do not touch wrote:
If you touch one of the protesters you will spend a night in jail
What is the actual law on this? Can someone who is actively, intentionally "trespassing" possibly win a case against someone who is participating in the event?
do not touch wrote:
If you touch one of the protesters you will spend a night in jail
What is the actual law on this? Can someone who is actively, intentionally "trespassing" possibly win a case against someone who is participating in the event?
Defense Attorney wrote:
I work as a criminal defense attorney, but I would be cheering for the D.A.'s office on this one. I am wondering if a creative DA could actually charge the protesters with assault. If someone is walking down the street, and I stick out a foot to trip them up, that would be assault. Why should it be any less if the person is running down the street in a street especially reserved (at that particular moment) for running?
I'm currently 1L right now, and this whole thing is good fun for practicing Torts, a little Civ. Pro., and even some Con. Law. Creating a hypo of an interaction between a protester and a runner, then walking through all the intentional torts, some negligence possibilities, and any defenses, then walking through the procedure side of a suit filed on both sides, and then seeing if I can draw it up to where Con. Law gets involved and working through the whole thing with a study group? Actually quite fun and productive.
The idea of protesting at an event which has zero relation to the cause you're trying to further, however, is really a downer of a concept no matter how much academic fun and practice it brings about.
This brings back recent memories of studying for the bar exam. We would definitely discuss this in torts and criminal law if I was still in school.
Here's my analysis:
Assault:intent to cause apprehension/fear of imminent harmful or offensive contact with the person of another.(battery) A battery need not actually occur for there to be assault.
Battery: intentional harmful or offensive touching of the person of another without consent. Harmful=causes physical pain or illness. offensive=would be offensive to a reasonable person. Touching need not be direct, i.e. can throw a wrench at a runner and hit him and commit a battery. If you miss, then you have committed assault.
Conclusion:
Runners running up to a wall of african americans angrily protesting who are forcefully stopping other runners already have a case for tortious assault. You can use self defense that is proportional to the anticipated harm. If you, as a runner, reasonably anticipate being shoved, you can shove somebody out of the way. Your belief that you are about to be battered/assaulted must be objectively reasonable though. You couldn't shove an innocent bystander in the crowd and claim self defense.
I stick fish sticks in my pu$$y
I will be running and just heard about this. I've been busting my *ss to run a huge pb. I'm probably going to jail because I am not stopping at mile 25 for a bunch of overweight hooligans who don't run a step all year. Bring it on
Collisioncourse wrote:
I will be running and just heard about this. I've been busting my *ss to run a huge pb. I'm probably going to jail because I am not stopping at mile 25 for a bunch of overweight hooligans who don't run a step all year. Bring it on
Remember this phrase...
"I was intimidated and feared for my life if I had stopped."
All you need to know.
Run through the line.
My younger brother is running with only speedos on and pink glitter all over his body. I advised him to smear dog sheit all over his back also. Would love to see someone stand in his way.
Collisioncourse wrote:
I will be running and just heard about this. I've been busting my *ss to run a huge pb. I'm probably going to jail because I am not stopping at mile 25 for a bunch of overweight hooligans who don't run a step all year. Bring it on
Thanks for the advice. Someone will have to knock me out to stop me from getting though. I don't know what exactly these people hope to accomplish but this will backfire, at least for the folks in my way.
LawyerUp wrote:
Collisioncourse wrote:I will be running and just heard about this. I've been busting my *ss to run a huge pb. I'm probably going to jail because I am not stopping at mile 25 for a bunch of overweight hooligans who don't run a step all year. Bring it on
Remember this phrase...
"I was intimidated and feared for my life if I had stopped."
All you need to know.
I think the top 20% (in the US in particular) are perhaps unaware of how their leisure activities reinforces their own insularity.
To prepare for and run a marathon takes that most precious of commodities - time. Lots and lots of free time. This is in addition to the extra gear, the entry fees, travel expenses etc. If you are in the bottom 1/3 of income earners in the US, this is a luxury completely beyond your reach.
So I understand why they want to target a marathon. It is a leisure event with almost exclusively white people attending. This will go down very well with their constituents. It does not go down well with those affected. If you actually inconvenience the economic elites, they will bridle at the thought of having their Sunday off trashed.
I think they might have been better served if they had spoke with the organizers, and maybe had a special booth at the expo and the finish set up. Supported the event, tried to get the sponsors and organizers to work with poorer communities in StP/Minn to sponsor at-risk-youth to run etc. But this is the long view, and might fail.
No easy answers.
Lyndon LaRouche wrote:
I think the top 20% (in the US in particular) are perhaps unaware of how their leisure activities reinforces their own insularity.
To prepare for and run a marathon takes that most precious of commodities - time. Lots and lots of free time. This is in addition to the extra gear, the entry fees, travel expenses etc. If you are in the bottom 1/3 of income earners in the US, this is a luxury completely beyond your reach.
So I understand why they want to target a marathon. It is a leisure event with almost exclusively white people attending. This will go down very well with their constituents. It does not go down well with those affected. If you actually inconvenience the economic elites, they will bridle at the thought of having their Sunday off trashed.
I think they might have been better served if they had spoke with the organizers, and maybe had a special booth at the expo and the finish set up. Supported the event, tried to get the sponsors and organizers to work with poorer communities in StP/Minn to sponsor at-risk-youth to run etc. But this is the long view, and might fail.
No easy answers.
I can't speak for Minnesota chapters, but these type organizations are all over the South and bring large #'s of participants to every fun-runs, races, charity events, and more.
http://blackgirlsrun.com/http://blkmenrun.com/“My hope is the marathon runners realized they’re not going to be able to finish this race and instead of being angry and complaining, that they join in in the protest and stand in solidarity because justice is all we are asking for,†Turner said. “I’m not concerned about them feeling threatened. We’ve always been non-violent, we’ve been peaceful. Hypothetically we’d be more afraid of a car running through the crowd like they have in the past than we would a marathon runner reacting with violence.â€
So they should not be upset if they are blocked from protesting on the course!!! This way of thinking is just sad and idiotic!
THE International Shoe Co. wrote:
Defense Attorney wrote:I work as a criminal defense attorney, but I would be cheering for the D.A.'s office on this one. I am wondering if a creative DA could actually charge the protesters with assault. If someone is walking down the street, and I stick out a foot to trip them up, that would be assault. Why should it be any less if the person is running down the street in a street especially reserved (at that particular moment) for running?
I'm currently 1L right now, and this whole thing is good fun for practicing Torts, a little Civ. Pro., and even some Con. Law. Creating a hypo of an interaction between a protester and a runner, then walking through all the intentional torts, some negligence possibilities, and any defenses, then walking through the procedure side of a suit filed on both sides, and then seeing if I can draw it up to where Con. Law gets involved and working through the whole thing with a study group? Actually quite fun and productive.
The idea of protesting at an event which has zero relation to the cause you're trying to further, however, is really a downer of a concept no matter how much academic fun and practice it brings about.
So you literally just started law school?
What would this have to do with civ pro?
You have so much to learn little one.
Several in the track club are running it in confederate flag singlets. If any protesting blacks are spotted, spitting at and/or giving the finger has been recommended.
TwinCitiesRunner wrote:
Several in the track club are running it in confederate flag singlets. If any protesting blacks are spotted, spitting at and/or giving the finger has been recommended.
+1
and how many black people are being killed and beaten by other black people? FAR more. Maybe they should prioritize who they really should be protesting against...THEMSELVES!
AnotherMNrunner wrote:
TwinCitiesRunner wrote:Several in the track club are running it in confederate flag singlets. If any protesting blacks are spotted, spitting at and/or giving the finger has been recommended.
+1
+2
TwinCitiesRunner wrote:
Several in the track club are running it in confederate flag singlets. If any protesting blacks are spotted, spitting at and/or giving the finger has been recommended.
Because that is mature...
They should protest by entering the marathon and running the full distance with their banners.
EdenPrairieRunner wrote:
AnotherMNrunner wrote:+1
+2
+3