Support NeoGAF

[DY_nasty]

What hardline do you think I made?

Punches can kill someone. When they do, especially if the punch was unprovoked, I believe that it should be punished appropriately, regardless of whether or not the puncher was dumb enough not to realize the punch could kill.

Think I had you and computer confused since I initially quoted him then.

K.

Its just that generally speaking a single punch is not and will not be considered a deadly assault (by itself) unless they're coming from a trained or substantially strong individual. Punches are not thrown with the intent to kill - nor are they thrown to cause what many would consider to be significant bodily harm (because that's subjective and ...yeah, it takes convincing when there isn't anything larger than a black eye).

I just feel a second degree murder charge here would be the same as slapping the kid on the wrist. There's no way he'd get convicted for it. Aggravated assault, manslaughter, etc though? Sure.

 

[Rocket Scientist]

WTF? What does a poke have to do with anything? Someone punched a person in anger that resulted in their death.

He compared jogging to punching someone in the face to hurt them.

 

[Space Avocat]

Yes in fact there are certain acts that are recognized as adequate provocation and those that aren't. Me walking in on you fucking my wife would be considered adequate provocation in every jurisdiction. You calling me an idiot would never be.

Not every jurisdiction.

(b) Spousal adultery not a mitigating factor.- The discovery of one's spouse engaged in sexual intercourse with another does not constitute legally adequate provocation for the purpose of mitigating a killing from the crime of murder to voluntary manslaughter even though the killing was provoked by that discovery.

http://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/2010/criminal-law/title-2/subtitle-2/2-207/

 

[rexor0717]

25 years, 13 with good behavior. He's gotta learn.

Seriously. He just punched a guy, and while its really sad what happened, no one would have guessed that the dude would have died.

 

[syllogism]

I think punching an old person or baby is probably more serious than punching a 20 year old, but think an unprovoked punch resulting in death on anyone should be seriously punished by prison time.

It's an assault so certainly. What I, and presumably other people arguing a similar position , am suggesting is that the fact the act caused a death is less relevant than the inherent risk involved and the foreseeability of the consequence.

 

[Sorian]

People like me? Do you think the victim's family doesn't deserve justice? Should they let this slide because the kid was 'angry' in the heat of the moment? Tell me what you would tell the victim's family.

That this is a case of manslaughter, possibly voluntary and possibly involuntary. It is not a murder charge though and the boy will not be tried for murder in this case.

You seem to think we need to make the punishment worse to appease the family or something. It is unfortunate and my condolences go out to them but that is about it. We don't have a law system in place for revenge.

 

[Dude Abides]

Missouri state law.


So the knockout game which purpose is to cause enough harm to knock somebody out had nothing to do with charging him with 2nd degree murder.

The punch has the purpose to cause harm. It has nothing to do with whether the punch was part of the "knockout game" or because the guy stepped on his sneakers. You punch someone, you have the intent to cause them serious harm because you are presumed to intend the reasonably foreseeable consequences of your actions.

It's funny that you say something would never be seen as provocation when a trial like this would hinge on discretion, specifically the discretion of the jury. To this kid, a soccer game could be more important than someone else fucking his wife. Is that a stretch? Of course but people do get heated at different things. Everyone has their limit and their things that push the limit faster than others. Assuming he doesn't have or did not have anger issues and was perfectly normal when it came to that limit then I still don't see how its so impossible to see this as a heat of the moment case.

The law uses a "reasonable person" objective standard, so "people do get heated at different things" doesn't matter. It is not legally relevant if this particular kid happened to have short fuse. The question is whether a reasonable person would consider getting a yellow card in a rec league soccer game sufficiently enraging that they would lose control and hit someone. Good luck convincing a jury of that.

 

[Shahadan]

I want to punch many people in this thread, am I a mass murderer?

 

[Angry Fork]

I don't feel like searching the complete thread, but it would be swell if you could provide a round up of all the people that posted something to this effect. I would like to examine them.

On the first page I counted 3 people on the 'infinite vengeance' side of the argument.

WTF? What does a poke have to do with anything? Someone punched a person in anger that resulted in their death.

He's arguing everyone should recognize once they throw a punch, there is a possibility of death occurring, therefore if they do cause death, they should get the full weight of the law thrown at them.

I'm saying there is a small possibility of death everywhere, you would have to do nothing if you wanted to remain 100% safe. Punching someone to settle a verbal dispute is wrong but I'm not defending that, I'm saying ruining someone's life over an accident that had a small chance of occurring is wasteful/excessive and unnecessary.

He compared jogging to punching someone in the face to hurt them.

Going out to jog = there is a small possibility you could trip fall hit your head and die.
Punching someone = there is a small possibility they can die.

Joggers don't even think about this small possibility because it's so unlikely to happen, and when you punch someone you also ignore that small possibility because fights are so common and nothing serious happens.

Why is this so hard to get.

If it makes it any better replace jogging with shoving someone, or poking them. Forget I ever said the jogging shit. Everything has a small possibility of death through some random final destination-like scenario.

 

[Camp Lo]

People like me? Do you think the victim's family doesn't deserve justice? Should they let this slide because the kid was 'angry' in the heat of the moment? Tell me what you would tell the victim's family.

Well in the heat of the moment, they might have this kid doing life than years go by and the incident is almost forgotten by the family, he will still be in jail. That's not justice to me.

 

[DY_nasty]

Angry Fork

bro

 

[EleventhDoctor]

Going out to jog = there is a small possibility you could trip fall hit your head and die.
Punching someone = there is a small possibility they can die.

Joggers don't even think about this small possibility because it's so unlikely to happen, and when you punch someone you also ignore that small possibility because fights are so common and nothing serious happens.

Forget I ever said the jogging shit. Everything has a small possibility of death

Yeah, about that.

 

[Sorian]

The law uses a "reasonable person" objective standard, so "people do get heated at different things" doesn't matter. It is not legally relevant if this particular kid happened to have short fuse. The question is whether a reasonable person would consider getting a yellow card in a rec league soccer game sufficiently enraging that they would lose control and hit someone. Good luck convincing a jury of that.

You say convicing a jury of that would be hard but then there are plenty of dads around the country who punch another dad at a little league game or pop warner football game when one dad says the other dad's kid sucks. A "reasonable person" could easily relate in some capacity.

 

[Camp Lo]

Joggers don't even think about this small possibility because it's so unlikely to happen, and when you punch someone you also ignore that small possibility because fights are so common and nothing serious happens

Dunno how many fights you've been in but all of mine result in broken or fractured fingers/hands and hospital visits.

 

[Count Dookkake]

You say convicing a jury of that would be hard but then there are plenty of dads around the country who punch another dad at a little league game or pop warner football game when one dad says the other dad's kid sucks. A "reasonable person" could easily relate in some capacity.

Yes, other criminals would probably be a bit more sympathetic.

 

[Angry Fork]

Yeah, about that.

I was comparing the small possibility of death occurring in both actions. Literally nothing else.

Why is that crazy. You still haven't explained.

 

[Sorian]

Yes, other criminals would probably be a bit more sympathetic.

Yes, because accidents and emotional bursts are what breed the lowest filthy criminals.

 

[EleventhDoctor]

I was comparing the small possibility of death occurring in both actions. Literally nothing else.

Why is that crazy. You still haven't explained.

I'm saying we should lock up the pothole that caused the jogger to trip and fall

 

[Sorian]

I'm saying we should lock up the pothole that caused the jogger to trip and fall

With or without parole?

 

[Count Dookkake]

Yes, because accidents and emotional bursts are what breed the lowest filthy criminals.

I don't know if they are the lowest or if they are filthy, but grown men who hit others over the officiating at a children's game are criminals.

 

[UnluckyKate]

Soccer is a gentleman's sport played by thugs.
Rugby is a thug's sport played by gentlemen.

:'(

 

[EleventhDoctor]

With or without parole?

It depends on if the pothole had a legitimate reason. Everyone gets upset every now and then.

 

[Dude Abides]

You say convicing a jury of that would be hard but then there are plenty of dads around the country who punch another dad at a little league game or pop warner football game when one dad says the other dad's kid sucks. A "reasonable person" could easily relate in some capacity.

Ok. Others can decide if they think your argument that angry little league fathers should set the standard of reasonable behavior is convincing. I don't.

 

[Sorian]

I don't know if they are the lowest or if they are filthy, but grown men who hit others over the officiating at a children's game are criminals.

I'm sure you are a criminal in some way as well if we are going to allow every little offense to dictate what we call you for the rest of your life.

 

[Angry Fork]

I'm saying we should lock up the pothole that caused the jogger to trip and fall

What are you talking about. You people keep arguing completely different shit to what I'm saying.

 

[Count Dookkake]

I'm sure you are a criminal in some way as well if we are going to allow every little offense to dictate what we call you for the rest of your life.

lol.

"WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES?" isn't a valid rebuttal.

Try again.

 

[empty vessel]

25 years, 13 with good behavior. He's gotta learn.

I think that's even excessive. A person doesn't need 13 years in prison to learn from a mistake.

lol.

"WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES?" isn't a valid rebuttal.

Try again.

It kind of is if your only point is to use a particular word ("criminal") to characterize a person's entire being.

 

[Sorian]

Ok. Others can decide if they think your argument that angry little league fathers should set the standard of reasonable behavior is convincing. I don't.

It is stupid behavior but it is just an example. Everyone does something stupid at one time or another. Is it really right to judge someone so harshly just because they happened to do it the one time and get unlucky? You should be punished for the actions you've done. This resulted in death so he should be charged for a little more thna just assult but not full-on murder or anything. With that being said, have you made your stance clear Mr. Law Degree? What should he be charged with in your expert opinion.

 

[Space Avocat]

He's arguing everyone should recognize once they throw a punch, there is a possibility of death occurring, therefore if they do cause death, they should get the full weight of the law thrown at them.

I'm saying there is a small possibility of death everywhere, you would have to do nothing if you wanted to remain 100% safe. .

It seems like you guys are just arguing where to draw the line. S/he draws the line before intentionally punching someone in the head, and you after.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Life for punching a guy in a fit of passion, seriously?

 

[Angry Fork]

It depends on if the pothole had a legitimate reason. Everyone gets upset every now and then.

I have never defended the punch. I have only said the death was an accident and the person's life shouldn't be ruined for it or spend dozens of years in prison over something like this. I was arguing against the person who wanted the book thrown at him, whoever said life without parole etc.

 

[Sorian]

lol.

"WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES?" isn't a valid rebuttal.

Try again.

I don't need to try again, my stance has been and continues to be that he should be tried for manslaughter, nothing more, nothing less. That does make him a criminal but it isn't what some of the lynch mob here wants. You haven't offered a rebuttal to my original claim so any response I have given to you in this thread is out of the goodness of my heart at trying to explain my ideas more.

 

[empty vessel]

It is stupid behavior but it is just an example. Everyone does something stupid at one time or another. Is it really right to judge someone so harshly just because they happened to do it the one time and get unlucky? You should be punished for the actions you've done. This resulted in death so he should be charged for a little more thna just assult but not full-on murder or anything. With that being said, have you made your stance clear Mr. Law Degree? What should he be charged with in your expert opinion.

You don't need to worry about what he is charged with so much as you do with what sentence he receives. If his actions fit the technical definition of a crime as spelled out in legislation, then he has committed that crime. The sentencing options for that crime should be broad enough to accommodate the range of aggravating and mitigating circumstances that can accompany the technical commission of that crime.

 

[xbhaskarx]

All the amateur lawyering in this thread is making my head hurt...

 

[Count Dookkake]

It kind of is if your only point is to use a particular word ("criminal") to characterize a person's entire being.

I did not do that. Perhaps you are confused.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

This shows that you can't just go throwing punches at people just because you feel like it

 

[Dude Abides]

It is stupid behavior but it is just an example. Everyone does something stupid at one time or another. Is it really right to judge someone so harshly just because they happened to do it the one time and get unlucky? You should be punished for the actions you've done. This resulted in death so he should be charged for a little more thna just assult but not full-on murder or anything. With that being said, have you made your stance clear Mr. Law Degree? What should he be charged with in your expert opinion.

I think three to five years is appropriate. Plus he should be charged as a juvenile, since that's what he is.

Recall that my first post was only to correct people who were making incorrect assertions like "no intent to kill, no murder." Don't get snippy with me for pointing out your mistakes.

 

[Sorian]

I did not do that. Perhaps you are confused.

I don't know if they are the lowest or if they are filthy, but grown men who hit others over the officiating at a children's game are criminals.

Hmm....?

 

[Count Dookkake]

Hmm....?

lol.

Read better.

Instead of trying and failing to point out some hypocrisy on my part, put more effort into framing your arguments.

 

[Sorian]

You don't need to worry about what he is charged with so much as you do with what sentence he receives. If his actions fit the technical definition of a crime as spelled out in legislation, then he has committed that crime. The sentencing options for that crime should be broad enough to accommodate the range of aggravating and mitigating circumstances that can accompany the technical commission of that crime.

Actually the charges matter a lot. You are right, to an extent but then there are some charges that further break down the range of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. First degree and second degree murder for example already address some of those circumstances.

I think three to five years is appropriate. Plus he should be charged as a juvenile, since that's what he is.

Recall that my first post was only to correct people who were making incorrect assertions like "no intent to kill, no murder." Don't get snippy with me for pointing out your mistakes.

It would appear that the source of our debate stemmed from you believe manslaughter to be murder when I do not? Is that right? Can't really call that a mistake on my part. Legal definitions and all that.

 

[Loofy]

If he punched him but the ref lived would it be considered attempted murder?
If not then it cant be considered murder.

 

[Sorian]

lol.

Read better.

Instead of trying and failing to point out some hypocrisy on my part, put more effort into framing your arguments.

I'm not pointing out hypocrisy, I'm pointing out your arguments that have no place in this thread and are not moving conversation along.

Edit: Which is partially my fault. I should have responded to you in the first place since you didn't really try to pick a part anything I said in a way that mattered with this specific case.

 

[Count Dookkake]

I'm not pointing out hypocrisy, I'm pointing out your arguments that have no place in this thread and are not moving conversation along.

Uh-huh.

You'll have to do better than "WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES?"

Edit: Which is partially my fault. I should have responded to you in the first place since you didn't really try to pick a part anything I said in a way that mattered with this specific case.

lol. I just wanted to make sure you realized that people who hit others over children's games are in fact criminals, because it sounded like you did not understand that.

 

[Dude Abides]

It would appear that the source of our debate stemmed from you believe manslaughter to be murder when I do not? Is that right? Can't really call that a mistake on my part. Legal definitions and all that.

No, the source of our debate is that you didn't understand the difference. Hopefully our discussion has given you a better grasp of those terms.

 

[Prime crotch]

25 years, 13 with good behavior. He's gotta learn.

The fuck is he going to learn in prison? How to get your life ruined in two quicksteps?

 

[Sorian]

No, the source of our debate is that you don't understand the difference. Hopefully our discussion has given you a better grasp of those terms.

That's a nice claim. Care to point out an example of where I didn't understand the difference?

 

[Dude Abides]

That's a nice claim. Care to point out an example of where I didn't understand the difference?

I just spent a whole page explaining it to you. Punching someone and killing them can be charged and proven as murder 2. Getting a yellow card is not adequate provocation to reduce it to manslaughter.

 

[Rocket Scientist]

On the first page I counted 3 people on the 'infinite vengeance' side of the argument.

Name and shame away. Especially the people you've been arguing with. Let's see their crazy views.

If it makes it any better replace jogging with shoving someone, or poking them.

You have to make it a lot better to get out of the jogging pothole.

 

[JMizzlin]

God damn it, don't fucking punch people!

 

[Sorian]

I just spent a whole page explaining it to you. Punching someone and killing them can be charged and proven as murder 2. Getting a yellow card is not adequate provocation to reduce it to manslaughter.

I'm sure if we dug hard enough we could find a case where someone punched and killed someone accidently and it got charged and proven as murder 1. The outliers tend to not matter. The fact of the matter is, you claim that I didn't understand the terminology difference between manslaughter and murder. Unless you are going to prove that with something concrete, here is your opportunity to drop the what-ifs and we can get back to discussing the situation presented in this thread.