Adult Slapping a Child

I think that is why the child was simply slapped with an open hand. We are focusing too much on the age 13, not the size of the child. At 13, when I was in a fight, it usually involved being attacked by multiple people, because they knew one was not enough. I could have taken on many adults easily and won.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

I do not know what I am seeing this differently than anyone else. However, here we have a child with one arm in a sling, whose personal space is being invaded by an angry adult, who is a stranger, and the child pushes the adult away and then gets slapped, in the face, by the adult. I am really surprised that the police officer let it go like that.

Even if the children were deliberately baiting the guy by standing too far into the street, there are no sidewalks and the man should never have gotten out of his car. Who does something like that? What stranger gets out of their car and starts trouble with children? I personally feel that the police officer handled this poorly.

What lesson has this child learned? That the police won't help you if some stranger hits you? Seriously, even if the child was large for his age he had one arm in a sling? What danger did he pose to this adult stranger?

---

Quote:

---

Quoting Disagreeable

---

I think that is why the child was simply slapped with an open hand. We are focusing too much on the age 13, not the size of the child. At 13, when I was in a fight, it usually involved being attacked by multiple people, because they knew one was not enough. I could have taken on many adults easily and won.

---

The child is not 13, the child is 12...and this was not a group situation where a bunch of children were attacking an adult. This child also had one arm in a sling. Even the adult did not make a claim of anything more than a push.

You have to compare apples to apples.

My take on this is that this was a ticked off adult with anger management issues who got extremely stupid...and a cop that really didn't want to do his job that day.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

I do not know what I am seeing this differently than anyone else. However, here we have a child with one arm in a sling, whose personal space is being invaded by an angry adult, who is a stranger, and the child pushes the adult away and then gets slapped, in the face, by the adult. I am really surprised that the police officer let it go like that.

---

I agree with you -- that the adult was way out of line. Under the facts, the child's response may well be properly deemed self-defense. If it were referred to juvenile court and a prosecutor found a case worth pursuing, assuming the child's life (school, home, community, other police contacts) was otherwise stable, I doubt that it would result in more than a caution or benching.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

I personally feel that the police officer handled this poorly.

---

The police office gave mom the opportunity to press charges, but warned her that he would have to refer the juvenile for pushing. The officer wasn't there, the adult likely had a different story, and it would not be unreasonable for the officer to make that referral. I don't fault the officer for giving the parties the choice to walk away.

Quote:

---

Quoting Mr. Knowitall

---

"One who seeks to justify an assault on the ground that he acted in self-defense must show that he used no more force than the exigency reasonably demanded. The belief of a defendant in an action for assault that the plaintiff intended to do him bodily harm cannot support a plea of self-defense unless it was such a belief as a person of average prudence would entertain under similar circumstances." Baltimore Transit Co. v. Faulkner, 179 Md. 598, 600, 20 A.2d 485, 487 (1941). The push might be characterized as self-defense, depending on such factors as how close the irate adult came to the child, and what he was saying and doing at the time. The slap? You slap people because you're angry, not because you're fearful.

---

I didn’t say a self defense claim would stand up, only that it could be made and can muddy the waters in a he said/he said case where the officer was not present to personally witness the matter and must rely on the statement of the combatants.

Quote:

---

Quoting Mr. Knowitall

---

It was not mutual combat. Neither party consented to being touched. There was no actual fight.

---

In my state, the unlawful use of force against another is considered the crime of battery. Pushing or slapping someone meets the elements of that crime. When two people engage in battery against each and are not acting in self defense of themselves or others (as the officer apparently determined) it is considered a fight within the meaning of our disturbance of the peace law, which is also a misdemeanor. However, when there is nothing more than a push and a slap, our District Attorneys routinely categorize this a mutual combat and decline prosecution. For this reason, actual arrests are rare in such cases unless a suspect strikes an officer trying to break up the fight or commits some other violation.

I take it things are different where you are.

In any case, all of this is moot. The OP asked for opinions as to why the matter was handled the way it was. I am merely offering an explanation as to why this would have been an appropriate disposition of the matter where I am. Again, your mileage may vary depending on local laws and prosecutorial policy.

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

I didn’t say a self defense claim would stand up, only that it could be made and can muddy the waters in a he said/he said case where the officer was not present to personally witness the matter and must rely on the statement of the combatants.



In my state, the unlawful use of force against another is considered the crime of battery. Pushing or slapping someone meets the elements of that crime. When two people engage in battery against each and are not acting in self defense of themselves or others (as the officer apparently determined) it is considered a fight within the meaning of our disturbance of the peace law, which is also a misdemeanor. However, when there is nothing more than a push and a slap, our District Attorneys routinely categorize this a mutual combat and decline prosecution. For this reason, actual arrests are rare in such cases unless a suspect strikes an officer trying to break up the fight or commits some other violation.

I take it things are different where you are.

In any case, all of this is moot. The OP asked for opinions as to why the matter was handled the way it was. I am merely offering an explanation as to why this would have been an appropriate disposition of the matter where I am. Again, your mileage may vary depending on local laws and prosecutorial policy.

---

Your argument makes sense if we were talking about two adults. However, we are not. We are talking about a 12 year old child and an adult stranger.

by getting out of the car the adult instigated this entire event, you don't do those things, not if your thinking normally

Does a 12 year old become someone entirely different between the hours of 9pm the night before, and 1am the next morning when he turns 13?

Sorry, but its foolish to run with that as a means to mitigate (or aggravate, to be sure) the minor's reasoning. The adult was an idiot, clearly. But the 12 year old is not faultless here, either.

And are we assuming that 12 years old = not capable of "taking on" an adult? That is an incredibly dangerous mindset.

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

I didn’t say a self defense claim would stand up, only that it could be made and can muddy the waters in a he said/he said case where the officer was not present to personally witness the matter and must rely on the statement of the combatants.

---

Leaving aside the fact that a self-defense argument under the facts as stated really isn't credible, that might be a consideration for the prosecutor who is prosecuting charges against the adult but is otherwise irrelevant. The officer's statement is not described as being, "This could be mutual combat" or "this could be self-defense" -- it was, "If I proceed with charges, I'm citing both the adult and the child."

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

When two people engage in battery against each and are not acting in self defense of themselves or others (as the officer apparently determined) it is considered a fight within the meaning of our disturbance of the peace law, which is also a misdemeanor.

---

Disturbing the peace is a different criminal offense than battery.

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

However, when there is nothing more than a push and a slap, our District Attorneys routinely categorize this a mutual combat and decline prosecution.

---

I very much doubt that. If so, the proper would would be "mischaracterize". For example, in California, "Voluntary mutual combat outside the rules of sport is a breach of the peace, mutual consent is no justification, and both participants are guilty of criminal assault." People v. Lucky (1988) 45 Cal.3d 259. "It is also the rule that the apparent consent of a person without legal capacity to give consent, such as a child or insane person, is ineffective." People v. Gray (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 167.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Your argument makes sense if we were talking about two adults. However, we are not. We are talking about a 12 year old child and an adult stranger.

---

Back in the day, it was not all that unusual for a police officer, investigating a domestic or private disturbance, to find two people who had slapped, hit or thrown things at each other but with little or no physical injury, often with both intoxicated, and with each accusing the other of starting the fight, and to decline to arrest or charge either based on the idea of its being "mutual combat". With changed views of domestic violence, mandatory arrest laws, and the like, it's been quite a while since I've heard that phrase used as an excuse not to charge somebody for a fight that attracted police attention. From a legal standpoint, you are apt to hear of "mutual combat" in self-defense cases, where a person who initially chose to enter a fight does not attempt to end the fight or withdraw before causing injury to the other person, or as part of an imperfect self-defense argument to try to reduce a homicide charge based upon hot blood / provocation (perfect self-defense applying when there is no wrongful conduct by the defendant).

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Your argument makes sense if we were talking about two adults. However, we are not. We are talking about a 12 year old child and an adult stranger.

---

The law in this area does differentiate because of age.

Nowhere does the law say it is acceptable for a 12 year old child to block traffic, refuse to move and strike someone when requested to comply.

Apparently both intentionally struck each other under circumstances that were not permitted by law. While each had equal rights that should not have been violated, they also had equal responsibilities to each other and society they failed to uphold. You can't take action against one without taking action against the other.

Would you prefer that the District Attorney prosecute both? It would provide the satisfaction you are seeking with respect to the adult and teach your son not to block traffic, to comply when asked to get out of the street and not to strike other people.

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

The law in this area does differentiate because of age.

---

I have already documented that it does, when the allegation is that the child consented to combat.

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

Nowhere does the law say it is acceptable for a 12 year old child to block traffic, refuse to move and strike someone when requested to comply.

---

None of which has anything to do with whether the adult should have slapped the child.

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

While each had equal rights that should not have been violated, they also had equal responsibilities to each other and society they failed to uphold.

---

You are making a large number of assumptions.

Quote:

---

Quoting L-1

---

You can't take action against one without taking action against the other.

---

That is not correct. A prosecutor could charge one without charging the other.