A very dear friend of mine is caught in a horrible position. He asked me to place a poll here to get an idea of what a jury would decide. Please take this seriously. I will give you the components of the case.

The Charge is 2 counts of Assault and Battery. felony case.

A middle aged man ( 41) was driving on the freeway down in L.A when he gets in to a altercation with another driver who is 60 years old, female and weighs 180 lbs driving a minivan. The man is driving a small 4 door japanese car and has his child with him. The child is 10 years old.

After the initial altercation, the two enter the freeway and the Minivan driver starts to swerve at the other driver and slamming on her brakes to get him to either back off or hit him. These moves are so incredibly severe that the man calls 911 and starts to talk to the CHP. During the entire time he is on the phone with the CHP, the dispatcher is having a hard time in getting the information delaying the end of the call. The man then says the woman is getting off the freeway and the 911 operator then in mid call transfers him to the local police. The woman is still driving erratically. At this time the man is starting to get upset ( its very evident on the tapes) and the new dispatcher is having a very hard time getting the information correct. At this time both of the drivers pull over in front of a car dealership. ( no not a Mazda dealership lol ) The man is still on the phone with the police and the woman then gets out of the car, starts to approach the man, screaming and yelling at him at how he isn't going to get away with "stalking her" etc.. The man replies with a few nasty expletives and his anger is evident. You can hear everything that is going on in the conversation including him tell the woman that he is on the phone with the police.

The woman, continues to approach the man and he is describing it as shes coming after me, shes attacking me and my child and then the phone conversation gets abruptly ended. The woman ( while the man was writing something down) sucker punches him in the face through the open window, taking his cell phone and knocking outside the car. The man then tries to push her away with the car door and the woman then grabs ahold of the door while slamming it against him 4 or 5 times. The man thought about taking off in the car but the woman was hanging onto the door frame. The man pushes the car door hard enough and gets the woman away so he can get out of the car and get his phone. The woman comes after the man again as hes getting out of the car and then the man swings at the woman 3x hitting her twice and knocking her to the ground. SHe has a cut on her head.

This is all recorded on tape ( audio)

There is a witness that saw her yelling and screaming and approaching the car and bending down into the window but did NOT see her hit the man because he was on the passenger side of the car and about 30 ft away

The child saw everything but was not interviewed nor was there a drunk driving test done on the female though the male requested it.

The man was NOT arrested by the police, he was arrested BY THE WOMAN using a citizens arrest.

My friend says that she attacked him and all he did was to defend himself and his child and do enough to get her to stop.


Your comments and verdict? I can answer questions if you like. We are interested in serious comments and questions please. In this state it takes all 12 jurors to unanimously convict. One not guilty verdict is all it takes.

Thanks for your time.


Some clarification:

The womans side of the story.

She stated that the man had blocked her from getting on the freeway initially and as such she had to cut him off to prevent herself from hitting the retaining wall.

She stated that once she got on the freeway, the man began to harass her by honking the horn and giving her finger gestures.

She got off the freeway and the man followed her and that she was very afraid.

She stopped in front of the dealership because she felt safe and only got out of her car to ask the man why he was following her.

She states that the man immediately exits the car and starts to hit her. She denies hitting him or approaching near the car.


The man was asked at the scene why he didn't just take off when she hit him. He replied that she was hanging on to the car and to take off would have subjected her to being possibly run over by the car.

The woman also took his cell phone or knocked it out of his hands while he was talking to the police. The phone was outside of the car.


Please also note your duty to UPHOLD the LAW.

There is NO law that states a man cannot hit a woman. To state that the man should have not hit her because she is a woman, denies him equal protection under t he law and sexually discriminates against him because he is a male.

The man also did exactly what the woman did to him which was using his fist and only until she stopped attacking him.


The DA is trying to paint the man as an angry and violet person who took advantage of the woman and his size.

The woman is 5'3" and 180lbs The man is 6'0" and 245 lbs

The man is heard on the tape being very angry and using foul language. He is telling the 911 operator that she has tried to hit him with her car multiple times.

The first call to 911 though is calm and collected.

There is a witness that saw her yelling and screaming and approaching the car and bending down into the window but did NOT see her hit me because he was on the passenger side of the car and about 30 ft away

so was it a "friend" or was it you?

regardless, i voted "Not guilty" as i do not see how you (him) did anything wrong. The 911 tapes alone should provide enough evidence. the child is a cerdible witness as well. the bystander (call him Mr 30ft) can also give a general description of the scene as well. all of that together will prove you (him) were simply defending yourself and she was just a dumb psycho bitch. was she black? White trash? i sense a stereo-type personality here about the woman is why i ask. some how, i doubt she was "suburbia soccer-mom suzy homemaker."

Luckily for the plaintiff (and the defendant), this is not how a case in a court of law is decided. Of particular note, the jurors would be instructed multiple times in the actual verbiage of the law, particularly what constitutes "assault and battery" and what does not. Furthermore, a good defense attorney would highlight the sections of your state law which address defense of self and property, perceived danger, and use of force.

Furthermore, it's very clear that this is a one-sided account, and I can't help but wonder what the woman's perspective of the situation is. I could easily write a narrative that described this situation and made it appear that this woman was herself acting in self-defense, afraid that this man following her intended immediate physical risk to herself or her property. Again luckily for the jurors, both sides would have an attempt to present their sides of the story, and they would not be forced to decide based on ONE SIDE of the story, which you've prevented here.

Based on the clearly biased and one-sided narrative, it is natural that one would side with the man in this situation. That in no way relates to the verdict a jury will deliver, because, as I've highlighted above, they will be presented far more information with far less bias and with a far better definition of the applicable charges and their justifiable defenses.

so was it a "friend" or was it you?

Caught that too, but in the spirit of the original request, I'll leave that alone. It sounds like (you) your friend has a pretty solid case, especially if the audio can confirm that she originally assaulted (you) your friend and his child. I guess if Law Enforcement can get away with Tazing a 74 yr old woman that didn't 'physically' threaten the officer, then (you) your friend should be able to protect yourself from assault, no matter who it is.

I think your friend should have called the police with the ladys license plate number and let the police do there job. Your friend should not have followed the lady. But i think your friend will be fine, just needs a good lawyer

Given that she got out of her car...and approached his car...was the first to get physical....and it was recorded....I vote that she had it coming.....

But, my morality says that men don't hit women, except in very extenuating circumstances.

Sounds like there is something wrong with this woman...maybe look into her background for prior psych offences or problems...not likely this is the first time

k i dont understand the polls questions. who is guility the party in your poll? are you asking us if the male guility for the female?

Yeah, lots missing to this story. Never hit a woman.

Very tough to decide on a one sided account.
Striking isn't very jury friendly. Submissions are way better.

I agree with invasion08. He let his emotions get the better of him - to hate, to anger...
Stopping together is virtually an invitation for the obvious.

"What is the sound of one hand clapping?"

Yeah, lots missing to this story. Never hit a woman.

lol for real even if it is justified :lol:

I'm only 20 and I have to say that you acted immature as well as her. Avoid her to begin with. Do whatever it takes to avoid her and further persuing conflict. Especially in front of his 10 year old. He does not need that sort of example..

There is a witness that saw her yelling and screaming and approaching the car and bending down into the window but did NOT see her hit me because he was on the passenger side of the car and about 30 ft away

Hmmm, which one of your "friends" did you say this was? :lol2:

I say the female is guilty and the man is innocent!

Yeah, lots missing to this story. Never hit a woman.

+1, Never hit a woman! A man should be able to defend himself (by submission), especially if he's younger like in this situation. Unless a woman comes at you with something that can be considered as a weapon (almost anything), then dont hit her.

In this example would have been:

Man: Assualt and Battery charges V.S. Woman: Assault with a weapon, man would win. This case should be dismissed. Both acted like children.

If I'm on the jury, I've just heard one side. I haven't heard the other side. I can't make a judgment at this time.
It seems your "friend" has a credible case. Who is being charged, the male or the female? If it is the friend, a good lawyer should be able to convince the jury of his innocence. But again, we are only hearing one side. If the woman truly thought she was being stalked, she may have been defending herself with her actions.

Anything's possible in court as we are not seeing all the testimony (both sides). Too late now, but it's best to always let these situations go in the beginning before they heat up more. If someone is attacked, then defense is necessary but the man (especially with his child) should have never followed, then pulled over with the lady to begin with. Like someone said earlier, get the plate number, give to police and move on. But, based on this side of story: NOT GUILTY.

Well if this whole thing took place infront of a well known dealership then there should be video tell em to ask the dealer!! Plus it would b considered self defense if she aproached him while he was in the video, she can't he attacked her cuz they would ask y did she not call the police initially! It doesn't really matter that they got off the same exit that's not proof enough that he followed her! He should be fine no jail time if she approached him first

You might want to go back and edit your original post a bit...

If it was you and you're trying to hide it (to prevent potential legal complications), then change it all to "your friend". If it was you and you aren't worried about it getting in the way of a case, then change it all to "Me". If it wasn't you, then change it to "my friend".

That said, what was the original altercation? How was she followed? If I was trying to follow someone, I could easily keep distance and make it clear there is no threat. Or I could make it apparent that I'm upset or show aggression (such as tailgating). Stuff like that matters too, not just the final "battle".

Luckily for the plaintiff (and the defendant), this is not how a case in a court of law is decided.

I agree 100% with GT's statement. The overall views expressed here are not going to represent with any accuracy what a jury would decide due to the restrictions placed upon them by the judge in terms of definations and what they can/cannot consider in the case.

The one problem with this story is going to be what lead up to the altercation. The male subject has two things going against him. 1st, he did all of this with a child in the car by which you could easily argue the child was put in danger as a result of this situation.

Second, the male pursued this woman after already getting into an altercation with this woman previously. In my opinion, a responsible (and safe) method of handling this would have been simply to have pulled off the road, called the police and left it alone.

I understand a lot of this is hindsight, but as someone who has carried a firearm for 8 years I am always aware and pay attention to the circumstances with lead up to a self defense situation. While it may not become a cornerstone of the case, I can promise you her attorney will attempt to paint the male as a wreckless individual with no consideration for the safety of himself or the child which lead to this altercation.

Whether that's true or not it could be used to sway opinion.

The big question is whether or not the notion of "self defense" as defined by California law includes any provisions that require you have no other means to flee or escape. If that's the case, it could be argued the male could have left the scene at any moment but chose to stay.

Just my perspective. I cannot say who is or isn't guilty without hearing all the facts.

Logically there are many things missing from the timeline.

Says there was an initial altercation that supposedly was what started this whole time. It says that the altercation was on the freeway then the author says that they next "got on the freeway"

Was this an altercation? Or an accident?

If it was an accident I could see the man justified in trying to get the woman's license plate number and information by following her, not that this would have been an especially smart thing to do with a 10 yr old child in the car and not knowing if the woman was armed or not.

If it was an altercation then I see that the man was indeed purposefully following the woman and should be found guilty of harassment, BUT not guilty of assault as it was the woman who got out of her car and started assaulting him.

Without hearing the tapes and from the opposition, I can't make an educated decision, but if what you presented (although it will of course be biased) I would have to say he is innocent, and would suggest she should be on trial for road rage/assault. Also, injuries, medical reports, police reports, etc, are missing from the story.

Who conducted the citizens arrest?

Also, what was the initial confrontation? Why did he continue to follow her? All he should have needed was a license plate, direction, and call to the police.

I'm not sure how it ever got to the point where people got out of the car in the first place.

I refuse to vote either way on the issue. There were to many points where this should have just ended and both parties go their separate ways.

both parties are guilty of the charge of retarded road rage

I clarified some important points including adding her side of the story.

ALSO PLEASE NOTE!

the poll is asking you if you think the man is guilty or NOT guilty and if YOU are a male or female.

Thanks

k i dont understand the polls questions. who is guility the party in your poll? are you asking us if the male guility for the female?


Since it is the man that is being charged, I am asking you if the male is guilty or NOT.

The man also has no criminal record. Neither does the female

Sounds to me like a situation that could have been easily avoided. If the woman was driving erratically then the best thing to do in that situation is slow down, or change lanes to get away from her vehicle. If she is presenting a clear danger to others, call 911 and give them the plates from a safe distance. Getting involved in a road rage situation, especially then taking an exit and following her is foolish in the extreme and could have gotten someone killed. If she had felt sufficiently threatened and was carrying a gun? Is it worth risking your 10 year olds life to chase down someone? Even once the exit was taken, as soon as the woman got out of her car, the man should have moved his car. Stopping your car next to someone you have had an altercation with on the freeway is asking for a fight.

Now, I will disagree with something people have said several times above me about never hitting a woman. If you are being assaulted you need to take whatever steps are necessary to keep yourself or your family safe. If you have the size and ability to restrain your attacker without causing damage then do so, but in many cases that is not possible. I have trained with enough female martial artists to know that if you underestimate a woman she has the potential of handing you your ass. "Weaker sex" is bullshit. If you find yourself hesitating to fight back while a woman pummels you thats on you. For myself, if ANYBODY has made the decision to attack me or my family, I will do the very best I can to stop them using any means possible. If I can restrain them I will, if I cannot, I will subdue them with strikes, if they present a lethal danger I will kill them. Period. I don't risk my life or the life of my family to protect my attacker regardless of gender.

Since it is the man that is being charged, I am asking you if the male is guilty or NOT. awww lol. i totataly forgot that you said 2 charges. i was so into the Jason BOrne chase scene in your story. that i forgot. but yah not guilty.

I would have read the licence plate to the police and went about my way. Whether it be slowing way down away or speeding up past the person. I have seen many many many aggressive drivers (as I'm on a motorcycle and people are very upset they can't lane share as well) Easy peasy. Don't aggrevate more, get out the way as fast as you can.
As for the case what state? If it happened in Michigan you're doomed. My buddy delt with this before. Women always win sorry. Law is still not equal when it comes to hitting females. They can gun you down and you are still in trouble if you hit them. Sorry.

Sounds like the woman is lying.

Man should be not guilty.

I find people's responses to be quite interesting, if that is indeed the point of this exercise.

could the woman be Bipolar? like someone mentioned, have her medical background examined.

Oh, and give the police the license plate and let them do their job? I would be VERY surprised if the police actually made a SLIGHT attempt to do anything about it.

The man followed her because she attempted several times to hit him with her car. He is also a medical professional who thought that this woman was under the influence of some drug or alcohol and wanted to make sure she was stopped.

Sounds like the woman is lying.

Man should be not guilty.

I find people's responses to be quite interesting, if that is indeed the point of this exercise.

The woman has already been shown to have not told the entire truth and has omitted several key points.

the prosecution has NOT listened to the tapes yet. ( believe it or not)

Not sure why there were two threads... must have messed up while editing.. Sorry! Please continue to vote or voice your opinions. Thanks!