Unintended Consequences

people keep making similar claims, but never put up any evidence that what they assume to be true, is infact true. It's all just anecdotes', I heard of this kickboxer who,,,,, which kickboxer when, where is the news report ?

if you assault someone and break their jaw, you are going to court and most likely convicted. I dont see a 140 lb kick boxer being treated worse than a 300 power lifter who did a similar thing, unless you actually have something/ anything to back up this point of view

I was the deputy who brought him into court that day and heard the Prosecutor argue that. I think he ended up taking a plea deal out of it at his lawyer's advice. He was a local guy, no one famous. No big "news report" on it.
 
I'm wearing out the keys typing the same thing over again
his point was that MAer are treated more harshly than EVERYONE else. My point was, they are not, for instance a power lifter might be treated equally harshly. But for that matter so would a 100 lb weakling who attacked an old man.

that these factors apply to every one, means his point was wrong

If you want to wade through that.

http://www.aware.org/legal-articles...se-my-life-against-me-in-a-self-defense-trial

Here we go straight up.
No Cookies | The Advertiser

Kung-fu champ ‘choked stepdaughter so hard she blacked out'
 
Last edited:
I'm a bit mystified what you are trying to show with them, one is about a king fu man who went mad and attacked a young girl, there seems no self defence aspect at all.

the other is a considered view of how life style aspects can be used to build a negative view of you to influence a jury. It focusses almost entirely on gun law and shooting cases and sp in the most part isn't relevant to this discussion, what it perhaps does show is that any part of your life could be used against you. What films you watch, what magazines you read, who you associate with, what sports you play and included in that is what martial art you practise. This may or may not be admitted in evidence, it may or may not influence the jury for or against you.
what it most definitely doesn't show is that being a martial artist, will mean you are treated more harshly than anyone else. Which is what the claim was
 
I'm a bit mystified what you are trying to show with them, one is about a king fu man who went mad and attacked a young girl, there seems no self defence aspect at all.

the other is a considered view of how life style aspects can be used to build a negative view of you to influence a jury. It focusses almost entirely on gun law and shooting cases and sp in the most part isn't relevant to this discussion, what it perhaps does show is that any part of your life could be used against you. What films you watch, what magazines you read, who you associate with, what sports you play and included in that is what martial art you practise. This may or may not be admitted in evidence, it may or may not influence the jury for or against you.
what it most definitely doesn't show is that being a martial artist, will mean you are treated more harshly than anyone else. Which is what the claim was
Specifically.

"During a bail application yesterday, prosecutors argued the offence was extremely serious given Mr Downey’s martial arts background."
 
Back
Top