Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

mattyrm wrote:When am I ever going to need to sword fight anyway!?

That's what all the 40K tank commanders said.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

youbedead wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

I'm off to work now, go post that weiner dog firing fireworks at people some more, wouldya?

Actually in the court system eyewitness testimony is often placed above fact or hard evidence, so yes someones word is more then enough to send someone to jail, thats how most rape cases (false or real) are convicted.

Fraz I know that if this were to ever actually happen that it would be unlikely to be convicted, I was just pointing that technically you are not legally justified to do it. But as we both know, actual legality /= what actually happens

But if you have two eyewitnesses both offering conflicting accounts then you need more evidence to disprove one side.

youbedead wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

I'm off to work now, go post that weiner dog firing fireworks at people some more, wouldya?

Actually in the court system eyewitness testimony is often placed above fact or hard evidence, so yes someones word is more then enough to send someone to jail, thats how most rape cases (false or real) are convicted.

Fraz I know that if this were to ever actually happen that it would be unlikely to be convicted, I was just pointing that technically you are not legally justified to do it. But as we both know, actual legality /= what actually happens

Thats my point. Legally the black belt chick IS JUSTIFIED in using force to defned against harmful or offensive touching. Its classic self defense.

Which in no way resembles this:
Drunken fratboy: grope
Karate Chick with issues: Now you die.
Drunken fratboy: wa...
Karate Chick with issues rips out his spleen.
Crowd: Finish Him!
Karate Chick with issues rips out spine.
Crowd: Maximum Fatality!

Frazzled wrote:

youbedead wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

I'm off to work now, go post that weiner dog firing fireworks at people some more, wouldya?

Actually in the court system eyewitness testimony is often placed above fact or hard evidence, so yes someones word is more then enough to send someone to jail, thats how most rape cases (false or real) are convicted.

Fraz I know that if this were to ever actually happen that it would be unlikely to be convicted, I was just pointing that technically you are not legally justified to do it. But as we both know, actual legality /= what actually happens

Thats my point. Legally the black belt chick IS JUSTIFIED in using force to defned against harmful or offensive touching. Its classic self defense.

Which in no way resembles this:
Drunken fratboy: grope
Karate Chick with issues: Now you die.
Drunken fratboy: wa...
Karate Chick with issues rips out his spleen.
Crowd: Finish Him!
Karate Chick with issues rips out spine.
Crowd: Maximum Fatality!

Did you not read my posts then, yes she can you use force, it is a matter of how much force. But serious question, is matty, in his example, justified in punching the chick in the face hard enought to knock her out, or break her jaw, or something similar. Is a woman justified in doing the same thing to a man who gropes her.

Youbedead, the defendant is allowed to be an eyewitness to his own case?

MrDwhitey wrote:Youbedead, the defendant is allowed to be an eyewitness to his own case?

Don't see why not. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

MrDwhitey wrote:Youbedead, the defendant is allowed to be an eyewitness to his own case?

Check my post on the previous page. The defendent is not only allowed to be a witness, but can act as his own lawyer and question the accuser.

Wow. The hammer guy in your anecdote is stupid as feth.

MrDwhitey wrote:Wow. The hammer guy in your anecdote is stupid as feth.

My friend is really good with the way he can get people to trip up and admit things. This wasn't his first time in court. Once he got challanged as he was walking along with his 2 year old on his shoulders. He put his son down, thumped the guy in a one punch fight picked his boy back up, and went on his way as his assailent lay on the sidewalk.
In that trial, he simply told the judge he didn't hit the guy until after he put his son down.
The judge , upon hearing that my bud was carrying a child when he was attacked, threw out the case and layed into the plaintiff

MrDwhitey wrote:Youbedead, the defendant is allowed to be an eyewitness to his own case?

Yep, in fact testimony is the only form of evidence that doesn't require another form of evidence to be permitted. In a court someone saying that it rained holds more weight then a meteoroligical report saying it didn't rain.

youbedead wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

youbedead wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

I'm off to work now, go post that weiner dog firing fireworks at people some more, wouldya?

Actually in the court system eyewitness testimony is often placed above fact or hard evidence, so yes someones word is more then enough to send someone to jail, thats how most rape cases (false or real) are convicted.

Fraz I know that if this were to ever actually happen that it would be unlikely to be convicted, I was just pointing that technically you are not legally justified to do it. But as we both know, actual legality /= what actually happens

Thats my point. Legally the black belt chick IS JUSTIFIED in using force to defned against harmful or offensive touching. Its classic self defense.

Which in no way resembles this:
Drunken fratboy: grope
Karate Chick with issues: Now you die.
Drunken fratboy: wa...
Karate Chick with issues rips out his spleen.
Crowd: Finish Him!
Karate Chick with issues rips out spine.
Crowd: Maximum Fatality!

Did you not read my posts then, yes she can you use force, it is a matter of how much force. But serious question, is matty, in his example, justified in punching the chick in the face hard enought to knock her out, or break her jaw, or something similar. Is a woman justified in doing the same thing to a man who gropes her.

What a man is justified in doing and what a woman is justified in doing are different things.

I should point out that this applies only to US courts. Im not terribly familiar with how you run thing in jolly ol' England


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

youbedead wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

youbedead wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

I'm off to work now, go post that weiner dog firing fireworks at people some more, wouldya?

Actually in the court system eyewitness testimony is often placed above fact or hard evidence, so yes someones word is more then enough to send someone to jail, thats how most rape cases (false or real) are convicted.

Fraz I know that if this were to ever actually happen that it would be unlikely to be convicted, I was just pointing that technically you are not legally justified to do it. But as we both know, actual legality /= what actually happens

Thats my point. Legally the black belt chick IS JUSTIFIED in using force to defned against harmful or offensive touching. Its classic self defense.

Which in no way resembles this:
Drunken fratboy: grope
Karate Chick with issues: Now you die.
Drunken fratboy: wa...
Karate Chick with issues rips out his spleen.
Crowd: Finish Him!
Karate Chick with issues rips out spine.
Crowd: Maximum Fatality!

Did you not read my posts then, yes she can you use force, it is a matter of how much force. But serious question, is matty, in his example, justified in punching the chick in the face hard enought to knock her out, or break her jaw, or something similar. Is a woman justified in doing the same thing to a man who gropes her.

What a man is justified in doing and what a woman is justified in doing are different things.

According to the law, no.

youbedead wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:Youbedead, the defendant is allowed to be an eyewitness to his own case?

Yep, in fact testimony is the only form of evidence that doesn't require another form of evidence to be permitted. In a court someone saying that it rained holds more weight then a meteoroligical report saying it didn't rain.

That's akin to saying that an eyewitness saying he saw the defendant shoot a man trumps the factual evidence that the deceased was in fact stabbed.

Factual evidence > Eyewitness unless the eyewitness is supported by the factual evidence.

A Town Called Malus wrote:

youbedead wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:Youbedead, the defendant is allowed to be an eyewitness to his own case?

Yep, in fact testimony is the only form of evidence that doesn't require another form of evidence to be permitted. In a court someone saying that it rained holds more weight then a meteoroligical report saying it didn't rain.

That's akin to saying that an eyewitness saying he saw the defendant shoot a man trumps the factual evidence that the deceased was in fact stabbed.

Factual evidence > Eyewitness unless the eyewitness is supported by the factual evidence.

Except the eyewitness can say he was shot and it would be permissible, the fact that he was stabbed can only be permissible if supported by another form of evidence, such as testimony from a medical examiner

youbedead wrote:But serious question, is matty, in his example, justified in punching the chick in the face hard enought to knock her out, or break her jaw, or something similar. Is a woman justified in doing the same thing to a man who gropes her.

Absolutely not.

There are occasions where I would entirely say "go for it" and chin a woman, but that is when you can actually be hurt or make a good argument that you actually felt threatened../ A girl shoving off to her friends and grabbing your beanbag isn't one of them.

I always meet force with force, hence I have never been charged by the authorities.

The chop to the wrist was justified, and that's what happened. If she then attacked me I would have chinned her because I HAVE hit women before, again, I have several stories but this isnt the place for them.

One girl hit me over the head with a bottle in the street in Exmouth and when I put my palm to my head and it came back red, she got an uppercut before the second swing. I didn't kick her on the floor or anything obviously, because the threat was neutralized, just one smack and she went down like a knackered lift. I didn't get arrested and twenty people saw it.

I think I'm a fething expert frankly, training for Northern Ireland I got drilled and drilled and drilled and drilled on it for about 9 months.. basically only like on like is justified, and ultimately you always have to ask yourself "what would a jury think?"

I actually used to school my lads on this kinda thing.. I made a rhyme "Don't forget CCTV, always count 1-2-3"

Basically a variation of some NI training, we got taught to use the "count to three rule" if the press were about in case we were filmed smashing a local scum-bag round the face with a baton, because if a news crew films you hitting someone over there, they best have thrown 5 at you first or your gonna get crucified.. and you know for a fact command wont back you either. Similar to policemen.

Anyway, said rule has never failed me in its real world application (drunken nights on the town!)

I also punched a woman in a club once and I didn't get thrown out. She batted me round the head, I blocked it, and the next two, and then I slowly counted to three. At this point I jabbed her in the face and she was stunned that nobody present seemed to give a feth. Would you If you saw a woman throw 12 punches at a guy before he tossed one into her?

Oh yeah and once I mashed a bag of molten cheesy chips into a girls face because I didn't have a free hand and she was swinging for me ... she caught me a good one in the fething throat and it went downhill from there.. actually the more I think about it the more of these stories I have..

I grew out of that "intervening in strangers fights" gak when I was about 20. If I saw a chick throw ten into a guy before he poked one into her, Id probably laugh my fething ass off frankly.

A man should never ever hit a woman, so I demand the same fething treatment. I always let a chick have 3 free ones, but if she is still swinging after that she will catch one up. I honestly think it helps build a harmonious relationship! I mean, I've lived with my missus for 4 years and neither of us has ever laid a glove on the other, but she has told me a few times (we rarely fight, but everyone has a shouting argument once in a while) that the only reason she hasn't punched me in the face when she has been super angry is because she knows for a fact I would hit her back.

Thankfully courts are starting to move towards placing less emphasis on eyewitness testimony, and placing more weight on scientific fact.

youbedead wrote:I should point out that this applies only to US courts. Im not terribly familiar with how you run thing in jolly ol' England


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

youbedead wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

youbedead wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

I'm off to work now, go post that weiner dog firing fireworks at people some more, wouldya?

Actually in the court system eyewitness testimony is often placed above fact or hard evidence, so yes someones word is more then enough to send someone to jail, thats how most rape cases (false or real) are convicted.

Fraz I know that if this were to ever actually happen that it would be unlikely to be convicted, I was just pointing that technically you are not legally justified to do it. But as we both know, actual legality /= what actually happens

Thats my point. Legally the black belt chick IS JUSTIFIED in using force to defned against harmful or offensive touching. Its classic self defense.

Which in no way resembles this:
Drunken fratboy: grope
Karate Chick with issues: Now you die.
Drunken fratboy: wa...
Karate Chick with issues rips out his spleen.
Crowd: Finish Him!
Karate Chick with issues rips out spine.
Crowd: Maximum Fatality!

Did you not read my posts then, yes she can you use force, it is a matter of how much force. But serious question, is matty, in his example, justified in punching the chick in the face hard enought to knock her out, or break her jaw, or something similar. Is a woman justified in doing the same thing to a man who gropes her.

What a man is justified in doing and what a woman is justified in doing are different things.

According to the law, no.

According to fact, however, yes.

mattyrm wrote:

youbedead wrote:But serious question, is matty, in his example, justified in punching the chick in the face hard enought to knock her out, or break her jaw, or something similar. Is a woman justified in doing the same thing to a man who gropes her.

Absolutely not.

There are occasions where I would entirely say "go for it" and chin a woman, but that is when you can actually be hurt or make a good argument that you actually felt threatened../ A girl shoving off to her friends and grabbing your beanbag isn't one of them.

I always meet force with force, hence I have never been charged by the authorities.

The chop to the wrist was justified, and that's what happened. If she then attacked me I would have chinned her because I HAVE hit women before, again, I have several stories but this isnt the place for them.

One girl hit me over the head with a bottle in the street in Exmouth and when I put my palm to my head and it came back red, she got an uppercut before the second swing. I didn't kick her on the floor or anything obviously, because the threat was neutralized, just one smack and she went down like a knackered lift. I didn't get arrested and twenty people saw it.

I think I'm a fething expert frankly, training for Northern Ireland I got drilled and drilled and drilled and drilled on it for about 9 months.. basically only like on like is justified, and ultimately you always have to ask yourself "what would a jury think?"

I actually used to school my lads on this kinda thing.. I made a rhyme "Don't forget CCTV, always count 1-2-3"

Basically a variation of some NI training, we got taught to use the "count to three rule" if the press were about in case we were filmed smashing a local scum-bag round the face with a baton, because if a news crew films you hitting someone over there, they best have thrown 5 at you first or your gonna get crucified.. and you know for a fact command wont back you either. Similar to policemen.

Anyway, said rule has never failed me in its real world application (drunken nights on the town!)

I also punched a woman in a club once and I didn't get thrown out. She batted me round the head, I blocked it, and the next two, and then I slowly counted to three. At this point I jabbed her in the face and she was stunned that nobody present seemed to give a feth. Would you If you saw a woman throw 12 punches at a guy before he tossed one into her?

Oh yeah and once I mashed a bag of molten cheesy chips into a girls face because I didn't have a free hand and she was swinging for me ... she caught me a good one in the fething throat and it went downhill from there.. actually the more I think about it the more of these stories I have..

I grew out of that "intervening in strangers fights" gak when I was about 20. If I saw a chick throw ten into a guy before he poked one into her, Id probably laugh my fething ass off frankly.

A man should never ever hit a woman, so I demand the same fething treatment. I always let a chick have 3 free ones, but if she is still swinging after that she will catch one up. I honestly think it helps build a harmonious relationship! I mean, I've lived with my missus for 4 years and neither of us has ever laid a glove on the other, but she has told me a few times (we rarely fight, but everyone has a shouting argument once in a while) that the only reason she hasn't punched me in the face when she has been super angry is because she knows for a fact I would hit her back.

My friend had been charged several times, but never convicted, and he has a lot of similar stories. Another bud of mine who is about 6' 5"
and 300 lbs., had to pull his niece and nephew out of the way of a drunk driver's pick up in a mall parking lot one Christmas. The truck mirror hit him in the shoulder, so he threw a bottle he was carrying through the trucks back window.
The fool driving then hit the hooks, backed up, and pulling himself up to his full 5'8" height and drunkenly started mouthing off. The next thing he knew, he was picked up overhead, slammed into the bed of his pickup and beaten.
He crawled out of his truck to a couple of cops and complained about being attacked. The cops took one look at him and one look at my friend after hearing their stories and told the guy he was lucky he hadn't been really hurt, and told him he was busted.
The only reason he wasn't badly hurt was my friend didn't think it was a good idea for his new wife see him totaly unload on someone.
The whole point of the stories about my friends are to illustrate the fact that people accused of battery don't go to court or get convicted as much as a lot of people seem to think.

I don't doubt it Relapse, Ive been in feth loads of fights, and Ive never been charged..

I haven't won them all mind! But the law of averages states I should have been in the dock at least once!

I think people get chinned regularly over here anyway, it doesn't usually hit court unless some serious gak happened.

The only one I ever got charged for was knocking a tooth out of the kid who had a dentist father, but that was just high school.

Context: The old man told me "Good job." because they had matching tattoos of bald eagles ripping out of their legs despite having no family serving. Which is to say, stupid patriotism.

mattyrm wrote:I don't doubt it Relapse, Ive been in feth loads of fights, and Ive never been charged..

I haven't won them all mind! But the law of averages states I should have been in the dock at least once!

I think people get chinned regularly over here anyway, it doesn't usually hit court unless some serious gak happened.

Same here, back in my mis spent youth. That's the reason I shake my head when I hear people saying, like it's a given, someone is going to get arrested, go to jail, lose a bunch of money in a law suit, etc. because they beat someone in a fight.
When someone goes into a fight, they'd better expect to get hurt.
The guys that start fights, then press charges when they get hurt, are the same as kids that start gak and then run and hide behind their moms when things go bad for them.
Most judges can pick this up when someone like this presses charges, and with what I saw from the stories, it's a joy to watch it backfire on those type of people.

dogma wrote:The only one I ever got charged for was knocking a tooth out of the kid who had a dentist father, but that was just high school.

Context: The old man told me "Good job." because they had matching tattoos of bald eagles ripping out of their legs despite having no family serving. Which is to say, stupid patriotism.

Haha, I think the fether deserved it simply for the chad tattoo..

I should probably point out that I think that is someones messing with then fething break them, I was just pointing out that no those actions aren't actually legal. Never fight someone unless you're willing to go to court or end being injured or injuring someone, or as my uncle said if you're not prepared to kill someone then it's not worth it.

Relapse wrote:

mattyrm wrote:I don't doubt it Relapse, Ive been in feth loads of fights, and Ive never been charged..

I haven't won them all mind! But the law of averages states I should have been in the dock at least once!

I think people get chinned regularly over here anyway, it doesn't usually hit court unless some serious gak happened.

Same here, back in my mis spent youth. That's the reason I shake my head when I hear people saying, like it's a given, someone is going to get arrested, go to jail, lose a bunch of money in a law suit, etc. because they beat someone in a fight.
When someone goes into a fight, they'd better expect to get hurt.
The guys that start fights, then press charges when they get hurt, are the same as kids that start gak and then run and hide behind their moms when things go bad for them.
Most judges can pick this up when someone like this presses charges, and with what I saw from the stories, it's a joy to watch it backfire on those type of people.

I always found the secret was to not stick around. . .

MrDwhitey wrote:Not my point.

My point was "Word against Word". I would certainly hope in a legal system you actually require evidence.

The word of the defendant and the supposed victim is evidence. The outcome depends on whom the jury believes.

That's why defending barristers used to put such emphasis on blackening the reputation of victims in rape trials, and why they were stopped from doing it.

Frazzled wrote:
I always found the secret was to not stick around. . .

The best advice.

dogma wrote:To be fair, we don't really know what she was being asked to "tone down" from. Being overtly sexual, regardless of what the nature of it is, can get you bullied.

Granted homosexuals definitely have it worse in the vast majority of places.

I have known several gays that took it to a level that broke decorum and invited reprisal. There's a distinct difference between a highschooler being openly gay and a highschooler wearing a net shirt and pink feather sash every other day. Physical violence isn't an acceptable answer to most social situations, this one included, but there's how the world should work and how it actually does. "Don't do things that get you beat up" isn't always bad advice.

That said, the school should react to violence in a consistent manner regardless of the cause or participants and they clearly didn't seem to be doing that.

School uniforms. There's THAT part of the problem resolved.

God I miss the perverted catholic schoolgirls of our sister-school.

ShumaGorath wrote:

dogma wrote:To be fair, we don't really know what she was being asked to "tone down" from. Being overtly sexual, regardless of what the nature of it is, can get you bullied.

Granted homosexuals definitely have it worse in the vast majority of places.

I have known several gays that took it to a level that broke decorum and invited reprisal. There's a distinct difference between a highschooler being openly gay and a highschooler wearing a net shirt and pink feather sash every other day. Physical violence isn't an acceptable answer to most social situations, this one included, but there's how the world should work and how it actually does. "Don't do things that get you beat up" isn't always bad advice.

That said, the school should react to violence in a consistent manner regardless of the cause or participants and they clearly didn't seem to be doing that.

And the school should not actively encourage violence like this one did.

Melissia wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

dogma wrote:To be fair, we don't really know what she was being asked to "tone down" from. Being overtly sexual, regardless of what the nature of it is, can get you bullied.

Granted homosexuals definitely have it worse in the vast majority of places.

I have known several gays that took it to a level that broke decorum and invited reprisal. There's a distinct difference between a highschooler being openly gay and a highschooler wearing a net shirt and pink feather sash every other day. Physical violence isn't an acceptable answer to most social situations, this one included, but there's how the world should work and how it actually does. "Don't do things that get you beat up" isn't always bad advice.

That said, the school should react to violence in a consistent manner regardless of the cause or participants and they clearly didn't seem to be doing that.

And the school should not actively encourage violence like this one did.

I would say they more Reactively encouraged violence... but sometimes, the Nordic Fury, it crops up, even in the later generations of overly socialized panzies we scandahoovians left behind in the old countries ( ) ... And there is little than can be done on a micro scale to cure the Fury.

Bromsy wrote:
I would say they more Reactively encouraged violence... but sometimes, the Nordic Fury, it crops up, even in the later generations of overly socialized panzies we scandahoovians left behind in the old countries ( ) ... And there is little than can be done on a micro scale to cure the Fury.

I thought that was what the untold amounts of beer was for?!?!?

For feth sake's, if not that, why are you people hurting yourself so much?!?!? It's not like you need beer glasses...