Comments on: Waah, I cut my finger: mandatory-minimum for you! http://apublicdefender.com/2009/12/01/waah-i-cut-my-finger-mandatory-minimum-for-you/ Tue, 24 Jan 2012 02:29:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: CT: (not) so soft on cop assaults | a public defender http://apublicdefender.com/2009/12/01/waah-i-cut-my-finger-mandatory-minimum-for-you/comment-page-1/#comment-52880 CT: (not) so soft on cop assaults | a public defender Fri, 08 Jan 2010 05:15:29 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=2522#comment-52880 [...] of all the northeastern states for assaults on cops (which includes throwing paint). Puts the call for a mandatory-minimum sentence in a whole new light, doesn’t it? Take a [...] [...] of all the northeastern states for assaults on cops (which includes throwing paint). Puts the call for a mandatory-minimum sentence in a whole new light, doesn’t it? Take a [...]

]]> By: Gideon http://apublicdefender.com/2009/12/01/waah-i-cut-my-finger-mandatory-minimum-for-you/comment-page-1/#comment-52253 Gideon Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:34:01 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=2522#comment-52253 Well, wasn't there the guy in Texas (where else?) who was charged with attempted murder for spitting at a cop because he was HIV+? Well, wasn’t there the guy in Texas (where else?) who was charged with attempted murder for spitting at a cop because he was HIV+?

]]> By: Twogoodhands http://apublicdefender.com/2009/12/01/waah-i-cut-my-finger-mandatory-minimum-for-you/comment-page-1/#comment-52248 Twogoodhands Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:54:14 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=2522#comment-52248 Regarding 53a-167c(a)(4)...it's worse than "guilty of throwing paint at a police officer." I know of at least one instance in which a young woman was convicted of assault under this statute for spitting on an EMT while she was restrained on an ambulance gurney. This is a catch-all statute that already allows police officers to charge virtually anyone who gets rowdy in public as if they were a criminal. I also wonder what Richie Rodriguez means when he says that "any comments and or actions that advocate the assaulting or the killing of a police officer should not and cannot be tolerated." Given the current language of the statute and his advocacy of an even stronger law, is Rodriguez suggesting that it should be a crime to tell a police officer, a la Monty Python, "I clear my nose in your general direction!" Regarding 53a-167c(a)(4)…it’s worse than “guilty of throwing paint at a police officer.” I know of at least one instance in which a young woman was convicted of assault under this statute for spitting on an EMT while she was restrained on an ambulance gurney. This is a catch-all statute that already allows police officers to charge virtually anyone who gets rowdy in public as if they were a criminal.

I also wonder what Richie Rodriguez means when he says that “any comments and or actions that advocate the assaulting or the killing of a police officer should not and cannot be tolerated.” Given the current language of the statute and his advocacy of an even stronger law, is Rodriguez suggesting that it should be a crime to tell a police officer, a la Monty Python, “I clear my nose in your general direction!”

]]>