Actually, my narrative is rock-solid and demonstrated by my examples. In a single sentence, my narrative is that even children of 11 and 12 years of age can (and do) kill. This observation is pertinent in this situation.
He escalated to excessive force, that is why HE was arrested, the 11 year old girl was not arrested. Why is that?
I agree he escalated too far, but the gang of girls, particularly the primary aggressor, should face justice for provoking the entire violent encounter. The reason she was not arrested is that children are often (and erroneously, to my mind) given passes for behaviors an adult would be arrested for. When it comes to provoking violent confrontation, this is doubly-true.
His overreaction conceded, I still say she tried to grab the bull and instead got the horns.
“given passes for behaviors an adult would be arrested for. “
Exactly, that has always been the case since forever, when you are 18, you should KNOW better. If we applied the law strictly to children that we do to adults, a large majority will be in prison before they are 14. I don’t think that benefits society either.
He was 51, he should know better then to do what he did. I said earlier, he should have avoided the group and just walked by. He had ZERO to gain by confronting them. He is the one with the arrest, he is the one who now will spend the next two years in court, and possibly 3-5 years in jail. The jury will only see the part where he knocks her lights out, because in reality, that is all that really matters to the law. (Even the whole video doesn’t help this guy’s case)
The law focuses on what DID happen, and less on what MIGHT happen.