What are the laws in Virginia about fist fighting? And can one party sue the other if both partys exchanged hits?
|
What are the laws in Virginia about fist fighting? And can one party sue the other if both partys exchanged hits?
It is a fight, and the one who starts it is the one who will be charged with a crime, most likely battery. If the other party had a chance to get get away and did not, they may get charged also.
If the police are unsure, both may be charged at first, till investigation proves more
I don't see anything specific in the VA statutes about fistfighting. Of course it does fit within the normal definition of assault and battery, which is declared to be a crime here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Panda86
Criminally, if one person strikes another in the course of a fight, the striker could claim self-defense.
Civil actions for injuries sustained in a fight would normally involve the defense that the other person struck first. It generally follows the criminal rules of self-defense, in other words.
It is interesting that there is nothing in the books, that I can see, about dueling. Dueling was a problem in Virginia and elsewhere 200 years ago, but I guess the need to have a criminal statute about it, specifically, was deemed no longer necessary.
But is it true that if both partys started it and it wassent just one person hitting the other than nether party could sue?
Anyone can sue almost anyone for almost anything... and it doesn't require anyone getting hit.
First almost never does both parties start it, you go back to the actions that brought it on It will be exactly case by case.
If one party had the chance to leave and did not, If they had the other one down but did not stop at that point.
Civil law does not require the same level of evidence as criminal law, and one party who feels they were not the one at fault can of course sue the other.
Take cases like the OJ trial, an example, there was not enough evidence for criminal conviction, but the civil court found him guilty and he had to pay money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panda86
The only way both parties started "it" is if they both swung and hit at exactly the same time. No way could that happen UNLESS one challenged the other, and in that case the person who issued the challenge started the fight.
Could either person sue for injuries? Of course. It's winning that's going to be the problem.
There are other ways, but as Fr_Chuck said, it would depend on the particular circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
Say, for example, "Sticky" took "Buster's" cream puff without asking. Therefore Buster attempted to grab it back, Sticky shoved back, and Buster hauled off and slugged Sticky. In return, Sticky swung at Buster, and the fistfight is on. Which one "started it"?
"Sticky" and "Buster"?
"Sticky" started it by shoving "Buster." "Sticky" was the first person to place his hands on another person.
Was "Sticky's" brother, "Geezer," there?
Sticky arguably started it by taking the cream puff.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
Buster grabbed at it and may or may not have touched Sticky in the process. In any event, Buster's action may have been privileged as "defense of property". If not, Sticky was arguably acting in self defense by shoving Buster.
It can get complicated.
How bought if both partys threatened each other before the fight
Why don't you tell us exactly what happened?
To sum up Assault and Battery is a crime. It is up to a prosecutor to determine whether to bring charges and against whom.
Damages from any type of physical altercation is a civil matter. Either or both parties can sue for damages and it will be up to a court to determine fault and awards.
Also some states and actually most don't accept fighting words to be enough to force someone to fight, Threats alone in most situations do not justify fighting.
So yes the threats are a crime, assault but normally it is who threw the first punch, they started the battery.
Of course normally drinking and being drunk all start part of it. So they could have course charge them both with public drunk and change both of them with the crime if both appear to be at fault ( for the criminal)
But for part of the criminal and for the civil. You have to look at where they were, why where they there, did any of them have a chance to leave first, what was this happening, what was the fight over. At any time did one of them during the fight have a chance to leave or stop.
You are not giving enough details , just challenging what we are saying.
So my advice either give all the details or answer our questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panda86
Without the details this is going nowhere. What happened?
If you have to try that hard to justify it... odds are you are going to lose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Panda86
The court looks at evidence at hand, the wording of the law, and precident... and renders a judgement.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:54 PM. |