No jail for attack with a road sign

r borg

Mar 7th, 15:21

she threw things first according to the news item, hence she was violent too

I Bugeja

Mar 7th, 10:10

It depends what kind of provocation - this woman threw things at him. If shouting does not do any bodily harm, objects thrown at people can.

Peter Murray

Mar 7th, 11:40

It does not depend on anything as provocation is too subjective an issue to considered as admissable evidence and the acceptance of it as an justifiable excuse thereby condones violence and taking the law into one's own hands.It is also hardly a self-defence argument is it -especially in this case?

Keith Cauchi

Mar 7th, 12:01

I'm sorry but you're too much stereotyped. Basing on what I've read here, there's a.) an act of violence that first originated from the woman b.) resulting provocation from the woman and c.) retaliation from the man to the woman's acts.

The results meted out for these three offences were: a.) nothing, b.) nothing and c.) suspended jail term. Why was she let go scotch free? Stereotypes that's why!

Mr C Camilleri

Mar 7th, 09:50

And why is that Mr Attard ? Sorry for not looking like the perfect gentleman but what rights does a woman have over the integrity of a man ? NOBODY should throw stuff at someone else.

I Bugeja

Mar 7th, 10:13

Agree Mr. Camilleri. Everyone should respect each other's space.

Bear in mind that in this case she owed him money.

Then she called him to meet her.

Then she shouted and threw things at him.

What would a warm blooded man (or woman) do?

Most probably I would have done the same

r borg

Mar 7th, 15:24

Isn't throwing thing violence too George Attard or a woman is always justified and the male always the culprit?