We grown as a board. For the most part no misplaced homophobia in the dick sucking thread and no fake tough guy shit itt. When we started I bet the results would be the exact opposite.
We’ve had some shit scenarios on here recently, but sign me up, assuming I get to wear a mouth piece and my medical bills are also taken care of.
Mike Tyson at 13 might kill the majority of this board in this scenario. So in his prime? No fucking way.
Unrelated: I assume some sort of stuntman union covers your healthcare if you get injured during a shoot?
Yeah, if you’re hurt on set, the production covers it. You have to be pretty banged up to take them up on it, though. It’s highly frowned upon by the old school stunt guys to make a fuss over minor injuries, so you deal with them. Also, SAG health insurance is some of the best on the planet (since it is the same benefits that major stars have), so we are generally pretty taken care of.
“During the Covid pandemic your grandpa got beat up by Mike Tyson while on an airplane” is quite the opener
That would be an incredibly easy case to defend with that video. Tyson's lawyers will hem and haw about risk of trial and will settle it, but he ought to defend it.
Take it to trial, Mike. Get one person on that jury that has flown on a plane and it’ll take twenty minutes to reach a verdict.
I would argue that the legalities is the only reason it should stop. I'm all for entertaining rounds of "fuck around/find out"
Read Tyson was even nice enough to take a selfie with the guy. Take your selfie and leave him alone. Not that hard
I'm not generally in favor of violence but sometimes someone needs a reality check and I'm not gonna say that it's wrong.
The elements of civil battery are: 1. Intentional touching of the body of another; 2. In a harmful or offensive manner; 3. Without the victim's consent; and 4. Damages. Mike is not winning summary judgment on that, because there's certainly a fact issue. That means the case would go to a jury of laypeople (which you've devoted countless paragraphs to arguing are better suited to deciding these issues than lawyers). To a jury, there's a strong argument that the provocation was consent to escalation. If not, the behavior before and after are going to gut his damages. With his reaction after the punches, a jury is going to call bullshit on any emotional distress, pain and suffering, or mental anguish claims. So, at best, he's going to get his medical bills for some stitches.
Banking on "I think the jury will disregard the law and say he deserved it" seems risky to me. If he were your client, would you advise him to settle or fight it?
In rereading this, you were asking about criminal charges. My bad. I think he will just plead it down to disorderly conduct or something and that'll be that.
I clarified in my previous post, but I'd definitely tell him to try a civil suit. Whether he tries the criminal case would depend on the available plea. If the DA insisted on felony assault or something stupid, I'd recommend he try that, too. And, it's not banking on the jury disregarding the law. It's banking on how they'll interpret the facts to the law. Juries typically get it right.
I'd need to know more details but the video would be hard for me to get past. Sure he was annoying and it's easy to say he deserved it but punching someone like that is never ok imo. I'd vote for the plaintiff. You can't just hit people bc they were annoying.
Yea thats why I said I'd want to know more details. How close did he get, what was he saying, did Tyson ask for help from the staff, etc.
And what would you award in damages? You'd be instructed that compensatory damages are intended to compensate a Plaintiff for the injury he sustained. You would also be instructed that nominal damages are a small number, like one dollar, that can be awarded when a Plaintiff is in the right but is not damaged. Either way, Mike doesn't have to prove that it was "okay" for him to win. In fact, he doesn't have to prove anything. Plaintiff has to prove all four of those elements to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury including the amount of damages to which he's entitled. I totally agree with you that using violence was dumb and inexcusable, but that doesn't mean it's a good case for the Plaintiff.