Search found 5 matches

Return to “Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru”

by Valor
Thu May 24, 2012 10:23 am
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru
Replies: 59
Views: 5325

Re: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru

mamabearCali wrote:
Two people assaulting one person who is trapped in their car...no I don't think the defense would find that a challenge. Just because a person makes the (slightly foolish--but not illegal) statement of "thats not cool" does not mean they are ready to fight it out. They are commenting, perhaps not wisely, but certainly not illegally. And they do not lose their right to self defense because they talked with someone who then beat them up.
After investigating the incident, a witness came forth stating the assaulted woman initially provoked the assailants by calling them "low life scum and it was not cool." From this story, we have only heard one side. Regardless, any attack less than aggravated will be an increasingly challenging fight for the defense. The use of mace or a tazer is a more acceptable form of defense in this case. At the end of the day, it is your life and if you truly are in fear of your life and need to use a gun it better be justified in the eyes of the judicial system and jurors. In court there are 4 truths; Defense presentation, Prosecutor presentation, what really happened and what the jury believes.
but that she could not have legally defended herself because she had said something completely legal to them. This very much bothers me. It is part of the reason that people think they can beat someone up with no consequence. The attitude that you were there and these people did something criminal, so it is your fault. That I find really infuriating.[/
She can legally defend herself from the attack. But it is not easy convincing the court that a gun had to be used from a punch in the face and bit on the finger and the assailants did not have a deadly weapon. There are consequences. Being one’s own judge and jury can be costly.
by Valor
Wed May 23, 2012 11:53 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru
Replies: 59
Views: 5325

Re: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru

speedsix wrote:...but it is...ever take defensive driving? Parent, Adult, Child syndromes are discussed...Parent always wants to correct and make the other person do what's right...Adult minds his own business and takes wise, appropriate action based on what he sees...Child acts irresponsibly...in this case...had she been an Adult-minded person, she would have ignored it, dialed the police, or called Don't Mess With Texas...or picked up what they'd thrown out, if it really bothered her that badly...after they'd gone...instead, she couldn't miss an opportunity to correct someone who OBVIOUSLY already had social problems...and they responded predictably...
...as to your ideas on law enforcement...if HQ dispatches a call about littering, the officer assigned deals with it...is it likely to happen? NO...but that's still the only wise option...report it to whose job it is to correct lawbreakers...don't take on that job yourself...it's entirely likely that the person will respond in like manner as these did...verbally if you're fortunate...physically if you're not...rarely will you get a favorable response making obvious comments like she did...
...hope those of you who find no fault with what she did don't teach your kids to go around acting like she did...for their sakes...
*applauds*

The OP asked whether the victim would have been in the shoes of Zimmerman provided she "defended" herself using a pistol and killing the BG. In this case, probably so. It is challenging for the defense to argue you feared for your life when you did not have a problem initially confronting the eventual attackers. When you are concealed carrying, mind your business. Unless, true aggravated assaults/robberies are happening to you or in your presence.

Not saying "the common man" should be afraid, be wise.
by Valor
Wed May 23, 2012 5:36 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru
Replies: 59
Views: 5325

Re: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru

Mamabear, I do not disagree with one being able to protect herself. My angle is to point out that as CHL holders we are held to a higher standard. Although a solid punch to the face can be lethal, if it doesn't knock you to the ground causing "serious" injury and you draw your weapon and discharge injuring or killing the assailant, your attny will have a much harder defense case. Let's say the assailant charged you with a club, then all is fair in love(hate) and war.

And most prosecutors are about improving their conviction ratio, not being vindictive. If they find any internet postings or witnesses to state you are "trigger happy", there again, another challenge for your defense. Another reason why carrying less lethal tools for defense, in addition to side armor; can save lives, money and misery. Remember, the objective is to STOP a treat, not KILL the threat. Killing is often a byproduct of attempting to stop.
by Valor
Wed May 23, 2012 3:18 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru
Replies: 59
Views: 5325

Re: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru

Scott in Houston wrote:
Valor wrote:It is certainly an assault http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/22.01.00.html but I wouldn't be inclined to draw a weapon with the intent to discharge without it being an aggravated assault http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/22.01.00.html.
Really? If someone was beating on you, you wouldn't draw? I would definitely draw if they're approaching, and if anyone hits me while I'm sitting there, I'm defending myself. If they just throw grape soda and call me a 'whitey', I wouldn't shoot. Also, my window would sure as heck be closed.
In my haste, I posted the same statue twice. Here is aggravated assault http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/22.02.00.html the primary differences between the two are the use of a deadly weapon and serious bodily injury. Make note, I said draw with the intent to discharge. The woman only exhibited bruises and a mild laceration on the finger. Are you willing to go before a grand jury and have your counsel argue that "serious" bodily injury resulted without the exhibition of a deadly weapon, yet you required no stitches, fracture bones, nor a concussion?

My concern is that CHL and MPA begin "protecting" themselves with a gun against non-deadly force / aggravated assault threats arming (pun intended) antigun proponents with energy to attempt to repeal gun carrying rights.

Although I am in agreement with speedsix about not approaching someone over littering and it is not my property, I do not feel she instigated the attack. Keep in mind, as a CHL holder; we are required to steer away from provocations. Yes, in today’s society, speaking up can be provocation. A good prosecutor may be able to argue that the CHL only approached the gang of litterers because she was armed and not a good Samaritan.
by Valor
Tue May 22, 2012 8:35 pm
Forum: The Crime Blotter
Topic: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru
Replies: 59
Views: 5325

Re: Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru

It is certainly an assault http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/22.01.00.html but I wouldn't be inclined to draw a weapon with the intent to discharge without it being an aggravated assault http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/22.01.00.html.

Return to “Woman beaten inside her car at McDonald's drive thru”