You must be a Brit…(checks)…yup!
He intended to get drunk (illegally). The consequences are all a result of that first decision. The US does not excuse crimes if the perpetrator was drunk. I don’t remember the UK doing it either.
Regardless of whether or not it was a crime, he should at least have the decency to apologize for his actions. What a class act this guy must be.
On the plus side, I now feel a little better for accidentally spilling a part of my beer on a lady at the movies last week.
On occasion it’s happened on an aircraft, as it’s medical knowledge that alcohol has a stronger effect on a plane (cite), and if an individual cannot have been reasonably expected to know this, it’s a valid excuse.
Not that I think that’s what happened in this case, especially as he was drinking before he got on the plane.
What happens in some, but not all, cases in the UK is that there are different offences when drunk, such as drunk and disorderly, where the intent to get drunk is what makes it a crime, not necessarily any intent to be disorderly.
Also, what crime, specifically, is pissing on someone? It pretty obviously ought to be a crime, but as there appears to be no threat to the victim, or actual harm caused* the usual assault and battery laws in the UK wouldn’t seem to apply, but damage to property seems too little somehow.
*I don’t think psychological harm is covered under battery laws.
From this legal dictionary (applies to US for sure, and maybe to UK):
"Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.
Intent is an essential element of assault."
So, it seems that the fact that the tangible harm was mainly psychological (plus some laundry expenses or whatnot) isn’t what might make it “not assault”. Rather, what might make it “not assault” is the possibility* that there was no specific intent to cause harm (of any kind) to anyone.
But he’s still a dickwad, and should do a little time, IMHO. But if his daddy gets him off with no legal punishment, at the very least his having blown his chance to be in the Olympics should, one hopes, make him feel deep remorse for this (even if he hasn’t expressed this remorse publicly.)
(*Or it’s possible that there was intent, and that this could be proven. Then, it could very well be assault.)
-
It was illegal for him to drink at all, since he was underaged (legal drinking age is 21 in the US).
-
Aside from assault, an other obvious charge is indecent exposure. It’s illegal to wave your weenie at a little girl, even if you’re not pissing on her. I think he should have to register as a sex offender. Maybe that would penetrate his self-absorbed skull.
Does “tossing off” not have the same meaning across the pond then?
Not anywhere I’ve lived (New York, Chicago, California, Kansas), as far as I know! That’s why the headline writers for this story didn’t think twice about writing headlines like the one that was cited.
Given the general tone of that quote, I would at least say it might be wise to actually watch the event in question by one’s self before passing judgment based solely on it.
It turns out that this is a difference in the law in the UK and (most of) the US. In the UK, there needs to be intent to shock for it to be indecent. I suspect this will be what they get him for.
“Tossing off”?
Information please.
Throwing bodily fluids on another person is assault. You spit on someone in the US, you’ll be charged with assault.
It’s possible to transmit disease through bodily fluids, and the exposure of a victim to whatever infectious agents the perpetrator may have inhabiting his body is the reasoning.
(Besides, it’s NASTY!)
~VOW
Having a wank.
Googled " Can HIV be transmitted through urine? " and came up with resounding No’s in the first 2 pages of cites. Hepatitis, on the other hand, can be.
:eek:
Here’s hoping that he suffers from Sudden Unexpected Punch To The Face Syndrome for years to come.
And I swear I han no idea Dirty White Boy was even in my iTunes until it started playing while I was posting in this thread.
Word to the wise.
Never order a hand tossed pizza while in the UK.
Yeah, don’t care for the white sauce.
Holy one-eyed snakes on a plane!
Then that would mean that rape do to intoxication would be legal. It would be okay for me to convince a girl to get drunk just so I could have sex with her. If she consented, that’s something she did while voluntarily drunk.
I’ve known people who take this position, but not on this board.