Ray Rice KOs wife video
- Thread starter Rossibreath
- Start date
So if he "stiff arms" her...breaks her collar bone...she falls to the side and hits the railing...he opens the elevator door and drags her out...we would still be at square one.
Props:
S.SAVAGE and S.SAVAGE
If it is increasingly hard to talk to people on this forum then the first thing you need to do is see if you're communicating to the best of your ability and conveying your thoughts in a way that will allows others to understand.
Your entire premise is "who is the aggressor?" and "he could claim self defense." So, if you're going to ask about SELF DEFENSE, then you have to look at her SPITTING because that is the assault that caused him to hit her. If you are going to talk about SELF DEFENSE then certain requirements, which I listed, need to be met. If you are going to talk about self defense, you have to talk about what he is defending himself FROM.
Your entire premise is "who is the aggressor?" and "he could claim self defense." So, if you're going to ask about SELF DEFENSE, then you have to look at her SPITTING because that is the assault that caused him to hit her. If you are going to talk about SELF DEFENSE then certain requirements, which I listed, need to be met. If you are going to talk about self defense, you have to talk about what he is defending himself FROM.
Gooddel is done!
ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) — A law enforcement official says he sent a video of Ray Rice punching his then-fiancee to an NFL executive five months ago, while league executives have insisted they didn't see the violent images until this week.
The person played The Associated Press a 12-second voicemail from an NFL office number on April 9 confirming the video arrived. A female voice expresses thanks and says: "You're right. It's terrible."
Lying ass like we all knew.
ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) — A law enforcement official says he sent a video of Ray Rice punching his then-fiancee to an NFL executive five months ago, while league executives have insisted they didn't see the violent images until this week.
The person played The Associated Press a 12-second voicemail from an NFL office number on April 9 confirming the video arrived. A female voice expresses thanks and says: "You're right. It's terrible."
Lying ass like we all knew.
tmz is going hard, they want dude to step down. but i dont think this is the death blow, but one more mishap after this fiasco and dude is out.
It is pretty apparent that he never had a hard stance on domestic violence, until the backlash of the 2 game suspension. He saw the tape, but with ray rice's proactive approach, coupled with the fact that they got married, he said f it and gave dude a 2 game suspension. He shouldnt have been a pussy and held firm with the 2 game suspension, admitted he saw the tape that was leaked. Now he has to tell lies to cover other lies.
It is pretty apparent that he never had a hard stance on domestic violence, until the backlash of the 2 game suspension. He saw the tape, but with ray rice's proactive approach, coupled with the fact that they got married, he said f it and gave dude a 2 game suspension. He shouldnt have been a pussy and held firm with the 2 game suspension, admitted he saw the tape that was leaked. Now he has to tell lies to cover other lies.
Props:
milkky and milkky
all he had to do was be honest and this wouldnt have been a big deal. "yeah i saw the tape. ray rice showed remorse, his wife forgave him, he went to classes, etc, so we gave him a 2 game suspension. however, i do understand that we have to increase the punishment for these actions..."
thats it. congress?! dude is in way over his head.
thats it. congress?! dude is in way over his head.
I didn't mention SPITTING because that is a "BATTERY" not an "ASSAULT"...the assault is her charging forward with the intent to strike...that is what I have in the pic I posted up of her in the elevator. My clarity is crystal clear as I "ASKED" you where did I reference SPITTING? I'll say it AGAIN...it hard to communicate with people who make ADDITIONS to what you have said to make their point.
This is incorrect as what is defined as assault or battery actually varies from state to state. In CA, which I mentioned before, this would be assault as the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that spitting on someone is “simple assault.”
You can read one such ruling (it was originally ruled in 2007) by hitting the following link:
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/10-10124/10-10124-2011-04-18.html
In addition here is more info on how assaults are treated from place to place:
http://www.attorneys.com/assault/what-is-aggravated-assault/
LOL. You can move forward towards someone all you want but you would have to prove her intent was to strike him. According to the video, there was no attempt to strike as she got knocked out as soon as she moved forward.
The pic means absolutely nothing. There is a video. Simply walking towards him or charging forward is of no concern because there is nothing in the video that shows her intent was to strike. She did exactly what she intended to do and he knocked her out. The question is did he meet like force with like force? Did he have a reasonable fear? Would his actions hold up under the reasonable person test? The answer to all three questions are no.
Again, if you're going to ask about SELF DEFENSE, then you have to look at her SPITTING because that is the assault that caused him to hit her. If you are going to talk about SELF DEFENSE then certain requirements, which I listed, need to be met. If you are going to talk about self defense, you have to talk about what he is defending himself FROM. Based on those who saw the video with full audio, she spit on him (on purpose) and THAT is what caused him to hit her. So all this talk about her charging forward, etc, is of no concern. What is of concern is his intent and how he reacted to her actions.
No one is making additions, stop cherry picking and using word jugglery to prove a point that no one gives two flying fucks about. For the sake of argument, let's say her intent was to strike him and he had a reasonable fear/belief. OK, you have satisfied one of the three conditions required for self defense. Now how are you going to justify the second which is your belief that you needed to use force to prevent it from happening? How are you going to justify the third in that you used no more force than what was necessary to stop her from doing it?
He did right by taking the advice of the lawyer as there was no way to prove 2 or 3. In fact, the first question is once she is four to six feet away from him, why did he follow her. To get on the elevator? Can't take the stairs or cool off? Ok, so you want to get on it as well, no problem. Why get on the elevator and invade her personal space as soon as you step on it? He makes a gesture, she puts her arm up and everything goes down hill.
We don't need to continue this conversation, breh.
You can read one such ruling (it was originally ruled in 2007) by hitting the following link:
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/10-10124/10-10124-2011-04-18.html
In addition here is more info on how assaults are treated from place to place:
http://www.attorneys.com/assault/what-is-aggravated-assault/
LOL. You can move forward towards someone all you want but you would have to prove her intent was to strike him. According to the video, there was no attempt to strike as she got knocked out as soon as she moved forward.
The pic means absolutely nothing. There is a video. Simply walking towards him or charging forward is of no concern because there is nothing in the video that shows her intent was to strike. She did exactly what she intended to do and he knocked her out. The question is did he meet like force with like force? Did he have a reasonable fear? Would his actions hold up under the reasonable person test? The answer to all three questions are no.
Again, if you're going to ask about SELF DEFENSE, then you have to look at her SPITTING because that is the assault that caused him to hit her. If you are going to talk about SELF DEFENSE then certain requirements, which I listed, need to be met. If you are going to talk about self defense, you have to talk about what he is defending himself FROM. Based on those who saw the video with full audio, she spit on him (on purpose) and THAT is what caused him to hit her. So all this talk about her charging forward, etc, is of no concern. What is of concern is his intent and how he reacted to her actions.
No one is making additions, stop cherry picking and using word jugglery to prove a point that no one gives two flying fucks about. For the sake of argument, let's say her intent was to strike him and he had a reasonable fear/belief. OK, you have satisfied one of the three conditions required for self defense. Now how are you going to justify the second which is your belief that you needed to use force to prevent it from happening? How are you going to justify the third in that you used no more force than what was necessary to stop her from doing it?
He did right by taking the advice of the lawyer as there was no way to prove 2 or 3. In fact, the first question is once she is four to six feet away from him, why did he follow her. To get on the elevator? Can't take the stairs or cool off? Ok, so you want to get on it as well, no problem. Why get on the elevator and invade her personal space as soon as you step on it? He makes a gesture, she puts her arm up and everything goes down hill.
We don't need to continue this conversation, breh.
Last edited:
Did this incident happen in California...answer: NO
Did it happen in New Jersey...answer: YES
So let see what that jurisdiction has to say about "assault" and "battery"
Assault and Battery in New Jersey:
Battery can be an indirect attack, for example, the perpetrator throwing and hitting the victim with an object such as a shoe, knife or by spitting.
Assault is an intentional threat caused by the perpetrator who causes bodily harm through physical force. It may consist of a physical attack on a victim, regardless if any physical contact was actually made.
The perpetrator can be held liable in civil court for assault if the following areas are met:
1- He or she intentionally caused harmful or offensive contact to the victim
2- The victim believed he or she was about to be personally harmed
Did it happen in New Jersey...answer: YES
So let see what that jurisdiction has to say about "assault" and "battery"
Assault and Battery in New Jersey:
Battery can be an indirect attack, for example, the perpetrator throwing and hitting the victim with an object such as a shoe, knife or by spitting.
Assault is an intentional threat caused by the perpetrator who causes bodily harm through physical force. It may consist of a physical attack on a victim, regardless if any physical contact was actually made.
The perpetrator can be held liable in civil court for assault if the following areas are met:
1- He or she intentionally caused harmful or offensive contact to the victim
2- The victim believed he or she was about to be personally harmed
Why are you still arguing about this. She had her charges dropped she obviously wasn't the one at fault
Props:
HERESY and HERESY
Oh and about those 2 links you gave me...the 1st one was a guy in San Francisco appealing a "felony assault" charge on a FEDERAL CORRECTIONS OFFICER whom the appellant spit on...he wanted the charge to be dropped to a "simple assault". I honestly don't know of civilians are treated the same as officers in terms of cases concerning civilians either "battering" or "assaulting" police. But once again Ray Rices incident happened in Atlantic City, New Jersey. The second link you gave me was information on "aggravated assault"...which is not what I was contending that Janay did but rather "assault" by her forward motion and aggression with the intent to cause harm.
I ain't arguing about nothing...I said what I said...I said nothing about her being at fault I merely said I think he has a case for self defense...I didn't say HE would win it...I didn't say SHE would lose. You need to direct your comment to Hersey...he is the one dissecting, correcting and editing for the past 8 posts.