Bully

[eric0095]

True, but by attacking the bully, because he was "defending himself" he still beat the patootie out of the kid. There are other ways of defending yourself, that wouldn't end in violence. Tell an adult, tell a vampire. Run like Forrest Gump.

There seems to be some discrepancies about Statements of Law... allow me clear them up:

Assault:
~ Definition:

- To intentionally create the perception of imminent and offensive bodily contact

~ Elements of Assault:

- Reasonable beleif of imminent bodily contact

Actual body contact is irrelevant (EX: Missed punch)

- Reasonable belief of bodily contact

Even if defendant lacked ability (EX: Unloaded gun)

- Reasonable belief of imminent bodily contact

Distant threats are insufficient (EX: A beating next year)

- Reasonable belief of offensive bodily contact

Even if not harmful (EX: Unwanted, though helpful, surgery)

Battery:
~ Definition

- To intentionally create offensive bodily contact

~ Elements of battery

- "Bodily contact" loosely defined

Possibly sufficient if contact is with clothing or an object

- Bodily contact generally considered offensive

Exception: Normal social interaction (EX: Elevator jostle)

Assault and Battery:
~ Frequently committed together
~ Occasionally committed apart

- Threat of contact without actual contact (Assault only)
- Actual contact without warning (Battery only)

Self Defense:
~ Definition

- Right to protect oneself from violence and the threat of violence
- Tied to the torts of Assault and Battery
- Available only if a person is at immediate risk
- Person acting in self defense cannot use more force than necessary in the circumstance
- Also applies to defense of a third party

EX: Parent defending child

- A complete defense

Protects tortfeasor from all liability

Provocation:
~ Definition

- Words or action that would cause a reasonable person to lose self control

EX: Defendant "snaps" after being taunted

- Closely tied to the torts of Assault and Battery
- A partial defense

Defendant is liable for the attack but plaintiff's damages are reduced

Torts = wrongdoing in law
Tortfeasor = person who commits a tort



So lets look at this legally shall we?

Facts:

• Defendant: Large Kid (Victim who is getting punished)
• Plaintiff: Small Kid (Bully who has not been punished)

• Plaintiff was obviously taunting Defendant before video started recording
• Plaintiff approaches Defendant and grabs him around his neck (by the collar) with one arm and starts to lineup a punch
• Plaintiff punches defendant in the face
• Plaintiff backs away, comes back and grabs defendant again and punches him in the face again, while defendant attempts/fails to block
• Plaintiff backs away again and assumes fighting stance, fists up ready to go, while defendant stands impassively/non-threateningly
• Plaintiff comes in fakes a few body shots, then lands a body shot
• Defendant runs at Plaintiff and grabs him around the waist from behind, picks him up, and slams/drops Plaintiff
• Plaintiff's friend approaches Defendant threateningly saying stuff, Defendant leaves while Plaintiff hobbles around looking hurt

Issue(s):
Has the Large Kid acted in reasonable self defense?
Or did he commit the Torts of Assault and Battery?
Was he provoked as well?
Did the Small Kid commit the Torts of Assault and Battery and Provocation?

Statements of Law:
(See Above)

My Argument:
The Small Child has obviously created the perception of imminent and offensive bodily contact. The Small Child followed up on those by committing offensive bodily contact, REPEATEDLY, whilst Defendant (Large Kid) stood impassively and finally retaliated in REASONABLE Self Defense in order to stop/subdue his attacker. On top of this the Defendant was also provoked repeatedly, not only by words but by Battery as well.

Decision:
The Defendant has a COMPLETE defense and cannot be held liable. The Plaintiff, though injured and smaller, clearly committed the Torts of Assault/Battery/Provocation whilst the innocent Defendant only committed Self Defense.



The School should also be sued for Contributory Negligence, but that is another case altogether.

I don't know how any of you can possibly defend that smaller kid... major respect points have been lost by those that were...

*rant over*