So perp approached someone on the street and accuses them of stealing their wallet. Grabs his shirt and then proceeds to beat them unconscious. The whole thing is caught on camera (except for the alleged theft of the wallet, which we only have the perp’s word for). Open and shut assault case.
I don’t see where the victim did anything wrong in this scenario. (Other than the arguable error of taking unnecessary risk to retrieve a wallet)
Why do you keep doing this? Why do you assume that the victim did not see the guy take his stuff and then approach him. You’re going out of your way now to spin this in a light most favorable to your initial misconceptions.
Folksy way of saying he did not appreciate or approve of having his property stolen.
In the sentence, he “didn’t cotton to” having a knife pulled. So, that’s the part he didn’t approve of. I don’t blame him. Nobody likes getting a knife pulled on them.
I just looked up the phrase as well. Gemini tells me that there is a regional difference. In British and Australian English, “cottoned to” means “realized”. So, I understand why there was confusion on this.
I think realized is usually “cottoned on” and not “cottoned to” (in the US at least). I agree it’s not an idiom that lends itself well to easy understanding.
Why does that make any difference? The sequence of events that was caught on camera was…
- Perp approaches victim on street and accusing them of stealing their wallet
- Perp physically accosts victim, grabbing their shirt
- Perp proceeds to punch and kick victim until they are unconscious
That’s assault, whether the accusation was correct or not has no bearing on it.
Here, I’ll fix this for you:
So perp approached the known thief immediately after seeing the thief make off with his wallet. He grabs the shirt of the thief, a reasonable amount of force to stop the thief from escaping. At that point, the thief pulls out a knife. The victim is now outnumbered, two to one, and one of the criminals has just pulled a knife. The victim uses force to defend himself from an attack and prevent a forcible felony. I’d also argue that in that situation, he had no ability to escape. Turning to run once that close could have resulted in getting stabbed in the back.
You’re still missing a key element. Between lines two and three should be the part where a knife was pulled. Why do you keep ignoring that?
-
Victim approaches Thief on street and accusing them of stealing their wallet
-
Victim physically stops theif, grabbing their shirt
-
Thief pulls a knife
-
Victim proceeds to punch and kick robber until they are unconscious
Why do you keep leaving out the part about the pickpocket pulling a knife?
Ok…
- Perp accuses victim of stealing wallet
- Perp attacks victim
- While being assaulted (but before being punched and kicked unconscious) the victim attempted to pull a knife
Still assault every day of the week.
Okay. I guess we’re just in disagreement. I don’t think the law, any prosecutor or any jury would agree with you, but you’re welcome to that interpretation, I suppose.
why do you think only what was caught on camera is legally relevant? If the guy did in fact steal his wallet (a fact that could easily be proven by, you know, finding the wallet in his possession), then the wallet owner’s actions are probably legal. If this is case of mistaken identify, welp, probably not!
My wife and I just passed our CCW class. Conceled Carry. It was stressed again, and again, that if you can, and it’s safe, just walk away. Take yourself out of the situation.
Neither of us intend to carry. But we can if we want to.
Frankly, it’s a pain in the ass to carry for lots of reasons.
Alright, I’ll bite.
Why is that?
- Camera stops recording and victim, thief, cameraman, and thief’s friend go out for a beer together having successfully created another Youtube teledrama.
(Just saying. Yes, this possibility was acknowledged in the OP, and yes the discussion to this point has been entirely legit.)
Guns are heavy. Even my .380. They are cumbersumb. I have yet to find a comfortable/concealaable holster.
(I’ve got a .22 the .380 a 38spl, a .45 and a .357)
And, perhaps compare it to driving a car. You need to give it special attention. If my wife and I are at a busy intersection we know to stop talking.
If you are not always aware and paying attention while a gun is on your person, you are doing it wrong. It’s sort of exhausting.
I’ve trained my wife how to shoot. If we have a weapon to look at, I check to see that it is not loaded. Give it to my wife for her to check that it is not loaded. And then of course treat it as it’s loaded. It’s what you do.
For a .380?
Get a pocket holster or a wallet holster. You get used to it . My off duty/back up piece is a Glock 30. Much larger than most 380’s. I carry it in a pocket holster. Either in my front pants pocket or the inside pocket of a coat or sports jacket. Do it enough and you get used to it.
Ok, I’m sure. But that is the problem. I don’t want to get used to it. “Here be dragons”
It stunned me that my Wife wanted to learn to shoot. But, thinking back she was recently surrounded by a pack of coyotes on a trail walk. And a woman was recently killed by a Cougar about 30 miles west of here A round into the ground is the way to solve all of that.
I was glad that my Wife wanted to learn how to shoot. Her next class is defensive pistol. So she will use my .380, not her 38spl (class requires a semi-auto, I sort of bought it for her). And she has to have a holster for that class, so I’m looking.
Didn’t cotton on to, as in didn’t understand that he’d pulled a knife. What other interpretation is there?