weapon. That's the law or it's not self defense.
If they are unconcious and they can't fight back and no longer a thread, then you are the attacker.
It's hard to know where the line is, but she had clearly past it. Once you are in the dominant position thats it, you either walk away or get help. If he's unconscious, he's no longer the aggressor.
Though that may be true one's reasonable nature is not thrown out the window when one is going through a Fight or Flight response. Further, that response is not a viable excuse for bad behavior. At least not to me and probably in court.
Ones reasonable nature can easily be overcome. Threaten a baby with its mother around...she won't be thinking about what she's doing to you, she's just reacting to the stimuli of her child being in harms way. Or how about people who have to be held back from burning (like totally consumed) buildings because their loved ones are inside? It's not reasonable to run into a burning building where there's no hope of anyone (including yourself) getting out, but people do. Why? Because 'Fight or Flight' takes over and they're thinking of just one goal: Safety (for themselves or others) and all other logic is thrown to the wind. So I disagree.
Though we can agree to disagree (which I'm fine with) on the matter I don't think the courts allow for such an option.
Here's some help: Premeditation means with planning or deliberation. The amount of time needed for premeditation of a killing depends on the person and the circumstances. It must be long enough, after forming the intent to kill, for the killer to have been fully conscious of the intent and to have considered the killing.
Sometimes the only difference between a manslaughter charge and a murder charge is 'did he think about it'? And this in a non-life-threatening situation, I'm talking just killing someone for no good reason AND THEY STILL CONSIDER YOUR STATE OF MIND.
Now I'm not saying knock the guy out then kill him, but if a little girl gets a number of extra kicks in before she thinks "Okay, he's down, now run" then who are we to hold her accountable for his fuck-up?
I understand that intent during the crime is a factor in the sentence and the consequences. But regardless of intent the charge still stands, a sentence is still coming and consequences are still to be expected. All three of these things may change based on intent, but they are still forthcoming. So, though intent still matters for the courts it only matters in how far they are going to go with their final decision.
As for this girl and this case, I gave my piece on it a few pages back. I think she went over board and, just like the initial attacker, should have to pay consequences for her actions. I can see where she was coming from but the end result was still unnecessary. But I also think the guy had it coming. When you live a life the way he lived his life there are bound to be consequences for that life. He has no one to blame for what happened to him but himself. But, I also feel that using a fight or flight excuse is just a lame way to justify bad behavior. There's this idea that if somehow one can bring in physiology then we can justify anything. I don't agree with that. Thousands of other people have held up in response to a fight or flight response. This girl could have as well. Physiology is not a good enough excuse for excessive violence.
I can hardly believe the responses I'm reading in this thread. For some of you people to actively imply she should have received no penalty for kicking an unconscious man in the head and say it's "No big thing?"
@Matoya: Did you miss the part where a man more than half her age put on a ski mask and followed her home?
Of course I didn't. And I'm not saying that's acceptable. Like someone else said, once he stopped being the dominant agressor, she could have walked away. And there was witnesses.
Log in to comment