javasaurus: (Default)
javasaurus ([personal profile] javasaurus) wrote2005-08-03 09:39 am

Assault with deadly weapon: Girl hits boy with rock.

An eleven-year-old girl hit a boy in the head with a two-pound rock. She is being charged with felony assault with a deadly weapon. Thoughts?

Here's the article from WTOPnews.com

[identity profile] javasaurus.livejournal.com 2005-08-03 05:06 pm (UTC)(link)
The case brings up interesting points of law, at least. For example...


"If a woman feels her life or her virtue is threatened"

I suspect it's more like "if a reasonable woman would feel her life (or her virtue) were threatened." I know that in many cases, laws are based on how a reasonable person would act. Whatever that means.

Also, there is no indication that she felt her life or virtue to be in danger.

As for the prosecution despite the "victim" not pressing charges: it's not necessary for a victim to bring charges in a case of felony violence. This is important for domestic violence cases, where the victim may even deny the assault.

It is not disputed that she hit the boy with a rock. The particular rock is in question, whether the boys attacked her with rocks first is also in question (see this chain of article for lots of disputed details).

But a rock of significant size, used in attack, is a lethal weapon, even if the attacker doesn't use it to kill, even if the attacker doesn't know that it can kill. If Person A intentionally shoots Person B in the leg with a gun, that is assault with a deadly weapon. Depending on the actual rock used, she did engage in assault with a deadly weapon. The question is whether it was first degree, second degree, etc., or self defence.