(Thanks JB)
UPDATE: More details in the Sun story.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Quote of the Day
Anne Arundel judge Paul Harris dropped domestic violence charges against a man who punched a woman in the face in front of an officer because, he said, he couldn't be sure that she didn't consent to the beating. "'You have very rare cases. Sadomasichists sometimes like to be beat up,' he said."
(Thanks JB)
UPDATE: More details in the Sun story.
(Thanks JB)
UPDATE: More details in the Sun story.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Okay, this is my take on it. The judge errored based on the following statues:
§ 3-202. Assault in the first degree.
(a) Prohibited.-
(1) A person may not intentionally cause or attempt to cause serious physical injury to another.
and
§ 3-207. Dismissal of assault charge.
(a) Dismissal.- On a pretrial motion of the State, a court may dismiss a charge of assault if:
(1) the victim and the defendant agree to the dismissal; and
(2) the court considers the dismissal proper.
The first statue was met, an assualt did occur (even if an assualt is consensual, it's still an assualt).
The second statue though was not met. The victim did not SEEK a dismissal, which is required. The judge took it upon himself to be the representative of the victim instead of being the arbitrator of the law.
I can't wait to see the fall out from this knucklehead.
One variation of the crime of assault in Maryland is "unwanted touching." Thus, an element of the crime is that the touching was nonconsensual and/or undesired.
If you meet someone to fight, any touching you receive is consenual.
Typically, the State needs the victim to testify (1) that she was touched, and (2) she did not consent to the touch.
It's nearly impossible in many judge's eyes to prove the crime without the victim to say the touching was unwanted.
Many "assaults" are really mutual affrays, which are not really assualts. A mutual affray is a fight between two or more consenting parties. Mutual affray is a crime in Maryland, though rarely charged.
The way the report is written the police witnessed the assualt. The law does not state that the victim must press charges, only that a victim may request dismissal of assault charges and even then the court is not required to drop said charges.
Going by this precedent, if the police arrive in front of a bar and witness two individuals beating the crap out of each other, no crime is being committed unless one of them states that they are being assualted.
So, gang members who already live under the "Stop Snitching" creed don't even have to worry about having the police witness some of their activities as long as no one else says anything negative.
Triple-shooting on the 3200 block, Woodland in NW around 11:00 p.m. TH.
GOR:
One cannot be found guilty of assault without proof beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a touching and this touching was not wanted.
It is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to prove this without the testimony of the one who was touched.
Without testimony from the one who was touched, the judge or jury is just guessing whether or not the touching was consenual.
This "guessing" is not allowed in American courts.
Was it dismissed pretrial or on a MOJA?
I think it was probably the latter and the papers are just using the wrong terminology.
Post a Comment