Massachusetts paraplegic charged, attempting citizen's arrest on alleged molester

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by jumpy

This is why I could never be a solicitor... also why I hold the opinion that there's a special place in hell for most of them.

You can argue the technicalities all you like, but I find a heavily disabled, wheelchair bound man to constitute very little physical threat to anyone. Bat or no. Give him a firearm on the other hand...

Clearly the disabled guy thought a baseball bat was an appropriate weapon as he pre-meditatively carried one. I think a baseball bat in anyone's hands no matter how young or old or able or disabled can be a dangerious weapon, especially when it is used as such.

Well, the key is to not look at this issue from an emotional viewpoint. That is what Lawyers and Judges have to do. It is very easy to get swayed by the emotional aspects of this case, especially when the emotions involved agree with you.

On an emotional level we have this cripple smacking the crap out of a child molester. On an emotional level this is very gratifying.

On a logical level we have a person setting up another person and smacking the crap out of them because the first person *thinks* they are a child molester.

That is not what the Citizens' Arrest laws were written for.

Was this truly a case of assisting justice or was it a case of vigilante revenge?

The actual facts and evidence will come out in court where they will, hopefully, be examined not from an emotional viewpoint but from a logical viewpoint.

The actual facts and evidence will come out in court where they will, hopefully, be examined not from an emotional viewpoint but from a logical viewpoint.

From a logical viewpoint was there any requirement for the man to be involved at all?

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

From a logical viewpoint was there any requirement for the man to be involved at all?

Aside from reporting it? No.

Aside from reporting it? No.

He didn't even do that though, his partners daughter made the report to the police about her husband on the mainland.

[Feuer Frei!]

Originally Posted by jumpy

You can argue the technicalities all you like, but I find a heavily disabled, wheelchair bound man to constitute very little physical threat to anyone. Bat or no.

Finally, someone sees the light.

What would you do to prevent a suspected gary from escaping arrest, knowing the police were on their way, when it involved a family member? If you had any decency, you'd do what was right regardless of the cost to you. Had wheelchair man wanted to do the other chap real harm there's much more he could have done than attempt to level the playing field of his disability with a baseball bat.

And again, Amen brother!
People should realise that emotions did get in the way, yes we don't deny that, and that this case is what it is.
A man, emotionally involved, for obvious reasons.

Originally Posted by Platapus

Clearly the disabled guy thought a baseball bat was an appropriate weapon as he pre-meditatively carried one.

Appropriate? Hard to say really. That's probably all he had to have with him.

I think a baseball bat in anyone's hands no matter how young or old or able or disabled can be a dangerious weapon, especially when it is used as such.

Really? Wow! There must be a lot of pansies out there in this big beautiful world of ours then.
And gun crimes should be down too then in that case.
Why is it that we always fall back on this arguement that a baseball bat is a threatening weapon?
Do we really have to derail this thread and start defining what is considered a threatening weapon? And how a object becomes threatening? And how an object must be made up of and held and wielded or cocked and loaded or held in the 2 hands and swung at full force by an able-bodied man who weighs 300 lbs?

Well, the key is to not look at this issue from an emotional viewpoint. That is what Lawyers and Judges have to do. It is very easy to get swayed by the emotional aspects of this case, especially when the emotions involved agree with you.

Well i do agree with you there.
It just shows that there are human beings out there with feelings and morals and emotions that get the better of them in situations like that. Does that make us weak? Does that make us criminals?

On an emotional level we have this cripple smacking the crap out of a child molester. On an emotional level this is very gratifying.

Hell yea, i'd do the same thing.
And i ask again, is this 27-year old a girl?
A right royal pansie! That should never have been a threatening situation for this clown. I take a guess that the clown thought to himself ill milk this one for all it's worth! What's the bet?

On a logical level we have a person setting up another person and smacking the crap out of them because the first person *thinks* they are a child molester.

Yes, it certainly is easy to sit back here, all of us, including me and judge the situation from afar.
Logic, would not be the first action i would undertake in a situation like that either.
And the point about him not knowing the facts, i have to agree with you, but surely there is more to this story than what is told.
More reports of the abuse, marks, etc on body of child etc etc.

The actual facts and evidence will come out in court where they will, hopefully, be examined not from an emotional viewpoint but from a logical viewpoint.

Ofc they will, that's one reason why the guy in the wheel chair is going to court.
Oh, and 2 other reasons ofc too, one: the clown that pressed charges, because he couldn't defend himself from a guy in a wheel chair () and two: the prosecution who i'm sure informed the clown that one: this would be beneficial to your case and two: let's make some money!

I think at the end of the day we are all going to go around in circles with this case.

[Aramike]

Much over-complication being done here, I think. Surely it is interesting, but its a mere elementary exercise.

The bottom line, in my opinion, is that the man was wrong when using force in an attempt to restrain the alleged molestor. That being said, I can empathise completely with what he did. In fact, should I ever be in a similar situation, the molester better hope I'm in a wheelchair or I'd do far worse than strike him with a bat.

I believe this man will get off with what amounts to a slap on the wrist. Vigilantism is wrong, but in many cases laws against such behavior seem to exist to discourage such actions, not to punish those in fairly extreme circumstances or those who are merely "wired" that way.

This should teach you several things.

NEVER admit to anything!
(He fell trying to run out the door and is lying about being hit with a bat will back fire! "I want my Lawyer" is all you should EVER say)

NEVER talk to reporters.
(They have a need to make the news and often cause more harm then good. Those 12 that will Judge you? Already saw or read the News before being selected for Jury Duty. And they will hang you just as fast as everyone here has this Guy)

NEVER, EVER, EVER talk to the Law Dogs (Sorry Jimbuna) about a case you are the suspect in!
(It's thier job to prove a case. Open your mouth and you've done thier job for them. You most likely will remove 'reasonable doubt' by yapping and your high dollar Lawyer just pleads you down when he may have actually earned his money and got you off scot free)

Read "The Manipulation of Human Behaviour" just once.
Written in 1961? It's still a main stream study guide in many areas.

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by Feuer Frei!

Why is it that we always fall back on this arguement that a baseball bat is a threatening weapon?

Have you ever, first hand, had to pick up the pieces of someones skull that has been shattered by a baseball bat?

I have.

I'd call it a threatening weapon when wielded as such.

[Feuer Frei!]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

Have you ever, first hand, had to pick up the pieces of someones skull that has been shattered by a baseball bat?
I have.

I am sorry that you have had to witness such a thing. Truly, i am.

I'd call it a threatening weapon when wielded as such.

No doubt, i would agree.
That baseball bat would have to be wielded by a able-bodied man i would guess.
I know this is being technical now, but how much force could a wheel-chair bound man exert with a baseball bat?
And how much force could a able-bodied man, standing, exert, with a baseball bat in full swing?
I hazard a guess that the latter would be in a better, much better situation to really do a lot of damage.
In fact, lethal damage.
Someone who is standing and swinging the bat would have much more force at their command.

Probably.
But an unarmed man standing faceing an unarmed wheel chair bound person holds the advantage everytime.

And unarmed does not mean one does not have deadly abilities.
We know nothing of the skills of the one who got tapped.

As Jimbuna said, he was trained to take a knife away from a person.
I was trained to kill a person by any means.
If you were faceing a threat like that?
Would you carry a bat or hope I'd sit my sorry butt down?

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by Feuer Frei!

I am sorry that you have had to witness such a thing. Truly, i am.


No doubt, i would agree.
That baseball bat would have to be wielded by a able-bodied man i would guess.
I know this is being technical now, but how much force could a wheel-chair bound man exert with a baseball bat?
And how much force could a able-bodied man, standing, exert, with a baseball bat in full swing?
I hazard a guess that the latter would be in a better, much better situation to really do a lot of damage.
In fact, lethal damage.
Someone who is standing and swinging the bat would have much more force at their command.

a) Just part of the job.

b) I've been punched by similarly disabled people, you learn quick to never underestimate anybody. IIRC, the article said he paraplegic on the lower half and one arm. I would assume he had full use of the other arm. And electric wheelchairs are fast (especially if you pull the governor). A charging, full swing blow, would do a lot of damage. Enough to break some bones. Think mounted cavalry with a club. But, mounted manwith a bat vs unarmed man, I'd think the guy with the bat would have the initial advantage.

But obviously yeah, a fully functional man would have an advantage with a bat.

[August]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

But, mounted manwith a bat vs unarmed man, I'd think the guy with the bat would have the initial advantage

a small initial advantage maybe

But obviously yeah, a fully functional man would have an advantage with a bat.

Which would have been the situation after the paraplegics first swing once the 230lb child rapist took that bat away.

I've read both pages of arguments in this thread but i'd be very surprised to see the paraplegic get convicted of assaulting a child molester, let alone see them "throw the book at him" like Neon wants to see.

Finally, someone sees the light.

No, that is someone who appears as myopic on the topic as yourself.

And again, Amen brother!

Strang, he disagrees with you there, he is more in accordance with Privateers often stated views.
So maybe he is not quite as myopic after all but somehow you think he is saying the same as yourself.

People should realise that emotions did get in the way, yes we don't deny that, and that this case is what it is.

That is exaclty what you cannot see. You cannot see the case for what it is.