Runner who slapped reporter’s butt in road race arrested for sexual battery

I've read this entire thread and can summarize as follows:

A: You're stupid

B: No, You're stupid

And so on.

““It was an awful act and an awful mistake,” Callaway said.

He also said he was trying to pat Bozarjian on the back or shoulder and didn't realize until seeing the video that he touched her buttocks.“

What exactly makes you think he’s actually apologized? Do you believe he really thought he was trying to pat her on the shoulder and missed it by just a little?

I don't see anyone trying to justify what this guy did. The issue is whether he should be prosecuted. If he is to be put in jail for being "stupid beyond belief" - as you argue - there wouldn't be anyone who wouldn't at some time be behind bars - and it also appears that would certainly have to include you.

Sexism is a terrible thing. You could be fired for it. Several of you are guilty of it by lumping together 1/2 of the population who identify as male. We are all individuals and should be dealt with that way. So you can demand certain punishments for this individual, but you have no right to call out all men. Most of the population would never do this. Most men woukd never do it and most women would never do it. And you may think I am being insincere, but you can not even be certain that the perpetrator identifies as male or that the victim identifies as female. The odds are that they do but I have made that mistake on two occasions recently.

You dolt, we would all have the same feelings if it was a male reporter and either/or male/female doing the slapping. It literally has nothing to do with victim reporter being female and everything to do with a butt slap being innocuous.

And definitely you.

Poster #431 wrote:

You're dodging answering whether - in your opinion - everyone who has committed this egregious act of sexual violence should be treated the same (of course as long as it's illegal where it occurred). Charged with sexual battery, angry internet mod out to get them. Do you feel that would be the appropriate response to every person who has committed this absolutely heinous act against person and body? Or are you okay with the fact that many of these vicious predators are able to get away with it? Why is this so difficult to answer? Do you really not understand the question or are you intentionally not grasping the concept so you can either feign ignorance or buy time to come up with a response?

But I don't think everyone should be arrested for suspected battery. The victim needs to bring charges.

Armstronglivs wrote:

boring, correct answer wrote:

I pointed out very clearly how absurd your contention is that support of a victim’s right to bring charges is implicit acceptance of the possible penalties. That is not a logical conclusion.

Be better.

And penalties are not a logical outcome of a decision to press criminal charges? What do you think a court does? Files it away for future reference? Once charges are pressed we are accepting the outcome of the process, which is that if the charges are proven or admitted to (as they are here) there will be a prescribed penalty. If you don't wish for a criminal penalty, or approve of the penalty imposed, you don't press charges. Still struggling to be better, I see.

Agreeing with charges being sought in sexual battery cases does not confer agreement with cutting off ones hand as a punishment. That's faulty logic. You are laughably dense.

Be better.

You continue to evade this matter of opinion. 'Suspected battery' implies some legal action has already taken place. I'm asking you - since I think we can all agree (and let me know if you don't) that unsolicited butt-slapping occurs between two individuals with some level of frequency - are you comfortable with the idea of each of these offenders being charged with the crime and publicly shamed? Or in a slightly different way, is the charging with a crime and public shaming the appropriate response to all of these unheard of cases? Yes or no? Answer yes or no to either or both of the questions above. Yes, no are the only options and the questions are to your opinion on the matter, not whether the proper legal action has or has not already taken place. I have specifically bolded the yes/no questions above so they're easily visible. Dodge again and I'm done since I know you're being intentionally obtuse . Even some other chick who jumped in here understood the question and answered it, so I know I'm not phrasing this in a way that's impossible to understand.

Elvin wrote:

Sure, they should all be charged. The internet mob should probably be reserved for those who are dumb enough to intentionally commit the act on live television.

I mean, I didn't even have to go back and forth 8 times with this genius. Absolutely amazing.

Poster #431 wrote:

are you comfortable with the idea of each of these offenders being charged with the crime and publicly shamed?

If the victim brings charges, then yes. As I said in my first response.

I haven't commented on public shaming as that is nonsense.

boring, correct answer wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

And penalties are not a logical outcome of a decision to press criminal charges? What do you think a court does? Files it away for future reference? Once charges are pressed we are accepting the outcome of the process, which is that if the charges are proven or admitted to (as they are here) there will be a prescribed penalty. If you don't wish for a criminal penalty, or approve of the penalty imposed, you don't press charges. Still struggling to be better, I see.

Agreeing with charges being sought in sexual battery cases does not confer agreement with cutting off ones hand as a punishment. That's faulty logic. You are laughably dense.

Be better.

But if cutting off his hand was the available punishment you would be in a bit of a quandary. You would support bringing charges but would then say at the sentence - "Gee, I wish they didn't cut off his hand." You have yet to grasp that once you decide to take an issue to court you are in the court's hands, and that includes the sentence it imposes. Only an idiot - and you certainly qualify - would advocate going to court without taking into account what the court may decide, which includes the penalties it may impose. But as I said before, you are apparently unable to think that far ahead.

Poster #431 wrote:

Dodge again and I'm done

Promise?

Let it go FFS, you’re embarrassing yourself.

As I pointed out before, those against capital punishment still want people to be charged with murder. It's very, very simple., but I'll point it out to you yet again. This does not constitute "not taking into account what the court may decide"; it is wanting the law to be applied while wanting reformation on the punishment. Wanting murder charged does not logically confer agreement with the death penalty just as wanting sexual battery charged does not logically confer agreement with cutting the assailant's hand off.

Be better.

Yfhf wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I don't see anyone trying to justify what this guy did. The issue is whether he should be prosecuted. If he is to be put in jail for being "stupid beyond belief" - as you argue - there wouldn't be anyone who wouldn't at some time be behind bars - and it also appears that would certainly have to include you.

And definitely you.

I'd be definitely joining you.

Armstronglivs is a deviant wrote:

Let it go FFS, you’re embarrassing yourself.

Sorry, not embarrassed at all. But you're welcome to express a view - if you're capable of that.

boring, correct answer wrote:

As I pointed out before, those against capital punishment still want people to be charged with murder. It's very, very simple., but I'll point it out to you yet again. This does not constitute "not taking into account what the court may decide"; it is wanting the law to be applied while wanting reformation on the punishment. Wanting murder charged does not logically confer agreement with the death penalty just as wanting sexual battery charged does not logically confer agreement with cutting the assailant's hand off.

Be better.

Oh dear. "Wanting sexual battery charged" without concerning yourself with the penalty requires that you are in acceptance of whatever penalty is imposed - unless you have formed a prior view independently that you oppose certain penalties, such as corporal punishment. Which you didn't do and haven't done. I see that you have suffered battery to the head at some stage earlier in your life. My sympathies.

So you don't understand logic at all and just assert whatever you want. Shame.

Yeah, that clip of the Notre Dame women is completely irrelevant. One would expect that the incident in that clip reveals something that happens from time to time among the teammates, and their is at least an implied permission. The case of the female reporter has no element of permission, familiarity, or custom. It is unwanted touching and not gentle. If I guy walked up to me and punched me in the chest, I could pursue and assault charge.

That said, it shouldn't, and won't, result in imprisonment of the runner.