Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SuperMrTiddles t1_ixokbap wrote

But even if that was her reason for doing it it doesn’t really justify the act. If someone is accused of something you don’t have the right to assault them just because. I’m not going to comment on the specifics of the football players case, but she did her own thing and was going to face potential consequences. I would like to add that it was only a potential expulsion, I’d be shocked if that was actually being considered or just listed as the worst outcomes like a lot of policies do.

18

JonnyAU t1_ixol33a wrote

We're not certain it constitutes assault or not, if it was even intentional or not, if there were any injuries, and if there were what the severity was.

It would be best not to assume anything.

−13

SuperMrTiddles t1_ixoluts wrote

I’ll put a link but throwing your drink onto someone is assault in California.

Okay, you’re right, let’s not assume anything. If we’re not doing anything wouldn’t it make sense to discuss it with her and inform her of the punishment if the findings go against her? I’ve read a few articles and in none of them have I read anything that makes me feel like they were going to punish her, just that there was a potential punishment. I’m not sure how else they were supposed to handle it, because if they didn’t inform her that she could face punishment or what the punishment was then she’d have an argument that they’re blindsiding her.

https://www.hashemilaw.com/practice-areas/criminal-law-overview/california-define-assault-simple-assault/

8

JonnyAU t1_ixom91u wrote

Damn, California is soft as hell. Still, if it wasn't intentional it of course wouldn't be assault.

−9