Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)
25. I don't know what they are saying but
Tue Oct 10, 2017, 11:52 AM
Oct 2017

Defending yourself varies based on states.

There are two broad categories. "Duty to Retreat" and "Stand Your Ground".

In a "Duty to Retreat" state you first must look for any available means to retreat away from your attacker and attempt to retreat and can only defend yourself if retreat isn't possible. In a DTR state you can be charged for defending yourself if retreat was possible, and also sued in civil court by your attacker if you injure them. So if running away is possible and you don't but try to defend yourself in a DTR state you are in the wrong legally.

In "Stand Your Ground" states you can defend yourself without first trying to retreat, as the attacker is considered to be responsible for any harm that comes to them from a person defending themselves.

VA looks to be a SYG state, so that is out.

Now, it can be more complicated. For example if the attack on him was over and his attackers had ceased hostility and were walking away and he went after one of them, then it is no longer self defense. The attack on him had ended and then when he initiated force he became the attacker and the roles were reversed. If that happened then this charge could be legally viable. I've actually charged both parties in a fight with assault before because Party A hit Party B first, but then Party A ceased attacking and walked away and Party B followed them and hit them- in this case it was legally two seperate assaults.

I don't know where they are going. If tape exists of him assaulting somebody before the assault on him we all saw that changes the legal aspects a good deal.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

WTF shenmue Oct 2017 #1
His blood got all over a white supremacist beating him, how dare him. ck4829 Oct 2017 #2
I want to see this "other video" Lee-Lee Oct 2017 #3
If somebody's attacking you it's unlawful to defend yourself? octoberlib Oct 2017 #4
Didn't click, but from the quoted text, that's what it sounds like... Wounded Bear Oct 2017 #23
I don't know what they are saying but Lee-Lee Oct 2017 #25
Thanks for the info! octoberlib Oct 2017 #27
Apparently maxrandb Oct 2017 #28
I agree. cwydro Oct 2017 #7
From WaPo bathroommonkey76 Oct 2017 #12
This message was self-deleted by its author Jake Stern Oct 2017 #5
Don't like, but let's wait this out. Reportedly other video shows Deandre Harris Hortensis Oct 2017 #6
There were a lot of video and stills being shot. Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #11
Stopping him is one thing, but beating him in retribution is another. Not Ruth Oct 2017 #40
Horseshit! maxrandb Oct 2017 #30
Our founders knew universal education was critical to democracy, Hortensis Oct 2017 #32
Some people would say the same about abortion providers mythology Oct 2017 #45
And those " some people" maxrandb Oct 2017 #50
A punch in the face at the very least. MindPilot Oct 2017 #49
Betcha he'll spend more time in prison than the Nazis that beat him dalton99a Oct 2017 #8
Can we donate to his legal fund? catrose Oct 2017 #9
What is the name of the magistrate? Not Ruth Oct 2017 #10
"Cracker magistrate." Nice. Bonx Oct 2017 #13
How do you know this? n/t Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #14
How do I know what? Bonx Oct 2017 #15
That the magistrate is a cracker. Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #16
I don't. I was quoting the OP. And commenting on his quote. Bonx Oct 2017 #17
I see. Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #18
RE: "Not "nice". Correct. Bonx Oct 2017 #20
"Cracker magistrate. Bet he has a hood at home" Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #19
If it isn't obvious to you I can't help. n/t n2doc Oct 2017 #21
So it's obvious to you. Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #24
I hear that allegation quite often LanternWaste Oct 2017 #26
You found just the right words. It really is obnoxious seeing people attempting to be injured. Judi Lynn Oct 2017 #44
"The magistrate had no choice. " -- WTF??? ATL Ebony Oct 2017 #31
Yep. Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #33
That's not actually how it works Lee-Lee Oct 2017 #34
Yes, Lee-Lee Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #35
Yep- you better be honest in what you do or it will backfire Lee-Lee Oct 2017 #36
A false warrant can also open you up to big civil liability. n/t Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #38
In other words, there's no evidence to back up your bigoted term mythology Oct 2017 #46
Congrats n2doc Oct 2017 #47
Did you miss the story in the OP? n/t kcr Oct 2017 #41
No. I heard and read about locally as well. n/t Yonnie3 Oct 2017 #42
Oh, I see. n/t kcr Oct 2017 #43
WTF? raven mad Oct 2017 #22
If you watch carfully the old beared kkk bastard with the confederate flag charged those guys The_Casual_Observer Oct 2017 #29
"A magistrate, not the police department, issued the warrant" Weekend Warrior Oct 2017 #37
It's not Lee-Lee Oct 2017 #39
That whole paragraph leaves a lot to be desired. nt. Weekend Warrior Oct 2017 #48
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Charlottesville magistrat...»Reply #25