http://newsok.com/article/5531208
She did not spit on him and he clearly says something to the male friend. The "gay" Slur ?
She did not spit on him and he clearly says something to the male friend. The "gay" Slur ?
Last edited:
Because he is good at football.How in the Fvck is that guy not in jail?
http://newsok.com/article/5531208
She did not spit on him and he clearly says something to the male friend. The "gay" Slur ?
I did notice that. I was screaming at the video "why are you all just watching"!!?? How can you let someone get hit like that and just sit around like nothing happened? At least call the law....help her......watch him to see where he goes or what car he gets into...something. I thought Mixon was bad before but seeing that video.....no NFL team should ever give him the time of day. And can you imagine a company hiring him and the blowback? And all he got was a fine and communitys service? I wonder if it had been the judge's daughter if he would have felt the same way?I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but, does anybody find it odd or peculiar in how nonchalant the other patrons act after the punch and especially the employees of that cafe. Nobody other than the guy she walked in with and two girls rendered aid. Just weird and disturbing.
Exactly.Let me be clear that a man should never hit a woman unless he is in real danger imo.
Now on to the legal side of things, she did initiate the physical contact by pushing him then hitting him in the head/neck area. He hit her back and then leaves. Legally, he defended himself. I think it was completely morally wrong but legally he did nothing wrong in that video.
Yes, he could have walked away and sued her for assault. Again, to me it was very d-baggish.
Let me be clear that a man should never hit a woman unless he is in real danger imo.
Now on to the legal side of things, she did initiate the physical contact by pushing him then hitting him in the head/neck area. He hit her back and then leaves. Legally, he defended himself. I think it was completely morally wrong but legally he did nothing wrong in that video.
Yes, he could have walked away and sued her for assault. Again, to me it was very d-baggish.
You can say she initiated the physical contact if you want, but that isn't quite accurate. He does the punkish lunge twice at her to get some sort of response giving him an excuse to deck her. You can't honestly watch that video and believe she was the aggressor unless you are searching for a reason to defend this thug.Let me be clear that a man should never hit a woman unless he is in real danger imo.
Now on to the legal side of things, she did initiate the physical contact by pushing him then hitting him in the head/neck area. He hit her back and then leaves. Legally, he defended himself. I think it was completely morally wrong but legally he did nothing wrong in that video.
Yes, he could have walked away and sued her for assault. Again, to me it was very d-baggish.
Sure looks like it fits to me & according to your link as well.https://lawofselfdefense.com/statute/ok-§-1289-25-physical-or-deadly-force-against-intruder/
No. In order to argue self defense, JM would have to convince a jury that he was at risk of great bodily injury or death without any means of escape.
This entire argument about he was legally defending himself is idiotic. That's not how self defense statutes work.
Sure looks like it fits to me & according to your link as well.
D. A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.[/QUOTE]
You really think a jury is going to buy the argument that Joe Mixon feared death or great bodily injury?
You can say she initiated the physical contact if you want, but that isn't quite accurate. He does the punkish lunge twice at her to get some sort of response giving him an excuse to deck her. You can't honestly watch that video and believe she was the aggressor unless you are searching for a reason to defend this thug.
Like I said earlier, in my opinion & how I was raised, a man NEVER hits a woman unless he's in serious peril. Was he in a life or death situation? Not even close. But my opinion and the morals that I was raised with do not necessarily reflect what is legal or not.
I was thinking that she initiated the physical contact first by pushing him. He should have left right then and there but instead chose to do a douche lunge, get hit then hit her back. How is that not considered self defense under law? Honest question because I'm not a legal beagle.
Said perfectly.The key to a self defense argument is the belief that your life is in danger. It's not the "they hit me, so I get to hit them back" law.
II wouldn't, but in this day and age how do you prove what someone feels at any certain moment? You can go into girls showers as long as you claim you feel like a female. Can't truly prove either way. Zimmerman felt he was in danger even though he instigated the confrontation. I guess what I'm looking for is where is the difference?