wdefromtx

My point....is you are essentially saying that this is not assault only because it would have been the cops job. I think it is reasonable to assume that if there was an officer in the vicinity say near Higgins they would have intervened in similar fashion. As Higgins saw it he saw a threat, there were no cops around so he acted to remove him from the podium area when he saw him trying to run up to the people speaking. Dibda has already said that this is not criminal assault, I don't see this standing up as a civil tort as well. For this to be a civil tort assault and battery as I understand there needs to be intention to cause harm or apprehension. Reacting to someone running up on the group of speakers and the subsequently pushing them back out of the way to clear them of the area was not to harm the kid or make him scared. It was done as a defensive reaction. Maybe if he hurt him it could fall under negligence. In the heat of the moment one could say that the kid was the one that was committing assault by running up. Now I do not think he was going to attack them, but that is easy to say by watching a video. Higgins reacted to what he thought he saw happening and that is not illegal and the fact he is not a police officer makes no difference. If the kid was just running off at his mouth and Higgins did this then yes he would be in the wrong and it would be assault. But that is not what happened and I have always said that this kid's actions before that viral video is why this is not assault. Sure one could try to take Higgins to court in a criminal case or even a civil one, but once you see everything leading up to this I doubt a jury or judge would side against Higgins. If you still say this is assault then you are the one that is only looking at this from a partisan view. I suspect you and others only want to see the part where he is pushed back and ignore everything leading up to it. Yes the kid has a right to be annoying and yell at them, but once he started running up like he did nobody knew what exactly he was planning. That is the point that he no longer can claim to be the victim. If Higgins would have clocked him and had him on the ground whaling on him I would said that would be assault even if he thought the kid was a threat. This is jury instruction: 20:14 DEFENSE OF ANOTHER PERSON The defendant, (name), is not legally responsible to the plaintiff, (name), on (his) (her) claim of (assault) (battery) if the affirmative defense of defense of another person is proved. This defense is proved if you find all of the following: 1. The defendant reasonably believed (even if mistakenly) that the plaintiff was making or was about to make (a) (an) (harmful) (or) (offensive) contact with (name of third person); and 2. The defendant reasonably believed (even if mistakenly) that under the circumstances it was necessary for (him) (her) to intervene and use force to protect (name of third person); and 3. The defendant used no more force than a reasonable person would have used under the same or similar circumstances to protect (name of third person) from the actual or threatened contact by the plaintiff. https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Committees/Civil_Jury_Instructions_Committee/2020/Chapter 20.pdf Just a little more about the civil tort. Now if he just got mad at the kid and did what he did I could see this being the case. https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/assault-battery-civil-vs-criminal-cases.html

Would intent have to be present to be considered assault?

Maybe he should have just let things play out, but how does he know he was not going to pull out a knife or something? He was obviously causing an issue and when he thought he had de-escalated things he comes bolting back. Assault would imply Higgins had intent to hurt him.....you can plainly see that he was just removing what he saw as a threat from the immediate area.

With the crap that has happened today whose to say he did not have a knife.....even he could have done some damage. Hence why he removed him the way he did...if there had been cops right there I am sure they would have done it and it probably would have been with way more force.

Apparently not as fried as you are now. LOL But good. Not sure what you are saying here............but sounds like you see why Higgins removed him?

Answer this.......if Higgins was a cop and saw him run up around like this and remove him in the same manner would you be saying it was assault as well? Or would you be saying he was trying to stop a perceived threat?

If you watch the news clip he says there was no police in the direct vicinity of where they were speaking he thought he de-escalated things then he comes running back around. That is when he acted and removed him.

Not to mention the kid was trying to charge around and get to the podium. Funny how this is assault, but riots where they steal and burn stores down is ok and peaceful. Kid is probably lucky it was Higgins and not the police. I could see him pushing back and arguing with an officer and he would have went down and gotten arrested.

There fixed it for you. Pretty idiotic to think this kid is a victim here.

https://www.kplctv.com/2023/05/18/congressman-clay-higgins-removes-activist-during-news-conference/ If my wife was doing what this kid was doing.....being disruptive and charging around to get up to a congress person like he did prompting someone to remove them because they thought he could have been charging to get to the congress person then she deserves it. Go to about the 0:50 sec mark and you see this dumbass running up behind her trying to get to her....Higgins went into protection mode. He also tried to reason with him before this and he was still being an idiot. It does not surprise me that only one part of this went viral, but it points to exactly what I said last night that I knew something happened before hand that led up to this. Now, I fully expect you and others to say he was no threat...but like I said if he was a Trump supporter this would not be assault to you and you would be saying that he was being disrespectful and the one causing the problem. Also, since Leftfield kept wanting to talk about a police officer doing this to someone.....if the police were right there at the time and saw him doing this they would have removed him and probably used more force. Quit trying to act like he is a victim here.

I didn’t see an assault…did they charge him? Did the kid file charges for assault? It’s all on video so it should be pretty cut and dry right?

He’s grasping at straws to make this assault. It’s assault to him because he would be scared and according to the law in LA that’s all that matters. He’s trying like hell to get you in a gotcha situation. Thankfully I live in a state that has assault spelt out where it’s not up to someone who gets their feelings hurt easily to say they are assaulted if some gives them a mean look. Because according to their law that’s all it takes.

When did he get assaulted? Ss far as my wife goes I’d find out why she’s being removed. But she’s more than capable of handling herself.

If I was causing problems and someone removed me from the area no I would not fear that I would be harmed. Same for my wife, I may not like it and I’d handle the situation….but that does not mean it is assault. Also my family isn’t stupid enough to do something disrespectful to end up in this situation in the first place.

Soooo it’s down to if he felt afraid just like I said.

No the law does not disagree with me… https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.22.htm#:~:text=ASSAULT. (,including the person's spouse%3B or ASSAULT. ( a) A person commits an offense if the person: (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse; (2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or.

No it’s not assault. The kid was being disrespectful and if this made him anxious, felt like he was in imminent harm, or offended then he needs to suck it up. Happy? But since he was wearing a Bernie shirt his feelings were probably hurt so if that makes you think it was assault…but you do you.

Police accepting this or not a comparing two totally different things. The folks including this kid that think this is assault probably get upset if someone doesn’t use the correct pronouns. And as I said, I’d like to see what transpired before the clip. Lets face it, if he had a Trump shirt on no one on here would call it assault and this thread would not exist.

If this was a family member I still would not consider it assault. I also would like to know what transpired before the video clip started. I’m not saying the congressman was in the right….but if people think that’s assault they need to grow thicker skin.

LOL.....assault?

Is he "Art of the Deal" top notch though? 😁

I think we are paying for all the free COVID money now though.

Law of Conservation of Mass.

I believe in aspects of both. Science is the tool to figure things out.

Also, I did for s**ts and grins go to Copeland's church once with a friend to check it out. They had the works going, people being healed and fainting. Then he tooks his caddy to his private jet.