Dropped Charges

[cassanova]

I just got a letter from the state stating:

"Please be advised that an investigation has been conducted by law enforcement in the above-styled case and it has been determined that the facts and circumstances as presented do not warrant prosecution at this time."

I suppose I can now tell everyone what actually happened.

He was yelling at people and threatening them. I told him to stop, he threatened to "bash my god damn skull in with this chair." As I was turned around to see what was going on, I saw him picking up the chair, so I stepped into him and grabbed him by the shirt. This closes the gap and prevents him from being able to hit me with the chair.

I'm still a bit perplexed on how I wind up getting arrested for self defense, but oh well, the important thing is that the charges were dropped. Now, I have to find a way to get the arrest off my record because it was clearly a bogus arrest.

[Joe Nerve]

I missed part 1, but happy you're off the hook.

[MJ5150]

Maybe because you initiated physical contact without an assault actually occurring, just what you thought would be an assault? Perhaps you should have let him hit you with the chair once, then grabbed him? I'm not defending your pop here, just looking at it from an outside viewpoint.

-Mike

[bassteban]

The way I see it(that is to say dimly at best), the law would prefer that dude actually hit you before you touched him- perhaps he's a habitual liar & never planned on actually hitting you w/said chair..? As thickly-layered w/BS as that sounds, I think we've all seen more asinine possibilities argued in court. Glad you're off that hook, hope you get the arrest erased.

[Craig_S]

Good thing you only grabbed his shirt. He might have been swallowing teeth in a different situation.

[Pilgrim]

Better to have this problem than be in the hospital with a fractured skull or broken ribs from being bashed with a chair.

Those breakaway chairs only exist in movies. Real ones hurt.

[Thunderscreech]

That's basically saying "your case is not worth our time because there isn't really any profit we can make out of it."

Often they do that just because of "due process", so the records show that process was followed if it ever comes up again. Beuracracy is a strange animal.

[mid_life_crisis]

Some of our states are truly messed up.
I'm in NC.
My wife was at her (then 9 year old) son's baseball game and her ex lost it. Screaming at the kid about how he sucked, etc. The kid is cowering behind her while she uses one hand to hold off the ex and is talking to the police dispatcher on her cell with the other.
When the cops finally showed up, because she touched him (clearly in self defense and defense of her child) they were supposed to both spend the night in jail. They let her take her son in the car and follow them to the station and on the way the ex let his butt overload his mouth and wouldn't shut up. The police pressed charges against him themselves and let her go, but until he showed his true colors in the squad car, the cops were adamant that the law is the law and both of them were staying in a cell that night.
What do they expect you to do? Stand there and get beaten?
"It takes two to fight" is bs, and we all knew it back in grade school the first time we heard it. If only one person is swinging, it isn't a fight, it's a beating.

[cassanova]

Originally Posted by mid_life_crisis

Some of our states are truly messed up.
I'm in NC.
My wife was at her (then 9 year old) son's baseball game and her ex lost it. Screaming at the kid about how he sucked, etc. The kid is cowering behind her while she uses one hand to hold off the ex and is talking to the police dispatcher on her cell with the other.
When the cops finally showed up, because she touched him (clearly in self defense and defense of her child) they were supposed to both spend the night in jail. They let her take her son in the car and follow them to the station and on the way the ex let his butt overload his mouth and wouldn't shut up. The police pressed charges against him themselves and let her go, but until he showed his true colors in the squad car, the cops were adamant that the law is the law and both of them were staying in a cell that night.
What do they expect you to do? Stand there and get beaten?
"It takes two to fight" is bs, and we all knew it back in grade school the first time we heard it. If only one person is swinging, it isn't a fight, it's a beating.

The problem won't change until the model for domestic violence is changed. Most, if not all states follow the Duluth model for domestic violence. From what I know of the model (from having to counsel a batterers intervention group), the model more or less sums up that it's never the victims fault for being hit. All the blame is placed on the batterer, because they feel the person that does the hitting makes a conscious decision to hit the victim. In general, I agree with that, but it doesn't take into account things like self-defense.

There were many guys in the group that I counseled that would state things like "she started hitting me, so I grabbed her and tossed her off me." It wasn't until I was arrested for this that I thought, "maybe, a lot of them were actually telling the truth."

Your story sounds a bit similar to mine. I was told (post arrest) by the 2 officers, that "you both should be arrested for this and both going to jail." They never did answer me when I asked "why aren't you arresting him then too?"

[cassanova]

Originally Posted by MJ5150

Maybe because you initiated physical contact without an assault actually occurring, just what you thought would be an assault? Perhaps you should have let him hit you with the chair once, then grabbed him? I'm not defending your pop here, just looking at it from an outside viewpoint.

-Mike

I talked to a few cop friend's of mine online and that's exactly what they said. I was the one that initiated the physical contact. "Because you were about 3 feet away from him, they said the law sees it as I could've walked/ran down the hall away from the situation."

They also explained that they don't care if the chair/weapon was cocked and at the ready. So I would have to agree, that the law states they want you to get hurt before defending yourself. It's complete bullcrap.

[MJ5150]

Frustrating indeed. I am sorry you had to be drug through all of this. I'm not sure what it means to you that I am sorry it happened, but I am.

-Mike

[cassanova]

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

Better to have this problem than be in the hospital with a fractured skull or broken ribs from being bashed with a chair.

Those breakaway chairs only exist in movies. Real ones hurt.

I'm not so sure anymore. I'm not so sure about that anymore. I've had a few interviews since the arrest and every single one of them wanted details about what happened that night. I've got letters of recommendation out the wazoo stating that I'm an asset to the field, experience within the field, yet for some reason, I'm not getting hired. I can't help but wonder if the arrest has a lot to do with that.

[NateS]

As someone who lurked in all of your threads on the matter, I'm glad that everything worked out.

[sleepytime]

And it's surprising that many people have no respect for politicians, lawyers, judges and cops? Any system that takes away the right to self-defense is corrupt to the core.

[MJ5150]

Originally Posted by sleepytime

Any system that takes away the right to self-defense is corrupt to the core.

Well, in this case, it isn't like that. A verbal threat was made. No weapon was held in a menacing manner, although it appeared that a chair was about to be used as a weapon. So physical contact was initiated on the threat of physical violence. I think that is why we ended up where we are today.

Had the chair been swung in a menacing manner, or even initiated contact, then it would have been permissible (as I understand the law) to grab the attacker to subdue them.

-Mike

[jmattbassplaya]

Originally Posted by MJ5150

Well, in this case, it isn't like that. A verbal threat was made. No weapon was held in a menacing manner, although it appeared that a chair was about to be used as a weapon. So physical contact was initiated on the threat of physical violence. I think that is why we ended up where we are today.

Had the chair been swung in a menacing manner, or even initiated contact, then it would have been permissible (as I understand the law) to grab the attacker to subdue them.

-Mike

I have to disagree with this. The man made a threat to beat him with a chair,proceeded to pick up a chair, and then put said chair in a position that would allow him to swing it. While my opinion doesn't necessarily reflect the law, I would not of hesitated to defend myself once the aggressor had gotten that far in fulfilling his threat.

[MJ5150]

Originally Posted by jmattbassplaya

......and then put said chair in a position that would allow him to swing it.

I did not read that in the first post. As I said, not defending anyones actions here, but there is a fine line to walk when protecting yourself from a perceived threat of physical harm.

-Mike

[LiquidMidnight]

Originally Posted by mid_life_crisis

What do they expect you to do? Stand there and get beaten?
"It takes two to fight" is bs, and we all knew it back in grade school the first time we heard it. If only one person is swinging, it isn't a fight, it's a beating.

Quit this using common sense thing that you're doing here.

[jmattbassplaya]

Originally Posted by MJ5150

I did not read that in the first post. As I said, not defending anyones actions here, but there is a fine line to walk when protecting yourself from a perceived threat of physical harm.

-Mike

You seem to be right. I thought I read that in this thread somewhere, though. Either way, I still would of defended myself once he grabbed a chair.

[MJ5150]

Originally Posted by jmattbassplaya

Either way, I still would of defended myself once he grabbed a chair.

I hear ya bro. It would most likely be my first instinct as well, but as we have seen, not a good idea.

-Mike