you're the jury

[befsquire]

so i have this client who claims he kicked his wife out of the house in jest because she was hammered. so, his kick in her leg was all in the line of a kicking her out of the house kind of thing. he was hammered too, btw.

she said it was not in jest at all, and that as she was trying to get out and remove herself from a situation that was deteriorating, he kicked her in the back of the leg.

she doesn't believe it was in jest and part of a literal kicking out and she's told him she's over it and he kicked her and it's over.

domestic violence? is she right or is he? assume they are both drunk and he's never touched her before. also realize that according to fl law, a touching without consent, no matter how hard or soft, is battery, and if there's a relationship, familial or boyfriend / girlfriend, it's dv battery.

what would you, as a juror, decide, and what do you think she should do? she's done with that relationship and wants to end it based on that one incident plus his general attitude when drunk.

[QueenAdrock]

GAS CHAMBER!

Well, how hard a kick was it? I kick people all the time, but never like angry bruisy kicking.

[Bitchamachacha]

(!) Bef's threads are more fun than watching Cops!

[Bob]

i'd have to get a feel for how your client feels about it in retrospect. does he seem like he regrets the whole thing, or is he mad that he's being brought into this, or what?

what's the punishment for domestic violence? from what you've told us, it sounds like it was just an isolated fucked up incident that nobody deserves to have on their permanent record, i guess i'd vote in the guy's favor. everybody makes mistakes.

as for what she should do, that's not really my place to say. if she wants to get out of the relationship, all power to her, it's not my business really. but (again, just going off what you've told us) the guy doesn't sound like a chronic woman-beater or anything, it just sounds like a drunken mistake.

yeah, if you're going by the letter of the law, he's guilty, but i never liked that approach (as an observer)

[The Notorious LOL]

why dont you dork lawyers go join some dork lawyer board to discuss your dork lawyer stuff?

[Bob]

you hurt my feelings, i'll see you in court buddy

[befsquire]

according to her, he gets hammered and is a huge dickhead. major dickhead. angry drunken asshole is how she terms everything. she also feels like if he kicks once and gets away with it, he'll kick again.

he claims it was in fun, a "kick in the ass" as she's walking out the door from an argument. she says it was not in fun at all, and he kicked her hard, in the leg, because he was pissed she was leaving.

personally, i feel like if someone resorts to that sort of shit once, they'll do it again. anyone ever touches me, i'm done. i don't care what sorta shit you're telling me, i'm not having it.

[ET]

Sounds like he's just trying to play it off. One of those "OH I WUZ JOKIN!" kinds of people. So I put the blame on him.

You dorks.

[skra75]

(!) Bef's threads are more fun than watching Cops!

(y) fuck yes they are

[QueenAdrock]

personally, i feel like if someone resorts to that sort of shit once, they'll do it again. anyone ever touches me, i'm done. i don't care what sorta shit you're telling me, i'm not having it.

Exactly.

Unless we're roughhousing or wrasslin', which I find fun.

[yeahwho]

I would convict, based on my feeling that your client has more than just a casual drinking problem. His judgement is impaired to the point that he is actually breaking the law of your state (not that he was aware of it).

I'm not sure if this instance or crime could have a deferred sentence if he completed a treatment program and probation, but as his legal counsel I would recommend this to help him and society as a whole.

In the end enabling him to continue down the route of heavy drinking does no good.

[befsquire]

your first conviction for dv battery is a misdemeanor, and at worst you get one year probation with the requirement that you complete the batterer's intervention program.

your next battery, dv or not, is a felony. same goes if your first battery was a simple battery and your next was a dv battery. one prior conviction bumps it to a felony.

[Documad]

So he meant to kick her (it wasn't an accident), but it's just that he thought it was funny instead of hurtful?

What is the jury instruction going to say? :p

[Drederick Tatum]

personally, i feel like if someone resorts to that sort of shit once, they'll do it again. anyone ever touches me, i'm done. i don't care what sorta shit you're telling me, i'm not having it.

say we were together and we were having an argument and I got real mad and pinched you real hard. what then?

[yeahwho]

If she's pressing charges and going to testify against him she'll bring up his obnoxious behaviour. Did she have any marks or witnesses? Did the police arrive at the scene and take statements or did it get reported much later?

I guess what I'm asking is there two full statements that collaborate or just one persons word against the other?

Cause you've gots to defend, correct?

[befsquire]

say we were together and we were having an argument and I got real mad and pinched you real hard. what then?
i've been pinched and shit before. i've never been kicked. i don't know what i'd do. and certainly i'm all for a little bit of rough sex type stuff. but i'm asking for that.

i don't know whether the shit is right or wrong. to me, it's a he said / she said situation, and if there's 2 stories, there's room for reasonable doubt. i'm just trying to guage how that shit's gonna go over in a trial.

[befsquire]

also, i left out the part where she says when she was leaving, and before he kicked her, he shoved her over to the door (which is close to another door, and the shove pushed her into that one) and when she opened it, that's when he kicked her.

i know perception is everything, and if they're both drunk they're going to have different views on what those events meant to them. which i guess makes them both right and wrong at the same time.

but if it were up to you, as a juror, would you throw it out as a family situation that the state shouldn't be involved in?

[Bob]

but if it were up to you, as a juror, would you throw it out as a family situation that the state shouldn't be involved in?

well if you phrase it like that (which no doubt you will ;) ), then yeah. i mean, she got fed up and she left, she took her own initiative to get out of the situation. if he comes after her or something, then i'd say the state should get involved, but as is, it just seems like a private matter that's (hopefully) behind them now

[Drederick Tatum]

the guy was just helping her out the door.

[hitmonlee]

there's room for reasonable doubt. i'm just trying to guage how that shit's gonna go over in a trial.

if he admits to kicking her, i don't see how there's any reasonable doubt. in fact, shouldnt he be pleading guilty?

idk, things might be different over there
i just did my jury duty a few weeks ago :)

[Waus]

I don't really know how you can make a call on something like that. Considering they were both drunk, so neither can provide an accurate account, what evidence do you have about the kick or push that isn't just their own slurred versions?

Maybe she bumped into something on the way out - they could both be wrong if their memory of the night is faulty. I'd leave it a family affair.

[yooooo]

ain't you bound to professional discretion or some cool shit like that

[paul jones]

I think both people in this case should battle it out over a 'Who can eat the most onion rings in an hour' contest

That's how all court battles should be, eating contests

(y)

[ampm]

Is it okay to tell these stories over the internet? Isn't there attorney client priviledge?

[marsdaddy]

I'd vote to convict. Everyone can benefit from a little anger management and self awareness classes. He's actually winning by losing. Plus, if it really was a misunderstanding, he'll know not to break the law now, or face a felony.

[abcdefz]

A couple of key questions haven't been answered, unless I missed something:

Did he confess to the shoving and/or kicking?

Was there documented injury?

Also: what were the instructions to the jury?

[befsquire]

Is it okay to tell these stories over the internet? Isn't there attorney client priviledge?
no names. police report info only, and i alter the scenario enough that it can't ever be linked to a person were that person's friends or families to come online.

in the report, he admitted it, but said it was in jest.

usually it's about perspectives. so during jury selection, i use a basketball scenario. i make one person a fan of shaq, and another person a fan of lebron james. no, i don't know whether shaq would really be guarding lebron. anyway, i say that lebron is going to the basket and there's contact between him and shaq. i ask the shaq fan who initiated the contact. he says lebron did. i ask the lebron fan and he says shaq did. of course shaq is going to say it was lebron and lebron will blame shaq. neither one wants the foul. then i ask someone else how is it that all these people saw the same thing yet there are two different answers. they always say what i want: bias, perspective, etc. then you ask is there anything that happens during that game that can cloud what someone remembers, etc. "beer." ding!

i've not lost one of those yet. but i've got one coming up, and it's gonna be heated. and i know the vic is gonna show and the guy is gonna want a trial. best thing about it -- on one of the 911 tapes, you hear the vic's brother yelling "you come around here again and i'll fucking kill you man." the 911 operator advises the vic to tell whoever that their threats are being recorded and they should shut up.

a to z: the usual jury instruction on a dv battery is the jury has to find the defendant intentionally touched or struck victim against his / her will. so, if you can show consent, you're gold.

[steve-onpoint]

(!) Bef's threads are more fun than watching Cops!

True dat.

[steve-onpoint]

MARRIAGE DOESN'T WORK IN THE WORLD TODAY
IT'S AN INSTITUTION THAT'S IN DECAY!

[abcdefz]

I still don't know whether the dude pleaded guilty or not.

[hpdrifter]

Wow, this is a toughie.

I love this thread by the way.

I guess I would say leave it between the two of them. He's never touched her before and she is finished with the situation. They are both drunkards so their accounts are unreliable. A push and a kick in the butt? Hmmmm, not cool but not really saying abuser to me. Asshole yes, immature, most definitely, but abuser? I don't know.

Its on record as having happened so if it comes up again for either of them there will be a precedent and it'll be more clear what should happen.

[abcdefz]

Not knowing more about it -- no evidence of injury, no admission of guilt -- I'd toss the case out.

[befsquire]

^none. just the woman's word. which is what kills me with these. i have maybe had photos 3 times, and you couldn't see shit. essentially, florida law works like this: i call the cops and claim my ex husband smacked me in the face 3 days ago. they'll take a report and try to interview him and then send it to the state attorney's office. the state attorney then files formal charges. based only on my word that it happened 3 days prior and i couldn't be bothered to report it at the time. if the cops come to my ex's house and i claim right there on the spot that he did that, he's going to jail if i seem credible.

it's bullshit.

oh, and a to z, the guy is pleading not guilty so that he can have his trial. if the chick doesn't show, it gets dropped (provided there is no other witness).