|Cook committed assault - with the possible intent to take the gun away and use it on the other.|
|Re: I don't see how this passes SYG muster, but maybe I'm missing something: -- TEEBONE||Post Reply||Top of thread||Forum|
Posted by: LateForLunch ® |
Author Profile Mail author Edit
As near as I can figure, the law looks at the universe as a series of short videos or snapshots. For the rest of us, the world is a YouTube video with a beginning, middle and end but little else in detail.
In legal analysis, it seems that each action/reaction has significance in the context of the moment they occur, separate from previous or future actions.
There is in legal observation a strange, sort of slow-motion delineation of facts which recalls quantum physics in the sense that a particle's location can't be pinpointed exactly at the same time as its trajectory. You can have one or the other but not both.
So in the need for some precision in criminal charges, the law sometimes sacrifices overall context.
The only crime for which there is sufficient evidence to charge is (based on the admission of the guy who threw the punch) assault on the guy with the gun.
Modified by LateForLunch at Tue, Jan 01, 2019, 13:48:53
|Post Reply | Recommend | Alert||Where am I? Original Top of thread||Previous | Next | Current page|