Although you may not be back to read this, lieu, still: thank goodness. I was worried for you. I hope you’re feeling better soon.
Wow, your asswipe neighbor managed to finally retain counsel? That’s the only surprise here.
Congratulations. Hopefuly you never end up in a similar situation again . . .
Good news, and you deserve a rest lieu but once that is over we’ll need to know about all your stress induced bowel movements 
Cheers, Bippy
lieu
Location: Outside the box
Very appropriate!
Like everyone else has said, Thank God! And I hope you’ve learned to try to avoid these situations in the future.
Sam
So, what you are saying lieu is the getting the neck tattoo has been put on hold.
I am very happy for the outcome!
Now, go rest and breathe.
lieu:
Yet, you say you’re guilty. That should tell you something–apparently you really don’t believe you were justified in what you did. Please sign up for one of those road rage prevention/anger management classes.
Out of idle curiosity: Did anyone bother to quiz the jurors after it was all over to find out why they voted the way they did?
pugluvr: The “any physical comfort [which] may have [been] endured” by the “asswipe” neighbour was a broken nose (at least that’s what I take a cracked nose to mean). It’s not all that much of a surprise that someone, who was on his own property, who got a punch in the face, retains counsel for a likely lawsuit. There’s also the bit about “mutual respect for each other’s […] expectations of safety.” Bill had his nose caved in by someone and then that someone sent him a letter with that comment in it, so Bill just might take it to be a not so veiled threat.
p.s. lieu said the letter was sent via lieu’s lawyer.
That’s good to hear, but a question…
You can have a jury with six people on it?
Dang, Rick. I was just thinking the same thing: what’s with the tiny jury?
Another question, harking back to the original post in this thread: Why did those 4 prosecutors recuse themselves? They’re public officials and just refusing to be assigned to a case doesn’t sound kashrut to me. Recusing themselves for a valid reason, of course, passes muster.
Finally: Did the prosecutor finally assigned the case do his best? After all, wouldn’t a prosecutor who’s taking a case to trial actually try to prove the case?
Pissed off psycho neighbor living next door. Not good.
And finally Monty, in an earlier post you suggested lieu take a roadrage/anger management course. After reading your posts for the last few years, I suggest you join him.
Oh, and to save you the trouble: "Fuck you Klaatu!"
Klaatu: And I suggest you go ream yourself.
There’s a huge difference between saying something like that and (a) punching someone who was tailgating you in a traffic jam or (b) breaking your neighbour’s nose.
Well, hell, you got me dude, I was sure the “Fuck You” would come before the “go ream yourself.”
Pretty clever…
Sadly, Klaatu, I don’t share that opinion of you. Our limited interaction on this board puts you exactly zero steps above pet bridge dweller. Draw your own conclusion from that comment.
BTW, where do you get the “sour grapes” bullshit from? You will notice (unless you’re too damn lazy to actually read the posts) that I indicated that he shouldn’t get tossed into the slammer.
My posting about the prosecutor was one of simple curiosity: Is a prosecutor allowed to just turn down a case that the DA says to take to trial?
I`m sure we will.
Sorry, that was in reference to “Draw your own conclusion …”
Well, at least I don’t dwell under the bridge. (rimshot!)
I will save any more “limited interaction” for another thread.
Apologies to lieu et al for the somewhat juvenile hijack.