- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Joe Mixon video released
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:12 pm to Zchlsu
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:12 pm to Zchlsu
quote:Well despite his inexcusable actions, they weren't random; however, since the non-random hit was stupid, a random one would have been even more stupid.
Why would he go up to come random girl and just hit them? That just sounds stupid.
0
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:15 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:Yeah. I think it's hard for people to see that BOTH did something wrong. And even minor escalating reactions are wrong, but his was not even within the realm of minor.
You're a lawyer. You should know about reasonableness of response.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:16 pm to CCTider
Exactly. I wish I could say there wouldn't be a segment of any fan base (including LSU) that would defend him too, but that just isn't true unfortunately.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:16 pm to tigerbaitlawyer
quote:Do it.
I can make a legal argument (not a moral argument) this was self defense under Louisiana law.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:17 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
It's times like these that make me think PeeJ is a 25 year old dude just messing with us.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:18 pm to ReauxlTide222
It's worse. He's a 56yo messing with us. Older guy with significant health problems challenging numerous people to a fight. 
He's just trolling. He knows he can't do shite.
He's just trolling. He knows he can't do shite.This post was edited on 12/16/16 at 10:23 pm
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:20 pm to tigerbaitlawyer
quote:
He did Knock her out but only after she made contact twice with him. She aggressively pushed him and then struck him in the face. See the entire event actually changes my opinion about the situation. I believe it is wrong to hit a woman. I was under the impression he hit some random girl. See how she made contact twice alters my view.
quote:We ain't biting
tigerbaitlawyer
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:23 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:Well if Robert Durst could successfully argue self-defense when he then cut off and discarded a head, it's possible to make an argument in this case. Doesn't mean the argument had a lot of logical reasoning to it.
Do it
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:25 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Roger Klarvin
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:27 pm to Roger Klarvin
Battery isn't a crime dumb frick it's a civil cause of action. She committed a class C misdemeanor assault at best. He committed what is probably a felony assault. Same crime, extremely different circumstances / punishment range. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see the difference in circumstances between what they did, regardless of what was said leading up to the final hit.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:29 pm to Warrior Poet
quote:
Battery isn't a crime dumb frick
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:30 pm to Warrior Poet
quote:I'm almost 100% sure it can be both.
Battery isn't a crime dumb frick it's a civil cause of action.
Source: I took a business law class last semester and think I'm a evil genius lawyer.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:30 pm to Warrior Poet
quote:Wikipedia says otherwise. LINK
Battery isn't a crime dumb frick it's a civil cause of action
quote:It's usually a misdemeanor, but my non-lawyer interpretation is that it falls under criminal law.
Battery is a criminal offense involving the unlawful physical acting upon a threat, distinct from assault which is the act of creating apprehension of such contact.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:31 pm to tigerbaitlawyer
No, it can't, "legally" speaking mr lawyer. There is no such thing as mutual assault and self defense is only a legal defense for someone who has a reasonable fear of death or severe bodily injury, and even then only reasonable force is authorized.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:33 pm to Warrior Poet
No offense, but you don't know WTF you're talking about.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:33 pm to Fun Bunch
I'm not saying he is morally correct or justified, but Legally you can make an argument that his actions were in self defense.
He met her with equal and similar force. (Meaning not a knife vs fun). He stopped after his one punch and left after the threat was subdued. He even tried to get her away after her push. She then continued to act as an agessor by making contact with his face to which it appeared to be a reaction. Had he punched her a second time then it would have been excessive.
Mere words do not justify a battery. He could have said the worse thing in the world to her and it still does not justify a battery under Louisiana law.
Another factor was that He was alone, as compared to her. She appeared to be with a group. Her group was using racial slurs towards him.
Furthermore, she appeared to belligerent. Was she sober enough to stop or was she so drunk that force he used was necessary to prevent a drunk person from continuing an attack on him.
If it was a man instead of a women, everyone would say self-defense.
I could also argue why it wasn't self defense. My point is the video made this less cut and dry from a legal perspective.
Would I defend him? F**** No. I am just giving a counter perspective.
He met her with equal and similar force. (Meaning not a knife vs fun). He stopped after his one punch and left after the threat was subdued. He even tried to get her away after her push. She then continued to act as an agessor by making contact with his face to which it appeared to be a reaction. Had he punched her a second time then it would have been excessive.
Mere words do not justify a battery. He could have said the worse thing in the world to her and it still does not justify a battery under Louisiana law.
Another factor was that He was alone, as compared to her. She appeared to be with a group. Her group was using racial slurs towards him.
Furthermore, she appeared to belligerent. Was she sober enough to stop or was she so drunk that force he used was necessary to prevent a drunk person from continuing an attack on him.
If it was a man instead of a women, everyone would say self-defense.
I could also argue why it wasn't self defense. My point is the video made this less cut and dry from a legal perspective.
Would I defend him? F**** No. I am just giving a counter perspective.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:33 pm to buckeye_vol
according to your link it's a crime in 2 states. The crime is assault, trust me. Most states divide assault up into "classes" as is the case in Texas and Oklahoma.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:36 pm to Warrior Poet
§33. Battery defined
Battery is the intentional use of force or violence upon the person of another; or the intentional administration of a poison or other noxious liquid or substance to another.
§35. Simple battery
A. Simple battery is a battery committed without the consent of the victim.
B. Whoever commits a simple battery shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both.
summary: battery is a crime.
§19. Use of force or violence in defense
A.(1) The use of force or violence upon the person of another is justifiable under either of the following circumstances:
(a) When committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person's lawful possession, provided that the force or violence used must be reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense.
summary: you can use force to defend yourself in situations other than "death or severe bodily injury."
Battery is the intentional use of force or violence upon the person of another; or the intentional administration of a poison or other noxious liquid or substance to another.
§35. Simple battery
A. Simple battery is a battery committed without the consent of the victim.
B. Whoever commits a simple battery shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both.
summary: battery is a crime.
§19. Use of force or violence in defense
A.(1) The use of force or violence upon the person of another is justifiable under either of the following circumstances:
(a) When committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person's lawful possession, provided that the force or violence used must be reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense.
summary: you can use force to defend yourself in situations other than "death or severe bodily injury."
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:36 pm to ReauxlTide222
Ok
I'm an actual lawyer and started my career prosecuting assault cases.
I'm an actual lawyer and started my career prosecuting assault cases.
Posted on 12/16/16 at 10:37 pm to Warrior Poet
quote:Where?
I'm an actual lawyer
ETA: I don't know why I'm arguing. You clearly don't know what the frick you're talking about.
This post was edited on 12/16/16 at 10:38 pm
Page 17 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News