- This topic has 36 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
What, if any, are the legal repercussions of intervening in on an assault. Assume a person of no relation or connection to you is being viciously beaten on a street or down an alley and you get involved it is still considered “self-defence”? You had a chance not to get involved but chose to do so, so are you making yourself vulnerable from a legal perspective?
What if it was a robbery, a thief is running from a store and you decided to stop him. Could he say you assaulted him?
I’m sure this will vary from country to country and will depend on the circumstances such as who got injured and how badly but can anyone give any insight?
Thanks,
S.Re: Legality of intervention
In the Netherlands you’re obligated to do anything you can to help a person in trouble.
Anything you can may just be calling 112 (eurpean 911) or getting people to help or intervening yourself.However, if you go “too far” you do risk a lot of legal issues.
The right proportion in any situation is open for debate so I’m afraid our legal system is not really in favour of people stepping in to help.If you catch any criminal in the act , any civilian is allowed to apprehend the person and hand him/her over to the police. Reasonable force is permitted to make sure the person does not run away. Using handcuffs or even tie raps is not permitted.
Again, reaonable force is open for debate. You do risk penalty if your criminal gets hurt.
Re: Legality of intervention
From what the local cop that came to the scene of this incident told me I would have been possibly charged if the aggressor was injured and pressed charges against me, because I placed my hands on him first and he wasn’t initially attacking/aggressor to me.
Great question, last year me and wife was at local store parking, the one most women love has a red circle as logo… as i get off car wife notices man screaming obscenities at woman with 2 kids at her hands and very close to her face very aggressively, the woman looked freaked out and my wife grabs me tells me do something.. I didn’t want to get too involved I thought it was domestic(wife/husband) so i just say hey everything ok, the woman explained she accedentily cut off the guy parking looking in opposite direction, i told the guy calm down, no need to scream obscenities in front of kids , he immediately started coming towards me screaming something, I put my hand out on his shoulder to stop him & make space , he was still pushing towards me, I was few seconds from pulling him into an elbow. Security got there in their segways and took care of the guy, i was glad.
I always wondered if I had escalated it and hit the guy, would i have been charged. I don’t know for sure, but the woman was very very glad and kids also, they kids also already crying top of their lungs. What impressed and infuriated me the most even more than the actual aggressor was the fact there was a crowd of men and women around just looking standing there before i got in between doing nothing.
Re: Legality of intervention
quote kvmorl:What impressed and infuriated me the most even more than the actual aggressor was the fact there was a crowd of men and women around just looking standing there before i got in between doing nothing.That’s what pisses me off the most, people would rather watch and not intervene than risk making a fool of themselves. I’m sure if it had escalated someone would of intervened (although that in itself is not guaranteed) but no doubt that woman was terrified for her kids. I know on your part you probably think you didn’t do much but you did what most others were afraid to and that is something I’ve infinite respect for.
This question originally spawned from something I saw as a kid where a man was beating another while his girlfriend was screaming for someone to help. 200+ people must have passed without looking twice afraid to catch the glare of the aggressor. Eventually a man stepped out and diffused the situation by calling the police and restraining the attacker until they got there (he grabbed him by the collar, slammed him to a wall and threw him onto the floor). I left as the police were arriving but I’ve always wondered if he would have been in trouble for his actions.
It’s really quite disgusting to think about all those who tried to ignore it without even calling the police.
Thanks for the responses so far, I really do appreciate them thumbsup
Re: Legality of intervention
quote Seachmall:What, if any, are the legal repercussions of intervening in on an assault. Assume a person of no relation or connection to you is being viciously beaten on a street or down an alley and you get involved it is still considered “self-defence”? You had a chance not to get involved but chose to do so, so are you making yourself vulnerable from a legal perspective?What if it was a robbery, a thief is running from a store and you decided to stop him. Could he say you assaulted him?
I’m sure this will vary from country to country and will depend on the circumstances such as who got injured and how badly but can anyone give any insight?
Thanks,
S.IMO, too many variables to give any kind of concrete answer. Going to depend on things such as where it’s taking place, what was happening before/during/after, suspect/victim statements, evidence, witness statements, local statutes, etc…
oops, prematurely hit submit
quote Seachmall:What, if any, are the legal repercussions of intervening in on an assault. Assume a person of no relation or connection to you is being viciously beaten on a street or down an alley and you get involved it is still considered “self-defence”? You had a chance not to get involved but chose to do so, so are you making yourself vulnerable from a legal perspective?What if it was a robbery, a thief is running from a store and you decided to stop him. Could he say you assaulted him?
I’m sure this will vary from country to country and will depend on the circumstances such as who got injured and how badly but can anyone give any insight?
Thanks,
S.IMO, too many variables to give any kind of concrete answer. Going to depend on things such as where it’s taking place, what was happening before/during/after, suspect/victim statements, evidence, witness statements, local statutes, etc… Each case is going to be different.
From KVMORL’s side of his story, as an LEO, I would have had no problem with him stepping in and using force if/when the guy turned on him. OTOH, things that could make it bad for him would be if the woman he was assisting left the scene, bystanders/witnesses had a different view of the situation, the BG’s injuries were not consistent with his side of the story, etc.
I’m not sure how/when/where “don’t get involved” became the guiding mantra. From briefly reading up on Sir Robert Peel and others, my understanding is that law enforcement is (or should be) EVERYONE’s responsibility and that police officers are different only in that they are tasked with that duty on a full-time work basis.
I don’t think everyone who chooses to pass by is a “coward” – the legal system is so screwed up over here – too many stories of people trying to do the right thing getting royally fuc&ed over and/or criminals getting the benefit of the nod or winning outrageous lawsuits even when their criminal actions were the root cause. IMO, the “system” here is WAY too protective/soft on the criminal element.
When we’re off duty, we’re basically like everyone else. We no longer have all of our work resources/equipment available to us. We are also not readily identifiable as LEOs.
If any of us (LEO, non-LEO) choose to intervene in a situation, we have to be smart about it. What are we risking if SHTF? How bad is the situation? Do we know EVERYTHING about what’s going on?! Have we identified ALL the BG’s?! Etc… Too many horror stories to mention right now…
Re: oops, prematurely hit submit
quote Don:If any of us (LEO, non-LEO) choose to intervene in a situation, we have to be smart about it. What are we risking if SHTF? How bad is the situation? Do we know EVERYTHING about what’s going on?! Have we identified ALL the BG’s?! Etc… Too many horror stories to mention right now…What excellent rules of thumb concerning any potential intervention!!
Thanks for that..
Re: Legality of intervention
Don, well put.
Many states say that you are obligated to act whether it be calling for assistance like 911 or yelling, etc. If somebody is getting knifed and you run up to “intervene” that may not be the best idea for you. Like Don said, it is really situational. Instead I would ask yourself this “If I stood by and just let it happen, could I sleep at night?”
I have told this story before, but a group of people stood by and watched as a man beat a toddler to death on the side of the road, not a single person intervened– only a half assed attempt was made. IMO, the ones that could have physically stopped him (not the elderly couple) and chose not to, should be held accountable under state law but they were not. I hope they see that toddler’s face every time they close their eyes.
Now on the flip side, in some situations you just may be better off being a good witness for the police. Use common sense… in most cases, things are not as they appear to be.
Re: Legality of intervention
This is the all-time classic bystanders failing to intervene case – the horrific attack and murder in 1964 of Kitty Genovese in NYC..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Genovese
BTW it seems that more recent study of the case suggests a far less damning view of the bystanders in the incident – quite a different scenario than how I learned it many years ago.. (!!).. nevertheless, the incident and outraged public reaction sparked studies which led to learning about the bystander effect.
The bystander effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect
The bystander effect is a social psychological phenomenon in which individuals are less likely to offer help in an emergency situation when other people are present. The probability of help is inversely proportional to the number of bystanders. In other words, the greater the number of bystanders, the less likely it is that any one of them will help.
There are many reasons why bystanders in groups fail to act in emergency situations, but social psychologists have focused most of their attention on two major factors. According to a basic principle of social influence, bystanders monitor the reactions of other people in an emergency situation to see if others think that it is necessary to intervene. Since everyone is doing exactly the same thing (nothing), they all conclude from the inaction of others that help is not needed. This is an example of pluralistic ignorance or social proof. The other major obstacle to intervention is known as diffusion of responsibility. This occurs when observers all assume that someone else is going to intervene and so each individual feels less responsible and refrains from doing anything.The case of Kitty Genovese is the most famous example of the bystander effect. It is also the case that originally stimulated social psychological research in this area. Ms. Genovese was stabbed to death in 1964 by a serial rapist and murderer. According to newspaper accounts, the killing took place for at least a half an hour. The murderer attacked Ms. Genovese and stabbed her, but then fled the scene after attracting the attention of a neighbor. The killer then returned ten minutes later and finished the assault. Newspaper reports after Genovese’s death claimed that 38 witnesses watched the stabbings and failed to intervene or even contact the police. This led to widespread public attention and editorials that the United States had become a cold, uncaring society.
According to an article published in American Psychologist in 2007, the original story of Kitty Genovese’s murder was exaggerated by the media. Specifically, there were not 38 eyewitnesses, the police were contacted at least once during the attack, and many of the bystanders that overheard the attack could not actually see the event. The authors of the article suggest that the story continues to be misrepresented in social psychology textbooks because it functions as a parable and serves as a dramatic example for students.[2]Re: Legality of intervention
Well they sure seem to have a “disorder” for everything don’t they… a pill for this, a pill for that I guess… I have no sympathy for those people that watched that toddler get pounded on and beat to death. There is no excuses. People need to start taking responsibilty for their actions- or failure to react. I have far more admiration for the person that steps up and does something, even if only to call for help.
Perhaps I am getting old, who knows… 🙂
Re: Legality of intervention
This all makes me think of a show ABC called What Would You Do? Its a hidden camera show that shows what people would really do and if they would intervene in situations like this. Not really assualt/murder situations, but still very interesting and suprising to watch.
Re: Legality of intervention
quote Kirsten:Well they sure seem to have a “disorder” for everything don’t they… a pill for this, a pill for that I guess… I have no sympathy for those people that watched that toddler get pounded on and beat to death. There is no excuses. People need to start taking responsibilty for their actions- or failure to react. I have far more admiration for the person that steps up and does something, even if only to call for help.Perhaps I am getting old, who knows… 🙂
Someone beating on a child or anyone else incapable of defending themselves like that deserves to be put down just like a rabid animal. There’s no way I could just watch something like that happen without taking action. On a case like that, no prosecutor is going to indict, and no jury would convict. But even if they did, I wouldn’t care. It would be worth it.
There was an interesting show on 60 minutes or 20/20 a while back – they had actors get involved in what looked like domestic disputes in a park. No fake hitting, but yelling, screaming, etc. Most people would stare and basically watch. But in nearly every scenario, someone would step up and intervene in some way. The man in the scenario was a big guy, sometimes average women would step up, sometimes much smaller men. There are definitely people out there willing to not sit idly by and will come to the defense of a total stranger. Edit: Stephx777, that’s the same exact one I was thinking of. Very interesting show.
Re: Legality of intervention
quote Kirsten:Well they sure seem to have a “disorder” for everything don’t they…Its going to get even more fun when the new edition of the American Psychiatric Association ‘DSM’ (Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders) is going to drop in 2012 – those in LE can be sure a whole raft of interesting new terms will be flying around courtrooms.
As for the ‘bystander effect’ – I just find it interesting in terms of a partial explanation for why people act the way they do in certain situations. The bystander effect seems to be part of the equation, as are some of the other thoughts raised in this thread as to why people might not intervene or delay doing so.
Anyway, I hope it didn’t sound like I was suggesting in any way there’s an excuse not to do something, because of course there is no excuse. The story about the toddler getting beaten to death is particularly horrible (!)..
More on the strange paradox of the bystander effect (the more people there are on scene – the less people are likely to do something):
The bystander effect was first demonstrated in the laboratory by John Darley and Bibb Latane in 1968.[3] These researchers launched a series of experiments that resulted in one of the strongest and most replicable social psychology. In a typical experiment, the participant is either alone or among a group of other participants or confederates. An emergency situation is then staged — examples include smoke pouring from a vent in the room, a woman falling and becoming injured, a student having an epileptic seizure, etc. The researchers then measure how long it takes the participants to act, and whether or not they intervene at all. These experiments virtually always find that the presence of others inhibits helping, often by a large margin.
Re: Legality of intervention
quote Stephx777:This all makes me think of a show ABC called What Would You Do? Its a hidden camera show that shows what people would really do and if they would intervene in situations like this. Not really assualt/murder situations, but still very interesting and suprising to watch.That’s a great show, really interesting. Here’s the closest I could find to the vicious assault scenario in the OP,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dvzj8wyZ9PIIt’s a real feel good video knowing there are people who are willing to step in, I can’t help but wonder though what would have happened if the homeless person was being straight-up beaten. Would people have been more hesitant or more infuriated?
That Bystander Effect is very interesting, but frustrating at the same time. Thanks for the replies, great discussion.
Re: Legality of intervention
I guess this answers my question above,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ru1F29vuVKIWhat I don’t like however is that the women stated they came to his aid because he was Latino and the man had been in that situation before.
People with no [emotional] connection essentially didn’t think it was worth the hassle. Sickening.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
