19 year old female fends off attacker but is found guilty

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sky

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
2,927
Location
Texas
Last edited by a moderator:
The british (lower case intentionally) has an approach to self defense that pales in the face of Nancy Pelosi.

While I may say "tsk tsk" to myself for propriety's sake,I have an inward smile about her reaction.

Lets see, if I attack any female, I can take a beating and be set free. Wonder where the line is crossed as to the severity of the beating.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33945
 
However, she went too far by continuing to kick her attacker on the head even after he was knocked unconscious.
Sheriff Donald Muirhead told Burleigh she was entitled to hit Docherty to protect herself. But he added: "You lost control. You kept on kicking him when there was no longer any need. In all the circumstances, it seems to me that I can deal with the matter by way of a financial penalty."

Let's be sure we get all the facts straight before we get our shorts in a bunch.

The authorities decided to fine instead of jail her over continuing to kick the creep in the head after he was unconscious.

We tell people that defending yourself when you're afraid is reasonable, but acting out of anger isn't.

Sounds exactly what the authorities told her and they decided to fine instead of jail her considering the situation. Not exactly what we might like to see, but pretty darn fair.

Anyone want to start a paypal fund to help offset the fine? I'll put in $10.
 
Self defense is not a sport and the Marque De Queensbury rule against striking a downed opponent should not apply. Just because a man is down does not mean that he can’t pop right back up in less than two seconds and still be able to out run and catch the average woman. Ever watch the UFC? People go down and continue to fight all the time. Down is not out! She had a tiger by the tail so to speak and had to sufficiently disable him in order to flee safely.
 
Step 1:
make silly rules
Step 2:
Scrutinize otherwise innocent people in life or death situations, from the comfort and safety of your judges seat.
Step 3:
Punish the innocent
Step 4:
Raise toast to queen......


:barf:
 
Where was the defense, and the argument that the attacker had pushed the female victim past her threshhold of sanity? In my opinion (and one that could have been argued in front of a jury), she was emotionally and mentally pushed beyond normal control, into a state of "temporary insanity" at the moment she exceeded the level of force necessary to defend herself. She should not have been held responsible for her own actions at that point; her attacker should have been held responsible for pushing her over the limit.
 
let me see if I'm hearing this right, she beat the crap out of her attacker whilst being attacked and you think that SHE might not be able to get away safely???????

???


My head is starting to hurt thinking about that.... Stop the threat, then drop it. Really good barfights end with the victor buying the loser a drink.
 
"No charges were brought against Docherty."

How are we supposed to interpret this? He got beat up by a girl, so no charges.
If he'd managed to complete the assuault, well then we would charge him. :rolleyes: Hopeless.
I was stationed in the UK. Their justice system is through. Non-criminal's rights are secondary.
 
Her reaction, I suspect, is no different than fighters in MMA/boxing or other full contact sports.

When the rush starts, you really don't know when to stop. That's why there are refs.

Instinct kicks in. Doesn't mean you're trying to kill the guy.

Bad precedent.

Also, that guy stalked her from the nightclub to her house. He had a balaclava on. Sounded like he wanted to do more than talk.
 
lemme see if i got this straight

Bad guy tried to rob her, she kicked the <removed> out of him, so the government decided to finish what the bad guy started and finished robbing the girl...makes sense
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bad guy tried to rob her, she kicked the <removed> out of him, so the government decided to finish what the bad guy started and finished robbing the girl...makes sense :what::(

Had to add the smilies :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't get me wrong, the guy should definately be charged with assault, just sayin, she was obviously able to handle him, not to mention the fact that this happened right by her front door??? Okay, you knocked the guy out, now go inside and call the police to come and clean what's left of him off of your porch. I have seen several times where people continue the fight after it's over for no other reason then outward agression and wanting to "kick a man when he's down". They don't black out, they aren't temporarily insane, they are just adding insult to injury because they have a skewed sense of "fair play". The difference between a victim and a criminal is a very fine line in some instances, like someone that keeps shooting while a would be attacker is running the other direction.

I'm not omnipotent, I don't know if this was the case in this scenario, but being thrown out of a club that same night gives me some insight into this person's personality.
 
She was just upholding the old social contract of a society which used to be civilized. The first punches were for defense. The next ones were for punishment, deterrence, retribution, and hopefully rehabilitation.
 
comments in red
I have seen several times where people continue the fight after it's over for no other reason then outward aggression and wanting to "kick a man when he's down". They don't black out, they aren't temporarily insane, they are just adding insult to injury because they have a skewed sense of "fair play".

What the hell does fair play have to do with this. She was attacked, it's not a boxing match. It's not a case of mutual aggression. I take it you've never been in a fight with someone who's attempting to do serious harm or kill you. You don't let them have a chance to get up, kicking a man when he's down is defiantly in order.

The difference between a victim and a criminal is a very fine line in some instances, like someone that keeps shooting while a would be attacker is running the other direction.

It's good to live in Texas. Still probably better not to shoot them.

.
 
Burleigh, who was with her boyfriend Christopher Twaddle, 21, ripped off Docherty's black, paramilitary-style balaclava and defended herself.
It was 2 on 1 she was with her boyfriend walking home and the two of them beat him to the ground, but then she continued to kick him when down. Thats what got her the fine, even though we all agree he deserved it for attacking her.
 
It was 2 on 1 she was with her boyfriend walking home and the two of them beat him to the ground, but then she continued to kick him when down. Thats what got her the fine, even though we all agree he deserved it for attacking her.

The article makes no mention of the boyfriend doing anything. Do you have other sources that say he was involved.
 
Interesting case.
An older guy is kicked out of a bar. He waits outside.
He follows a young couple home, puts on a ski mask, and then gets beat down when he tries to attack.


The fact that the man followed them home and then put on a ski mask before the confrontation certainly shows some bad intent.



Owen SParks said:
Self defense is not a sport and the Marque De Queensbury rule against striking a downed opponent should not apply. Just because a man is down does not mean that he can’t pop right back up in less than two seconds and still be able to out run and catch the average woman. Ever watch the UFC? People go down and continue to fight all the time. Down is not out!


However in this case the downed bad guy is supposedly unconscious. After being followed home by a creep in a ski mask it was the testimony of the neighbors that sealed the deal in getting their neighbor in trouble.
They claim he was motionless and possibly unconscious when some additional kicks were given.
So alerted by the commotion, perhaps her screams when attacked, the neighbors look outside and then become witnesses to her criminal kicks.

While there may be a way to try and justify taking advantage of a dangerous threat before it is too late if he was unexpectedly downed but could get back up, if the bad guy that had followed them home and put on the ski mask was really clearly knocked unconscious there was other options.
The women was not alone, she was with her boyfriend.
Tying the unconscious man up would have probably been a solution that would be more acceptable.
How long he would remain unconscious without the additional kicks is unknown. I have seen people knocked out for just a few seconds, and some for much longer.
However kicking someone down can easily result in death or permanent disability.

She was also not alone, she had her boyfriend with her. So that alters the scenario slightly. An unconscious attacker, with two young adults. Harder to argue a disparity of force serious enough to argue a perceived danger from someone already unconscious that requires what could readily be lethal force.
The attacker could have regained consciousness and got up, and having learned not to underestimate his victims may have indeed been more successful the second time, but self defense is judged by the immediate threat, not a future threat.


The 19 year old adult women was charged and now has a permanent violent criminal record.





Of course in much of the UK things like pepperspray are illegal, as are almost any self defense items.
 
Last edited:
However in this case the downed bad guy is supposedly unconscious. After being followed home by a creep in a ski mask it was the testimony of the neighbors that sealed the deal in getting their neighbor in trouble.
They claim he was motionless and possibly unconscious when some additional kicks were given.

As well they should have been. Remember he was just outside her door and could come back to his senses at any time and continue to attack before the police arrived.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top