In the context of this case, it can. The otherwise unlawful contact between the two is justified as self defense, an accident that happens while the victim is defending himself isn't a crime unless you can prove recklessness. You clearly misunderstood not only the scenario I was describing, but what Jayzers was saying. He was saying that he believes from a very quick preliminary glance over the facts that murder charges would be appropriate. If you had kept reading instead of composing this post before knowing what was said in the rest of the thread, you'd know that. You'd also see why I don't believe that to be the case. For a murder charge you have to prove that the victim "intended to cause serious bodily injury and committed an act that was clearly dangerous to human life and this act caused the death of an individual", given the facts, I don't think that would happen, but I understand where Jayzers was coming from when it comes to charging the victim with everything he could possibly be charged with in order to give the jury options.
The victim is the guy that was attacked by the drunk pisser. When you attack someone, you aren't a victim even if your intended victim defends themselves and you end up dead.
Thanks for admitting that in your reality, the person who ended up dead is not the "victim," a title which in your mind belongs to the guy who laid on top of another man and quite literally choked him to death. I love it when you show your delusion off.
It's not just "in my reality", that's how it works in any reality. Anyway, I'm fine with people like you throwing your credibility away by going to bat for people who attack others and end up picking the wrong person to assault.
I didn't "go to bat" for anyone, I just pointed out that the person who you seem to think is the "victim" here is the one who killed the other guy by choking him to death.
LOL sure you didn't. You are still suggesting that an attacker was a "victim" in a case as a result of their intended victim being able to fight off the attack. Also, it was more a case of smothering an attacker to death while trying to prevent them from continuing the attack until police got there, but you know, whatever way you feel like you have to frame it to make you going to bat for the attacker feel better. The facts are that the guy who you believe to be the "victim" would have have gone to jail for assault, public intoxication, and either indecent exposure or public urination depending on the specifics of how and exactly where he was urinating in the parking lot if he didn't die as a result of his intended victim restraining him.
No, I'm suggesting that the man who was choked to death was the victim of violence that resulted in his death. I didn't "go to bat" for anyone, why do you feel the need to lie in nearly every statement you write? And would have been alive today if "the victim" hadn't choked (or smothered, if that word is more to your liking) him to death.
I don't consider self defense to be violence. Sure, and he'd be alive today if he didn't get drunk, whip his dick out in public, and then assault someone who said something about it. When you attack someone, you give your intended victim the right to defend themselves and prevent you from continuing your attack if you die as a result of them attempting to prevent future attacks while waiting for the police, that's not a crime unless you can prove that they acted recklessly according to the legal definition of that word. I don't consider holding down a belligerent and violent drunk to be reckless unless you stay on top of them after they go limp. While it's tragic that the drunk pisser ended up dead, it's 100% his fault. He put himself in the position for the fluke incident to happen and he did so by committing multiple crimes
Violence is violence, whether self defense or not. He did. He stayed on top of the guy until he was limp and very nearly dead. None of which were worthy of being killed. Not one.
Let's just say we disagree on this point. Self defense is the prevention of violence especially in this example. Your reading comprehension strikes again, notice the difference between the words "until" and "after". This will be hard for you to comprehend I imagine, but those words mean vastly different things. And no one tried to kill him....hell they even tried to save the life of their attacker after they saw he was having a medical emergency as a result of being restrained.
Also, just for fun, a standard definition of the word "violence" is "Behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something." which doesn't really apply to self defense instances where the intent is to merely prevent the attacker from continuing their attack. Also, most legal definitions of the word require malice and intent to harm, injure, or kill. They wouldn't apply to self defense where a person is restrained but they could apply to some types of self defense.
Choking someone while laying on top of them is violent no matter the circumstance. There were people who saw him go limp and told the choker to get off of him minutes before he actually did. This is on video, no surprise you're ignoring reality. Choking =/= "restraining," there is a reason that police departments have banned the use of choke holds by their officers.
Violence is defined by the World Health Organization as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation," although the group acknowledges that the inclusion of "the use of power" in its definition expands on the conventional understanding of the word.[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence What you think is the "standard definition" simply isn't.
Based on the definition of what the word means, that's not true. Yeah, that's you not being in touch with reality again, there were people who told the intended victim to get off of the attacker minutes before he did, but that happened while the guy was still kicking and screaming.....meaning he wasn't "limp" A choke is absolutely part of several types of techniques intended to restrain a person. Also, we know that the guy wasn't really choking the guy from the start or it would have been over in a heartbeat. Honestly he should have legitimately choked him in order to induce unconsciousness in seconds that way he wouldn't have had to stay on top of him that long compressing his chest. Staying on top of him while he was kicking and screaming for 10 minutes is likely what caused the death. He was a heavy guy. I don't put much stock into definitions that essentially say the outcome can determine the description. You could be an old man having sex with your wife and if you had a heart attack and died in the middle of it then it would be considered violence by that ridiculous definition.
Except that you didn't provide a "definition," merely your opinion. You need to go look at the video again. Seconds? Seriously? Even the best submission artists in the UFC don't choke their opponents unconscious in "seconds." You don't put much stock into anything that doesn't agree with your opinion, even when your opinion is directly contradicted by every fact in evidence.
You seriously must love being wrong all the time. Yeah that's about what I would expect someone that knew absolutely nothing about what they were talking about to say. It takes only about 3 seconds for a person to lose consciousness if a rear naked choke is applied properly. The reason it appears to take longer in the UFC to those who don't know what is going on is that professional fighters are REALLY good at preventing other fighters from getting chokes locked in, but once they are, they lose consciousness in seconds just like anyone else.
https://www.click2houston.com/news/deliberations-continue-monday-in-terry-thompson-retrial Found guilty. Womp womp. Another L for Bobby.
It's a no brainer he was guilty it just shows you how Hpuston jurors are. This killer was running around loose like he was facing a traffic warrant, the special treatment he got was crazy
