L
lexorandi
Guest
Yikes I’ll pray for you both 
- Status
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Thank you for clearing that up and sorry if I misunderstood.
As for the conflict of interest, was there really one?
Again, if this was real, this individual says that he went to a neighbor’s house who happens to be a narcotics officer, a police officer. This person accompanied him back to the residence. So in reality, could we not say that he was the one doing the detaining?
Also, again if this is real, his wife took a plea bargain, in essence, she admitted to the wrong doing, she allocuted in court before a judge. She waved her right to a trial. She admited guilt.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I think this is the best reply in the whole thread.Yikes I’ll pray for you both
R
Rob_s_Wife
Guest
E
Elliott
Guest
Wonder if he ever ticketed her for driving violations while she drove him home.
O
otm
Guest
The large majority of murderers are sorry about it later, too. And you are right, it was just a rage, not a cold blooded attempt to kill. But the victim is just as dead, even if you didn’t “mean it”.
Entirely different? Not in the law. Different, yes. But entirely? No, they both go under the heading of murder.
No, he could not have just dropped the charges. The assault was with deadly force; it was more than her just hauling off and landing a punch with her fist. She used a frying pan, which has been used as a murder weapon more than once. The District Attorney either subpoened him into the Grand jury hearing, or requested his appearance with the threat of a subpoena right behind it.
Once in there, he was giving sworn testimony: he had two choices, tell the truth or perjure himself. Given the public evidence already available to the D.A., perjury was simply not an option.
Had he chosen to not testify, the D.A. would simply present his testimony given at the Grand Jury. He did not bring the case, the State did, so he has no power to dismiss the case; it is not his case to dismiss; it is the State’s. And the State has no reason to dismiss an attempted murder case, or assault with a deadly weapon case; that is too high a level of crime to let slide.
P
pnewton
Guest
But it wasn’t and there was no follow up hitting. I do not think murder was the intent. Did you notice the original story has him having his head bandaged? This does not seem like an attempt at a death dealing blow.
J
JCPhoenix
Guest
Thought I’d post the quote we’re discussing:
“i made it to my neighbor’s house down the street, another police officer, and because i was still “on duty” and VERY angry, i arrested my wife for both spousal assault and aggravated assult on a police officer.”
Note he stated HE, not the neighbor, arrested his wife. He also stated he was VERY angry, which would be understandable…therefore he should have been seperated entirely from the situation as would be procedure in ALL domestic incident investigations for the safety of both the parties AND the officers involved.
Moving on…
"my wife pleaded down to avoid 15 years in prison, but she will end up serving 5 years before its over. through it all, my local church community has given me no support whatsoever, and consider ME in the wrong because i arrested, filed charges and testified to a grand jury against her. somehow i think that they consider my actions are breaking the marital bond, and i should have turned the other cheek. now i did testify again at the sentencing reccomendation hearing (very angrily and out of spite), and the testimony most definitely extended her sentence. "
This is just frought with bitterness, isn’t it? There is a conflict of interest there as he clearly has an adjenda which does in fact affect the bonds of matrimony.
Yes, the woman, if this is true, should be sent to trial. Yes, the husband, if he is truthful, should attend the hearing and speak the truth, even if it is an accusation against his wife. But I can say that the simple facts are enough for a conviction without any spite on the part of the accuser. He should not have been involved in the arrest. That is a conflict of interest. It is his word, as a uniform, against the word of a “crazed” civillian woman. It is his word, as a police officer, against his own wife, and in the eyes of many, he would automatically be seen as the more credible party just by the very fact he wears a uniform. Especially in this post-9/11 era. It could also be argued by some that the uniform destroys his credibility. This all undermines the search for the true facts.
Testifying at the sentencing recommendaion hearing (very angrily and out of spite, as he says) is just plain wrong. He is MARRIED to this woman! It’s one thing to testify as it is more than likely required and it is the job of the court to sort out guilt/innocence. But it is also the requirement under God of both spouses to focus on their marriage and go to God to heal whatever caused such a huge rift.
There are also cases under canon law (abuse being one of them) where divorce is permitted or at least seperation, and annulments can be given. Could this be one of those cases? We’ll never know.
O
otm
Guest
We are not talking about a slap up the side of the head case or a push (violently) against a wall case; we are talking about a minimum of assault with a deadly weapon case, and very possibly an attempted murder case.
As I said above, all she had to do was rotate the pan 90 degrees, and we would be talking about a first offender and a single incident called murder. A 2 to 3 pound object with a narrow edge, as the pan would have were it rotated, would crush his skull just as surely as a spoon, on edge, will shatter an egg.
O
otm
Guest
There was no jury. She pled guilty to a lesser charge with a mandatory sentance.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
If you go back and read all of his posts rather than just his first one you will see that he was accompanied back to his residence with is neighbor who is a narcotics officer.
You would also see his clarifing this “arrest” issue which he changed to really just detained while the officer who came did the arrest.
Go back and read all of his posts then we can continue to discuss it.
O
otm
Guest
Again, the “I didn’t mean to kill {her} {him}” is some of the first words out of the mouth of most murderers who kill in a rage.
Picking up a frying pan and hitting another person does not show intent? According to the law, it does, unless one can plead and prove insanity - they truly thought it was a paperback book, or they truly thought it was ws stranger intent on serious bodily harm.
She didn’t pick up a rolled-up newspapaer, or a wooden kitchen spoon. She picked up a frying pan. That qualifies in law as a deadly weapon. She was in a rage and intended serious bodily injury - what does one intend to do to another when one picks up a frying pan and hits another in the head - a love tap? This isn’t two lovers fooling around, and she picks up the pan and jokingly and playfully taps him on the behind as a mock spanking. She was in a rage and used a weapon eminently capable of crushing his skull.
Would you say the same thing if she were a cop, and he picked up the frying pan and beaned her?
P
pnewton
Guest
There is no way attempted murder would stand up to the level of reasonable doubt. Why she did not turn it on edge. Imagining what could happen if she had would just strengthen the arguement that she did not have intent to kill or she would have taken a more deadly blow and multiple blows. Instead she dealt a single blow that required a bandage and left the person angry, not dazed.
I do not support mandatory sentencing laws for first offenders because of the many possible variables involved. But then as I pointed out above (and linked to it) the only mandatory sentencing for domestice violence is 5 days, not 5 years as told. I can understand a cool down period like that.
P
pnewton
Guest
What law lists a frying pan as a deadly weapon?
P
pnewton
Guest
No. I openly admitted earlier I have a double-standard in this area. A husband is called to love his wife and lay down his life for her if needed. I assure you in the same situation I would not have had her arrested and would have refused testimony.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I do not know of any reasonable person who would not think that swinging a frying pan at someones head was done with at the very least the intent to cause serious bodily harm if not to kill them.
Also there was no need for it to stand up in court as she took a plea bargain and admited guilt.
M
mjdonnelly
Guest
Still it comes down to a cop had his butt kicked by a woman with a frying pan.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Just about anything that can cause serious bodily harm when used in an assault is considered a dealy weapon.
Yes, a man is called to lay down his life for his family, but he is not called to allow it to be taken by his wife.
If he did not appear before the Grand Jury, he could have been jailed until he did appear. Also I doubt very much that the lack of his testimony would have made any difference,
Once the report was made there was no choice in the arrest.
Unlike you and JCPhoenix, I have a zero tolerance policy on this. Assult me and its over, for my protection, but then this is from my experience with an abusive relationship. (Just so you know it is between me and my brother) Once the physical violence starts, it does not stop.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
And you find that amusing?
P
pnewton
Guest
Bear in mind that the “cop” in question claims to be sworn volunteer police officer, whatever that means, and is only in his twenties.
- Status