As a defense lawyer| Lawyers, disputes or assaults that dispute with each other give rise to many factual discussions. If you or a loved one is investigated or arrested for assaulting someone in a mutual struggle, it is important that they assert their right to counselling and speak to our defence lawyers| Lawyers before making a statement to a police officer or other officer. The law on mutual struggle and self-defense has many subtleties and consulting with a competent criminal defense lawyer ensures that you have a team of highly qualified third parties involved in the decision-making process. If you or a loved one is in jail, lawyers have the right to visit their clients and have a private conversation with them. Every defender | An honest lawyer will always educate and help their clients avoid prosecution. We have helped a significant number of clients avoid charges by making statements to police after proper review. If you decide to make a statement, we ensure that your testimony and all witness information will be accurately recorded by the investigator by contacting the police directly and remaining involved in the interrogation process. Even if we choose not to report, our office will contact investigators on your behalf, let them know that you are exercising your right to remain silent, and explain to you and your family possible arrest and bail issues. This is part of the overall process that our court-appointed counsel follow to proactively litigate our clients` cases to the fullest extent of the law.
A recent decision by the Cook County District Attorney`s Office not to bring charges against five alleged gang members involved in a deadly Chicago shooting has left many residents surprised and confused. Although all five were arrested on suspicion of murder and aggravated assault, they were later released from prison without formal charges. The reason prosecutors are refusing to charge the shooters is because, according to a police report, they were involved in “mutual fights.” But what does that mean? Note that amateur “fight clubs” are likely to be illegal in Texas, as it is almost inevitable that someone will suffer serious injury. Since the events of a fight club are not sanctioned professional fights, this form of mutual combat would become illegal. Mutual fights become illegal under Texas law if one of the participants is seriously injured. Hopefully the policeman/referee will intervene before this point. The only exception is when participants fight as part of their profession or as part of a medical experiment. In fact, a war trial may be considered a violation of other parts of the Constitution, such as due process and cruel and unusual punishment. The Washington State Mutual Struggle Act contains a provision that makes fighting a bit difficult legally: to be legal, a fight must be supervised by a police officer. Most of the time, police officers have something better to do with their time than watching a bunch of guys fight. Mutual struggle is an old common law concept that allowed two consensual adults to fight without fear of prosecution. Given that this concept was rooted in duel, it is hardly surprising that it has been watered down in today`s society, where such behavior and violence are generally discouraged except in controlled work environments.
Consent to consent to an attack resulted in judges having difficulty with agreed fights in everything from contact sports to gang-initiated punches. As a defense lawyer| Lawyers, we find that this area of law is ripe for arguments. In 2012, MMA fighter Phoenix Jones made headlines for participating in the mutual struggle. [5] A video of the fight went viral. [6] The Seattle Police Department later defended its officers for not intervening. [3] Seattle Municipal Code 12A.06.025 states that “it is unlawful for any person to intentionally fight with another person in a public place, thereby creating a significant risk of: 1. injury to a person who is not actively participating in the fight; or 2. property damage caused to a person who is not actively participating in the fight. [7] Thus, since the fight did not injure any third party or damage property, it was not prohibited by this law. Strange, because sometimes (on different sites, as a “fun fact”) I see that there are jurisdictions (e.g. Seattle, WA) where neither party can be brought to justice if both parties agree on “mutual struggle”.
That said, I feel like there`s some sort of targeted flaw in the No. 1 ball above. It is not saying that it is illegal to fight someone, it is saying that it is illegal to fight someone who is not actively participating in the struggle. What if both actively participated in the fight? That seems to me to be a fairly accurate definition of “mutual struggle.” .