primitives upset about finger-biting incident

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6456651

Oh my.

The Joanne98 primitive, who changes her underwear every ten days:

Joanne98  (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 04:39 PM
Original message
 
William J. Rice -- Who Threw Punch And Lost Finger At Health Rally -- May Not Be Charged With Crime
 
The aggressive punch-throwing man whose finger was bitten off at a health reform rally in California last night now has a name: William J. Rice. And chances are, he won't be charged with a crime.

That's according to Capt. Ross Bonfiglio, a public information officer with the Ventura County Sheriffs Department, who I just spoke to. Bonfiglio said Rice -- an anti-reform protester whose severed finger was reattached last night courtesy of Medicare -- is 65, lives in Newbury Park and has cooperated with sheriffs deputies.

Bonfiglio said his department has a description of the accused finger biter -- a pro-reform demonstrator who Rice punched before the biting -- but hasn't identified a suspect yet.

Rice told sheriffs deputies that the biter left the much larger pro-reform rally across a busy intersection in Thousand Oaks, CA, last night to have words with Rice at a small anti-reform rally that had set up across the street. Rice -- who our eyewitness said was aggressive and much bigger than the pro-reformer -- told deputies that the smaller man insulted him. "Rice says he felt threatened," Bonfiglio told me, "and decided to punch the guy in the nose."

The pro-reformer then got up off the ground, the two fought, and the pro-reformer bit Rice's pinky finger off.

Rice told deputies he assumed his finger couldn't be salvaged, so put his injured hand in a towel and walked to a nearby hospital. Another man reportedly picked up the severed pinky and brought it to the hospital, where it was reattached.

Bonfiglio said that while specific charges will be up to the district attorney, he thinks the biter will face a felony mayhem charge, with Rice facing a misdemeanor assault charge at most, and perhaps nothing at all.

"He's more a victim at this point," the captain said, even though "he was admittedly the primary aggressor."

"Nothing's black and white in a case like this," he said, noting that proportion can matter just as much as the order of events.

"If Rice was the initial aggressor and the guy cut his head off, it doesn't mean it was justified."

Late Update: I just got Rice on the phone. He said he's not speaking to the media. His brief statement before hanging up: "Surely there's more important things in this world than me getting my finger bit off."

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/man-wh...

Felony mayhem for DEFENDING YOURSELF? BULL SHIT!

Oh my again.

The tularetom primitive, who prospered mightily during the "lousy" Bush economy; not so great lately:

tularetom  (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
 
1. That doesn't seem right

The guy was supposed to just let this assbite punch him and not retaliate?

**** that.

zbdent  (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
 
34. when the cops are on the RWers' sides ... then that's how the law goes ... apparently ...

T Wolf (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
 
2. It ALWAYS comes down like this when a con encounters a liberal. Now, we are not even allowed to defend ourselves.

anigbrowl (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #2
 
22. There is a wide gap between defending yourself and mutilating someone

I heartily support someone's right to self-defense, and have exercised it more than once. However, there are limits to how far that right extends.

tridim  (1000+ posts)        Thu Sep-03-09 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #22
 
24. If someone assaults me and sticks his fingers in my mouth..

I can't be held responsible for whatever happens when the adrenaline kicks in.

anigbrowl (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #24
 
26. Well, that's kind of a large assumption there.

In any case, the point I was making was that a policy of not biting people's fingers off doesn't necessarily translate to having no right to defend oneself. Speaking for myself, I do consider myself responsible for what happens when the adrenaline kicks in, and that has served me well so far. Your mileage may vary, of course.

tridim  (1000+ posts)        Thu Sep-03-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #26
 
33. I've never been in a fight in my life, so I may be speaking out of my ass.

It's just that I've seen fights where fingers enter the mouth (and eyes), and IMO at the point when the gag reflex kicks in, the jaw muscle will do what it does best.

anigbrowl (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #33
 
35. I'm certainly not suggesting you are

It's possible that it was reflexive or similarly unavoidable; I, personally, don't think it was very probable and i do have a fair amount of experience to draw on. That's just my personal opinion. Either way, the correct course of action would have been to wait for the police and turn oneself in rather than flee the scene and make oneself an object of suspicion; but obviously, neither party was acting sensibly.

PSzymeczek  (612 posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #24
 
50. Apparently, Mr. Rice has never heard of reflexes.

sabrina 1 (849 posts)        Thu Sep-03-09 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #22
 
27. Not according to the rightwing.

This guy had used his finger, according to at least one eye-witness so far (who has spoken to the police) to threaten a woman, 'shoo'ing' her into the street where there was moving traffic. Then he used it again on the finger-biter. Seems to me his finger was a danger to at least two people that we know of. He punched the finger biter, knocking him to the ground again into a street where there was moving traffic.

I have listened to rightwingers and some on the left vehemently defend people who have shot and killed intruders or others they believe to be threatening them. Often even when the threatening person is running away. Self-defense is a right, they say, once you feel threatened.

But there were no guns here, just a finger, a fist and a set of teeth. So now we are hearing, from the same rightwingers, that the finger biter 'went too far'. Since Rice had already acted aggressively towards two people, looks to me like he was a threat to others until he lost his finger. Who knows what he might have done had that not happened? I am amazed that we haven't seen a thread praising the finger-biter as we so often see when there is a gun involved.

Maybe if he had used a gun instead of his teeth?

anigbrowl (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #27
 
28. which is exactly why I am not right wing.

sabrina 1 (849 posts)        Thu Sep-03-09 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #28
 
30. Me too, but the hypocrisy of the rightwing never fails to amaze me. And I think it is instructive to point it out when it is as blatant as this case. Had the situation been in reverse, Finger Biter would be a hero, and the finger waver would be demonized as a rabid liberal justifying why they need to be armed to the teeth, or maybe with teeth now that we see how effective a weapon of self-defense they can be.

I'd like to know who this guy's dentist is.

I do get your point. I am not in favor of violence once the danger is past. The thing is we don't know that it was past in this case, as I pointed out, Rice had already threatened another person and was apparently looking for a fight which might not have stopped with the finger biter.

He probably should have called the police, but people are people and when someone punches you in the face pushing into a street with moving trafic, you might not feel very rational at that point. Which is why my lecture, if I were going to deliver one, would be directed to the guy who started the whole thing and lost part of his finger as a result of his own behavior. Maybe next time he should not assume that there will be no consequences when he chooses to engage in violent behavior.

anigbrowl (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #30
 
32. No dispute there...

Basically my view is that you shouldn't get into or stay in a fight you can't handle...and that applies to both parties.

sabrina 1 (849 posts)        Thu Sep-03-09 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #32
 
38. I'm for not fighting either and would most likely have acted differently. But then I would not poke my finger in someone's face or punch them in the nose, because I would assume there might be consequences and because it's both morally wrong and more importantly, illegal.

As far as this incident, one is more responsible than the other. I am not for this 'everyone is wrong' attitude we have developed. Throughout history, in most legal systems, the initiator of violence is generally held to be the most responsible. Any reaction by their victims, is usually called self defense and most of the time, justifiable. The only question remaining once that is clear, is how far can you go to defend yourself? But for the police to say that the person without whom none of this would have happened is less responsible, is just plain wrong imho.

PSzymeczek  (612 posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #30
 
51. I long ago learned the defensive use of the teeth.

My now-ex-husband got mad and put his hand over my face while I was driving, so I bit his hand.

DireStrike (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #22
 
53. No there isn't.

The biter was smaller.

Fight to win.

And an old man, too.

What kind of coward runs across the street to confront an old man?

fascisthunter  (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
 
3. gee... what a surprise... Capt. Ross Bonfiglio wouldn't be biased, now would he? 

The busted baboon primitive:

arbusto_baboso  (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
 
4. Ventura County Sheriff's Department is a nest of the worst kind of conservatives.

I live in Ventura County and worked briefly as a civilian in the department. Our Sheriff's deputies are largely the same kind of people as the town hall nutbags. They are reactionaries, racists and generally despicable people. I used to like cops before I worked with some.

blahblahblah.....

brendan120678  (725 posts)        Thu Sep-03-09 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
 
6. Why did the guy who did the biting...even leave the group he was with? Almost sounds like he was hoping for a confrontation. I don't agree at all with what William J. Rice believes in, but it does sound like he was confronted. A punch probably was warranted.

Yeah, why did the guy who did the biting purposely go over to confront an old man?

yawnmaster (205 posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
 
18. lots of issues here...the street should not have been crossed. That is aggressive behavior, as was the punch in the face.

But I don't think getting up and then biting a finger off is a good self defense mechanism, when walking away would have probably been the best mode of defense.

Itchinjim  (1000+ posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #18
 
20. Crossing a street is "aggressive behavior"?

Getting up and fighting back is not a "good self defense mechanism"? Who are you? Harry Reid? I wish more of these Teabagging bullies had their noses bloodied or appendages bitten off. **** 'em.

yawnmaster (205 posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #37
 
40. exactly, not cut and dry...

Crossing a street, by itself, is not an aggressive behavior.

But once in court I can see arguments questioning why a member from an opposing group would cross the street to confront someone.

How was the person approached?

Did the person throwing the first punch fear for his safety (I'm not saying this guy did, but those are the issues that may be brought up if it ever goes to court).

If someone comes at me in a threatening manner, I may very well throw the first punch.

And to a previous poster, just because I believe someone is an asshole, does not, in my opinion, give someone the right to bite off a finger.

You may believe differently.

Caliman73  (986 posts)      Thu Sep-03-09 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #40
 
52. We don't know why he crossed the street...

We know by the righty's own admission that he threw two punches, the second of which landed in the man's mouth prompting the other man to bite. It isn't about belief, it is about what happens during a physical altercation.

The finger-biter crossed the street because he's an asshole and a coward, and wanted to threaten an old man.

Hannah Bell  (1000+ posts)        Thu Sep-03-09 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
 
19. The story I initially heard was: The pro-reformer threw the first punch. The anti-reformer bit off the finger.

This story is different.

Now how hard can it be to get such details right, or refrain from making claims until you do?

Regardless, biting off a finger isn't "self-defense".

[Vagabond]

If he threw a punch and was not reasonably in a situation where he felt threatened, then yes, he should be charged with assault.  However, the person who bit off his finger fails to meet the proportional response requirement in the laws of most states, that is typically you can only respond with deadly force if you are threatened with deadly force, likewise for serious bodily injury.  A human bite can cause dangerous infections, it's one of the worst bites you can get.  The bite resulted in the severing of an appendage, which exceeds the threat level that the punch of a sixty-five year old average man would justify.

[Chump]

gee... what a surprise... Capt. Ross Bonfiglio wouldn't be biased, now would he? 

Um, dude, all your cowardly accusations of RAAAAACCCCIIIIISSSSMMMM have blinded you to your own prejudice.

By your logic, I get to discount anything someone says just because they have a name like, oh, say, Barack Obama.  Doofus.

[djones520]

Joanne98 created two seperate threads over this... talk about a post whore.

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,33166.0.html

[Wineslob]

Rice told sheriffs deputies that the biter left the much larger pro-reform rally across a busy intersection in Thousand Oaks, CA, last night to have words with Rice at a small anti-reform rally that had set up across the street. Rice -- who our eyewitness said was aggressive and much bigger than the pro-reformer -- told deputies that the smaller man insulted him. "Rice says he felt threatened," Bonfiglio told me, "and decided to punch the guy in the nose."

My understanding, from the guy who picked up the finger (he was on Rush) is that the "Pro reform" guy was very in-your-face, as indicated by his willingness to cross a very busy street to confront............a seasoned citizen.

[jukin]

I blame team Obama and the donks for getting their side so riled up.  Hit back twice as hard. They are Nazis.  On and on the rhetoric to get the left inflamed was close to criminal and would have been resoundingly denounced if a republican had said it in the MSM.

[jinxmchue]

The real comedy is the earlier threads in which the DUmp monkeys thought the victim was an Obamacare supporter.  They were all indignant then, but when it came to light that the victim was an anti-Obamacare protester, the DUmp monkeys' tunes changed really quickly.