bamakertracer
Junior Member
The context of this post is the state of Alabama.
**Joe and Marty are bar patrons. Joe is there with his mother.
**Marty calls Joe’s mother a fat cow to her face.
**Joe shoves Marty.
**Marty takes a swing at Joe.
**Joe ducks and swings back, punching Marty in the face and knocking him unconscious.
**Marty is lying unconscious on the ground.
**Joe proceeds to stomp on Marty’s head, injuring him seriously, and sending him to the hospital.
**Marty files a pro-se civil suit against Joe (who retains an attorney), alleging battery and referring only to the head stomping after he was knocked unconscious.
**Joe’s Lawyers seek to demonstrate self defense on the part of Joe. Joe produces witnesses that say Marty attacked Joe. Joe’s mother also says that Marty insulted her.
**Marty files a motion to suppress any evidence or testimony regarding the fight and who started it, since with Joe’s witnesses, will contaminate a traditional “deep south” jury that, regardless of the legal aspects, will make their decision based on their notion of “Marty had it comin. Got what he deserved. A man doesn’t insult another man’s mother.”
** The judge denies the motion to suppress.
Is this correct? Or is Marty correct in asserting that the battery after he was unconscious is a separate act. He had no apprehension because he was unconscious. He had no means to react or defend himself. It also is irrelevant who started the confrontation or who the assailant was. Because no matter who it was, one of them was knocked out, and there was no further threat. The fight was over.
It seems a judge doesn’t agree that battery can be separate from assault.
**Joe and Marty are bar patrons. Joe is there with his mother.
**Marty calls Joe’s mother a fat cow to her face.
**Joe shoves Marty.
**Marty takes a swing at Joe.
**Joe ducks and swings back, punching Marty in the face and knocking him unconscious.
**Marty is lying unconscious on the ground.
**Joe proceeds to stomp on Marty’s head, injuring him seriously, and sending him to the hospital.
**Marty files a pro-se civil suit against Joe (who retains an attorney), alleging battery and referring only to the head stomping after he was knocked unconscious.
**Joe’s Lawyers seek to demonstrate self defense on the part of Joe. Joe produces witnesses that say Marty attacked Joe. Joe’s mother also says that Marty insulted her.
**Marty files a motion to suppress any evidence or testimony regarding the fight and who started it, since with Joe’s witnesses, will contaminate a traditional “deep south” jury that, regardless of the legal aspects, will make their decision based on their notion of “Marty had it comin. Got what he deserved. A man doesn’t insult another man’s mother.”
** The judge denies the motion to suppress.
Is this correct? Or is Marty correct in asserting that the battery after he was unconscious is a separate act. He had no apprehension because he was unconscious. He had no means to react or defend himself. It also is irrelevant who started the confrontation or who the assailant was. Because no matter who it was, one of them was knocked out, and there was no further threat. The fight was over.
It seems a judge doesn’t agree that battery can be separate from assault.
Last edited: