Here we go again...

[SRW]

Ugh...
Coach who attacked referee faces charges

[IRISHMAFIA]

Warned several times, thrown out of the game and then knocks the referee unconscious and they are only CONSIDERING charges?

I'm not big on ambulance chasers, but I hope someone convinces this kid to step forward and DEMAND charges. Not only is there the assualt on a sports official, but there should be a few other charges that could be drawn.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Warned several times, thrown out of the game and then knocks the referee unconscious and they are only CONSIDERING charges?

I'm not big on ambulance chasers, but I hope someone convinces this kid to step forward and DEMAND charges. Not only is there the assualt on a sports official, but there should be a few other charges that could be drawn.

Not to mention a healthy lawsuit!

[SRW]

I found the article in the local Corpus Christi newspaper here. There's a link in the upper-right to the video. Wow...

[WestMichBlue]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Warned several times, thrown out of the game and then knocks the referee unconscious and they are only CONSIDERING charges?

That is a legal position, Mike; it doesn't mean they are vasillating. The DA wants to make sure he has the right info and charges; he doesn't want to lose the case when he finally gets to court.

Oooh - a year in jail and four grand fine! Come on, Corpus Christi, throw the book as this SOB and send a message.

WMB

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by WestMichBlue

Oooh - a year in jail and four grand fine! Come on, Corpus Christi, throw the book as this SOB and send a message.

WMB

Sadly, that is throwing the book at him!!! That would be the maximum penalty allowed by law. That is where civil litigation could be more of a punishment. Just think of the grocery list of things that could come up in a civil suit: Medical bills plus pain and suffering from the no doubt serious injury incurred in the fray; the psychological scarring that this young man has suffered causing him to be afraid to set foot back on the field as an official, an avocation that he was hoping to persue the rest of his life, possibly making it to the pros (this would work a lot better with baseball or hockey than with football, but you get the idea), and the loss in all possible future earnings because of this fear to get back on the field and officiate. I am sure that a lawyer could come up with many more tangibles that could be injected in a lawsuit, one that would really make it costly on the offender.

[CecilOne]

1) From what I've heard, it is better to convict the person of criminal charges and then use that as evidence in the civil suit.

2) Why is assault and battery of a sports official a misdemeanor, but assault and battery on anyone else a felony?

3) If you officiate where there is no special law about sports officials, do not hesitate to use the local criminal law against an attacker. You are a person and, just because you are involved in a sport or in a controversial situation, there is no reason you are not entitled to the full protection of the law.

[Dakota]

I actually oppose special sports official laws. Just use the normal assault laws; they already cover everything necessary.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Warned several times, thrown out of the game and then knocks the referee unconscious and they are only CONSIDERING charges?

I'm not big on ambulance chasers, but I hope someone convinces this kid to step forward and DEMAND charges. Not only is there the assualt on a sports official, but there should be a few other charges that could be drawn.

They will charge.. they are considering WHAT to charge.

Im not familiar with Texas law but in CA (which is surely very similar, and we also have the "referee law"..

In CA assault on an official is a separate crime similar to Tx.. and that looks like what was discussed in the article.

While I often see posted/hear discussed "assualt on a ref is a felony etc" .. in most (if not all) states, including CA, it is actually a Misdemeanor charge, which isnt even enhanced from a normal Misd charge of assault/battery.

It doesnt mean they are limited to that depending on the circumstance.

I.E.

How charges CAN go are:

Count I
such and such PC, a Felony (battery causing or intent to cause serious bodily injury) etc etc

Count II
Some other related assault/battery intent type charge, a Felony, blah blah blah

Count III

assault on a referee, a Misdemeanor - blah blah blah.

The most serious charge will lead the filing.

If it is serious, the defendant will get held to answer; an Information filed; and the case moved to Upper Jurisdiction (facing prison time etc) ..

Then the plea and/or trial - all that crap all applies, depending on what the DA/Defense work out.

The point is, just because assault/battery on a ref is a seemingly weaker charge .. and it is (mostly lip service IMO)- it doesnt mean the DA is limited to that charge.. all other laws still apply (this will please Dakota CecilOne to know), and if they find cause, they can simply tack that on the list of other charges.


It is more than common (in fact probably most cases) to have felonies leading misdemeanors in cases..

I.E.

Count I
Felony Flee/Evade

Count II
Felony DUI

Count III
Misd Wreckless Endangerment

Count IV
Misd Driving while suspended

Even farther..

Count V
Speeding, an infraction




Thats just how it is done.

Nothing is negated by having a "Ref" Law.

[JEL]

Part of the article reads;

"Last month marked the start of mandatory training classes offered by the city aimed at promoting good sportsmanship at youth sports league events among adults.

The class, which certifies adult family members to attend youth athletic events on city property, requires participants to watch a video in an attempt to prevent confrontations.

Under the City Council-approved guideline, at least one adult family member must attend the course before the child participates in any sport."


That's kind of a novel idea.

1. Anybody seen that tried elsewhere?
2. Would it help anything? (obviously this coach missed that part)

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

...this will please Dakota ...to know...

Actually, no it won't, because I was not saying the existence of the special class law negated the other laws. I object to such laws on the principle of equal protection under the law. They are unnecessary. They separate the population into special classes under criminal law, where the person committing the crime is subject to differing punishment depending on the class of the victim. IMO, they SHOULD be unconstitutional. But, of course, the constitution is a "living" document, so they aren't unconstitutional.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."
-- Carroll

[Skahtboi]

Just in case you were wondering, here is the 2003 amendment to the Texas Criminal Code governing assault:


(c) An offense under Subsection (a)(2) or (3) is a Class C misdemeanor, except that the offense is:

a Class A misdemeanor if the offense is committed under Subsection (a)(3) against an elderly individual or disabled individual, as those terms are defined by Section 22.04; or
a Class B misdemeanor if the offense is committed by a person who is not a sports participant against a person the actor knows is a sports participant either:
while the participant is performing duties or responsibilities in the participant’s capacity as a sports participant; or
in retaliation for or on account of the participant’s performance of a duty or responsibility within the participant’s capacity as a sports participant.


(e) In this section:

"Family" has the meaning assigned by Section 71.003, Family Code.
"Household" has the meaning assigned by Section 71.005, Family Code.
"Sports participant" means a person who participates in any official capacity with respect to interscholastic, intercollegiate, or other organized amateur or professional athletic competition and includes an athlete, referee, umpire, linesman, coach, instructor, administrator, or staff member.
SECTION 2. The change in law made by this Act applies only to an offense committed on or after the effective date of this Act. An offense committed before the effective date of this Act is covered by the law in effect when the offense was committed, and the former law is continued in effect for that purpose. For purposes of this section, an offense was committed before the effective date of this Act if any element of the offense occurred before that date.

In esscence, assaulting a sports official takes the offender from a class c misdemeanor to a class b misdemeanor.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Actually, no it won't, because I was not saying the existence of the special class law negated the other laws. I object to such laws on the principle of equal protection under the law. They are unnecessary. They separate the population into special classes under criminal law, where the person committing the crime is subject to differing punishment depending on the class of the victim. IMO, they SHOULD be unconstitutional. But, of course, the constitution is a "living" document, so they aren't unconstitutional.

I agree with Tom. If it's assault, what difference does it make what position/responsibility that person carries at the time of the incident.

I believed what causes most "specialty" laws is the lawyers and judges. These individuals take into consideration their own beliefs of the situation and apply them to enforcement. While I understand that common sense should be applied at times, when another person is attacked, that is not an accident.

These folks are thinking, "Well, it is a competitive situation and the umpire did kick that call earlier, blah, blah, blah. ", anything to try and justify the actions of the accused. IMO, that is not their job, but it happens. Unfortunately, because these people of authority take it upon themselves to determine what should or shouldn't be prosecuted, lawmakers are urged to take away that option and give those offended a specific tool. It's sad, but that's the way it is.

[greymule]

Wreckless Endangerment

I love it.

the constitution is a "living" document

Translation: Judges ignore the intent of the framers and legislate from the bench.

[DaveASA/FED]

Under the City Council-approved guideline, at least one adult family member must attend the course before the child participates in any sport."

Indiana did that a few years back, it was wrapped up in a sportsmanship deal from IHSAA. There was a banner that you could display in your gym and I think there might have been a scholorship associated with it also. There was a list of things that had to be done, one was parents watch a video on sportsmanship, there were stipulations about coaches not getting thrown out of games and other items I forget now in order to keep current on the program and be able to continue to display the banner. Not sure if it worked or not, but I watched it so my DD could play volleyball!