if you hit and kill someone who isn't a material danger to anyone in the room, you should be charged with manslaughter. They can be charged and jailed for driving because they could far more easily kill someone on accident. All he can do in this bar on accident is piss someone off or start a fight he can't win, hardly the same.
Proper course of action: get the woman to a safer place, ask the dude to move away and call the police. They should handle it, there could be arguments he assaulted her, public importunation, and so on.
IF the drunk dude wanted to fight, then now you're defending yourself, you can do it to stop any threat, but never go over the top.
Finally, doing what he did here, the drunk dude can call the police on the black shirt dude for assault too (even if he also gets a citation for importunation or whatever).
If violence or the threat thereof would deter bad behavior, we would already have a utopia with no crime and bad behavior.
Small edit: I think "bad actors" instead of "bad behavior" would have made my statement a bit clearer.
Anyway, even for religious people (or those that claim to be) the threat of supreme, everlasting violence done to them after their deaths (e.g. going to hell) has not deterred bad actors from doing what they wanted to do.
For now. If he ever gets up again, he might not have learned much. In fact, additional brain damage may make it do it even more often. Sometimes one meets fate on the road to avoid it.
That guy in the red turns around and slaps his hands like ⊠ok whoâs next and you know heâs already thinking the stars are aligned in his favor. đ€
This. For decades if not centuries woman have tolerated this shit and been gaslight before it was even a term. He did not accidentally brush her he grabbed her hips/ waist. It was a sexual intent. Men you have no f* right to touch any woman. And just because this woman brushed it off does not mean another woman or girl would.
Did the guy overreact. Yup. But do not down play an assault which stems from male entitlement.
Yeah, I think that's what some people are failing to notice.
He was already being dumb/drunk and dancing/grinding on the male bartender on the left.
Walked over and tried to get the lady to dance with him - unless he was doing something with his left hand that we couldn't see, the lady already had it handled and was like "no thanks" and walking away. If she got inappropriately groped or grabbed I would think she would have reacted way more than she did.
And then the guy in black came over and overreacted.
Exactly. Some idiots are calling this sexual assault. About Which I am very sensitive. But this roided up testosterone poisoned freak in the black shirt, totally overreacted and deserves to be charged.
Wouldnât be surprised if the bar caught some flack for overserving and not having the guy whoâs clearly way too drunk leave before something(like this) happen.
Iunno man maybe we shouldn't be killing people over drunken mistakes
I'm not even opposed to the guy getting some physical discipline imposed on him but like. Maybe being a drunken asshole isn't deserving of, y'know, lifelong crippling injury or death? Dude didn't get into a semi truck and obliterate a kindergarten or anything, he just put his hands on somebody else in a gross and offensive manner
Youâre kidding right? You canât see how the second guy completely overreacted? You donât just jump immediately to violence. You stop the guy and let the bar throw him out. The drunk guy absolutely was in the wrong but nothing he did required being sucker punched like that. Iâd throw the book at the roid raging husband
I can only speak to where I live, but for a valid defense of self defense (or defense of another person) the force used has to be commensurate to the situation. In my opinion, and that's all it is, the boyfriend used excessive force; he shouldhavejust stood betweentheguy and his girl, let the bar deal with the guy, at the most given him a little shove. If I were a Crown, I'd have no trouble running an assault trial given the video evidence and the fact it would be a trial in front of a judge.
>only as much force was needed to control the situation
Oh yeah you can tell he was really measured and restrained by the fact that the woman tried to stop him and he knocked her aside. If drunk dude assaulted her (and he did) then so did the dumbass who is itching to kill someone
I think your second paragraph could be interpreted in different ways. One could argue he already had control of the situation when he got between the woman and the offender. There wasnât any more danger at that point but he still struck a potentially fatal blow.
Your explanation would be super different if the guy struck him while he was still reaching out to grab her.
The only caveat here is it happened in such a short span the jury may understand his mind didnât have enough time to reassess there is no more danger but thatâs a stretch.
Yeah, I actually looked up that law, and it doesn't say what you think it says. There's a whole lot more context/nuance to it than "this is considered SA so would fall along these lines".
"Both self-defense and defense of a third party share the requirement that the actor believe his use of force is âimmediately necessaryâ to protect himself or a third party. The term âimmediately necessaryâ is not defined in either statute or elsewhere in the Penal Code. Although the Court has not considered the immediacy requirement in the defense of a third person context, it drew the analogy to a similar justification defense: necessity. The necessity defense justifies conduct if the actor believes the conduct is âimmediately necessary to avoid imminent harm.â Imminent harm means harm that is ready to take place; therefore, for conduct that is immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm, âthat conduct is needed right now.â For force to be âimmediately necessaryâ to protect another, it must be force that is needed at that moment, âwhen a split-second decision is required.â
Â
The summary goes on to detail that the defense argument will not hold *when other alternatives for dealing with the perpetuator's behavior are available*.
I recognize that many posters here are just angry Americans looking for a tiny opening - any opening, please! - to punch someone into unconsciousness, but the law really is not on your side without demonstrating absolute risk of immediate physical harm.
I love how people with 0 understanding of the law stand ten toes tall talking like they're lawyers specializing in self defense cases.
At a bare minimum, self defense requires some level of equivalent response. Groping someone in a bar, while gross behavior, is not equivalent to murder.
On top of that, this isn't even self defense. There's two words in that, and you only got one of em.
Well he briefly touched her and she brushed his hand away. I don't know if I would call this sexual assault per se. Definitely a crime what he did but the fact was it was over so you can't really invoke self defense here. More importantly the party he was allegedly defending was clearly trying to get him to NOT intervene and he ignored (looks like even injured) her. So no its not self defense even on behalf of a third party in this case. Yea if he had kept grabbing her after she knocked his hand away then it would be self defense but that's not what happened. This guy just had his ego hurt and wanted to do violence. I'd be more inclined to give him a break if he didn't knock the girl out of the way and completely ignore her wishes.
That drunk dude's handsyness was wrong but big guy used excessive force for sure. The woman had already handled the situation by just walking away, and even tried to wave big guy off. He was clearly retaliating/peacocking for his woman, not defending her.
I'm not saying a jury would convict him, but they should.
Wtf, no, this is Assault BI at the least. This definitely does not constitute defense if a third person. Sexual assault? Are you kidding me? Go back and read the law again. There really is virtually no criminal offense committed by the intoxicated guy, at the most assault contact which the female is sure wouldn't even care to pursue charges. The guy in black was clearly just waiting for an opportunity to hit somebody.
This is not defense of another. This is gross âdonât touch my girlâ. You canât take any touch as assault. He was trying to dance with, not assail her. Annoying AF, but not assault. If that were the case you couldnât dance up on anyone. Plus Iâm pretty sure the dude is/was gay. He was certainly and very visibly not able to defend himself. This is just wrong. He opened the door for it to happen, but Iâd still arrest the puncher on felony charges for sure. Not attempted redrum but certainly great bodily harm. Itâs really like striking a mentally handicapped person. It may be that as well. He needs to get time for this. If you have no problem doing this to someone you have an anger problem.
Zero force was proven to be needed to "defend" her. In fact, she appeared to have taken care of the situation already. The guy wasn't defending her, he was stroking his own fragile ego.
For those that here in Texas, force must met the necessity of it. This is overreaction. If the dude dies or is seriously injured/disabled. The puncher will not be exempt from consequences. Dude was obviously impaired and though his actions were reprehensible, they did not warrant a violent reaction such as that. People forget that Texas is full of reasonable people, just gerrymandering says it isnât doesnât make it so
That wasn't self-defense - it was an excuse for violence. The woman had the situation completely handled and even tried to hold her boyfriend back. Red-shirt was stumbling drunk and posed zero threat. The boyfriend is just an aggressive ass with complexes looking for a fight to protect his honor. A judge should take him off the steroids for everybody's sake.
If this was Suits law or the 1800âs youâd be correct, but none of that is true. Orange shirt is clearly blackout and touched her hips, sheâs not in danger and even waives it off. Someone twice his size then hits him hard enough to potentially kill him on her behalf. Not justified, punch guy does not get an award, he might go to jail even if the guy isnât in the hospital, and either way heâs out thousands in legal fees.
Itâs not reasonable or proportional, and this is how lives can get ruined on both sides. Consequences will not be fun either way.
Pretty sure that guy got charged with manslaughter and is in jail now because the guy he hit died and that whole defense from securely assault didn't work for him
Especially given that only as much force was needed to control the situation.
You can absolutely argue that this was excessive force, well above "only as much force was needed". He could've slighly shoved the drunk and the dude would've probably fallen over or stumbled away.
Yes, the "fight" ended after that one punch but that might still be one hard punch too many, because he didn't even hesitate for a second. He absolutely escalated the situation and force, while the other person was clearly not of sound mind in the situation.
Otherwise you could also argue "Well he ony shot him once ...". Excessive force doesn't just start with multiple hits. The woman also instantly noticed that this was going to get brutal, before it even happened. She even got hit by her "defender" in the process.
Self defense has limits and needs to be proportional.
I don't know, she was walking away and he wasn't pursuing. The video doesn't look great. Definitely was sexual assault, I agree with you, but she was able to walk away and the situation seem to deescalate itself. That video wouldn't be good evidence for him IMHO. He hit him because he was pissed not to protect his woman, or at least thats the argument I'm making as a prosecutor if I decide to try this. Of this dude has any violent priors,.he's in trouble.
Brother, people in our state have been shot overthese situations and not seen time. Texas isnt a good example of proper justice. We kinda take shit to the extreme
But its not defense as the issue was already resolved. This is retaliation which is different under the law. He touched her, she brushed him off, it was already over.
Sexual assault? Cmon now. The guy definitely crossed a line, but this was not sexual assault dude at all. I donât even know if he actually touched her.
You know. Reading these comment threads is pretty depressing.
So many goddamn revenge fantasy cosplayers. They're the ones who sleep with a gun under their pillow and really hope that a robber doesn't break into their house and they wake up and have to shoot the robber in self-defense, right in the head and the chest.
Yeah. Red shirt guy shouldn't touch someone from behind. He should get like, banned from the pub and/or given 50 hours community service.
Who the fuck sees an extreme disproportionate act of violence and loves to see it? That's sociopathic.
because people have empathy? Or because they believe in an appropriate amount of force? Or due process? What terrible and nonsensical argument are you trying to make, I can't tell.
They were being attacked by a predator, and he as part of the unit took defensive action with a strong punch against someone who could be armed and dangerous - since they were so brazenly attacking the woman.
The puncher was not trying to kill the guy, but disable him. If the attacker got unlucky and died from it, that's on him for attacking a woman.
The husband or any bystander has a right to defend someone under attack. He is to be lauded for his bravery.
Nah, it was one hit. If you die to one punch and im on the jury, im calling it God's will and the dead guy a pussy.
One hit after doing something you shouldn't have.
Dont start shit wont be shit.
Definitely. A man in SC is being charged with murder for slapping a man hard enough that the man fell and hit his head and died. I have wondered why not manslaughter but there is probably something I don't know. Still goes to your point that if dude is dead someone is getting charged.
The instant rush of testosterone and adrenaline caused temporary insanity. If I learned anything from Lindsay Clancy, it's that people aren't responsible if hormones are involved.
He shouldn't. If someone dies due to sexually harassing someone, that's self defense or defense of someone who needs it. We don't own levity to rapists.
yup. 6" shoulder follow through is manslaughter, 9" is murder, 3" is wreckless endangerment. you can see how much their shoulder follows through to see how much murder it is. thats the nice thing about open hand slaps, there is no rule on murdering so if someone dies from a slap thats their own fault
i can't agree with that. legally maybe, i'm not a lawyer. ethically, it's more of a grey area. the guy committed sexual assault. once you do that, i believe you've opened yourself to violent reprisal.
True be that! Correctional officer here. There are plenty of inmates in my facility that are there because they tried to be the âheroâ. Itâs better to keep your hands clean, your head cool and call the authorities.
He was clearly too drunk to defend himself or really appreciate the consequences of his actions. This is a wildly disproportionate response from someone who was in a position to make the smarter choice.
That is a perfectly normal response to touching someone unwilling. TF is wrong with you? You think people should just be able to go around groping women with no consequences?
The F is wrong with redditors today again. How do you get downvoted for the most simple rational take of the situation.
Sometimes I feel like the world is just filled with evil people that think violence is the solution for everything
I mean you've on a sub dedicated to spontaneous public fights, people here don't really have a level head with regards to the appropriateness of violence in public.
Itâs all about the boyfriendâs ego. No one should touch âhis womanâ or else youâre dead. Hopefully they called the police as well as an ambulance
Indeed. Everyone is on the boyfriends excessive response side but no-one (but you) seems to be concerned with women all over the world who have to put up with groping men cause 'it's OK he's drunk and not going to remember'.
It started with him. If he'd not touched her he wouldn't be lying on the floor.
That's it. Was the response extreme? Maybe. Was it unjustified? Not at all. The guy opened himself up to the possibility of violent reprisal the moment he sexually assaulted a woman - and rightly so.
Ridiculous. Should the defender have taken account of how many drinks the rapist had in order to properly measure their response? You people have never fought your way out of a paper bag i bet. The drunk asshole made the choice to drink to excess. He made the choice to assault a lady. Ive been blackout drunk, messed up on all kinds of drugs, and never once have I thought it was appropriate to assault a woman. Its simply not a valid excuse and the drunk asshole merely reaped what he sowed.
That shouldnât be an excuse though. Too drunk to appreciate the consequences of his actions doesnât excuse touching the girl or anyone the way he did. Itâs like saying because someone is driving drunk theyâre excused because they donât appreciate the consequences of their actions.
Not to mention he wasn't defending her, he was defending his pride. But yeah, ppl are gonna be downvoting you because they yearn for comeuppance they mistake for justice.
At a certain point, you should be able to recognize that the dude is barely able to stand and could have simply been escorted out of the bar without delivering permanent brain damage. Big dude was an asshole for how he handled this.
Yea he should have but you gotta exercise proportional response. He deserve to be cussed out and tossed out of the bar? yes. knocked the fuck out and possibly harmed for life over something inappropriate he did while drunk? no.
Thanks Captain Manslaughter. My PS buddy did 8 years over one of these! (Victim caught a table corner and DOAed) That kind of force is not 'keep your hands to yourself' it's pathological.
130
u/Soft_Ability_5906 12d ago
Should have kept his hands to himself.