Master Index of Archived Threads


180 Days

Edgy DC Jul 15 2011 03:17 PM

I was in court yesterday, testifying against a man who, without provocation, punched me in the face and landed it pretty good. He had (indeed still has) long arms, and it was a wide open hook I never saw coming. Strange to be aggressively cross-examined in a case where the facts were so clear, but he demanded a trial and I accept that he was entitled to a vigorous (if goofy) defense. Anyshmoe, I was entitled to make a "victim's impact statement" afterwards. The impact was pretty minor. My jaw held, which I felt pretty good about, but then I felt pretty bad about what had become of my eyesight that I was staring right at this guy and didn't see the punch at all. (The lights just suddenly went out for a few seconds.) I walked around with a swollen cheek for a few days, and was pretty irritable and not a little depressed. (You know how you get an adrenaline rush when you're under attack? Well that adrenaline can really play havoc with you if you don't do anything with it.) Well, I was sort of ambivalant about pursing this. It happened at my evening job. I have folks in various places on the mental spectrum, but none of them had ever hit me in four and a half years. When I've had a confrontation, my security officer and other clients have always had my back. But my security officer had been out sick, and this guy had a history of being difficult, and so I wanted to take his mental temperature before he came in. I asked him how he was doing that day, I got my answer in the form of a spit in the face. When I asked him (dumb question) why he spit in my face, KAPOW! Rock 'em, sock 'em. As I said, I felt wishy-washy about pursuing it, but I felt I had to (1) set an example for the other clients, and (2) think of the safety of my volunteers --- the majority of whom are teenagers or seniors. I told the judge of my ambivalence, and asked that she not give him a long sentence (she had the option of a range of 45-180, and to possibly allow it to be served concurrently with another stretch he was obliged to serve), and that he was clearly in need of mental/emotional health care and hoped he would be placed in the sort of custody that could help him in this regard. BAM! The gavel comes down and he gets the full 180 days, to be served non-concurrently. Strange to walk around knowing your testimony led to somebody's incarceration. What they say about testifying bringing it all back to you is true. My jaw is suddenly sore all over again, and my adrenaline is racing. If you see a guy named Charles Shank ("Shank"! Seriously!), keep your guard up. He's sneaky fast.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jul 15 2011 07:10 PM Re: 180 Days

wow. I feel like I got punched in the face.

Fman99 Jul 15 2011 08:32 PM Re: 180 Days

I wouldn't say your testimony sent this guy up the river. I'd say it was the whole "punching another person in the face" thing.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jul 15 2011 08:51 PM Re: 180 Days

I can understand your ambivalence. She simply gave him the sentence she saw fit (whether fact- or "principle"- or whim-based).

Edgy DC Jul 15 2011 09:02 PM Re: 180 Days

He was on probation for a breaking and entering (or perhaps tresspassing) charge. That sentence was 180 days, and the judge said she couldn't give him less for a crime against a person than he got for a crime against property.

DocTee Jul 15 2011 09:09 PM Re: 180 Days

Unsolicited advice: call in sick in 181 days.

Edgy DC Jul 15 2011 09:16 PM Re: 180 Days

I hear you, but between other stretches he's got to serve, it'll be over a year before he's walking. By then the fulfillment of the Mayan prophecy will have made any question of retribution a moot point. I've got it easy. They guy who testified in corroboration of my account is also a more-or-less homeless guy who, living in some of the same circles, put himself in a lot more vulnerable position just to do the right thing on my behalf. I owe him in a big way.

Gwreck Jul 15 2011 09:30 PM Re: 180 Days

Edgy DC wrote: He was on probation I get the ambivalence, particularly if there is a question about his mental health. But if he's already on probation, she's got to throw the book at him. Otherwise, what good is probation?

Edgy DC Jul 15 2011 09:39 PM Re: 180 Days

Understood. I just hoped he be turned over to criminal psychiatric care rather than just the general prison population. Hopefully he still will. Seriously disturbed man, this Mr. Shank.

bmfc1 Jul 16 2011 09:06 AM Re: 180 Days

That must have been difficult but you did what the system asked you to do and you didn't create the system. You also may have prevented somebody else from being punched in the face for the next six months.

MFS62 Jul 16 2011 10:11 AM Re: 180 Days

While in the Army, I saw one of the cooks threaten another soldier with a big butcher's knife. The victim knew me and I was interviewed, then called to testify at the Court Martial. The guy was found guilty. I thought the penalty for assault with a deadly weapon would put the guy away until I was out (of the service). The guy (only) got two months of hard labor at Levinworth, and then returned to duty in our Company. I slept with one eye open until my discharge date. Later

Edgy DC Jul 16 2011 11:17 AM Re: 180 Days

bmfc1 wrote: That must have been difficult but you did what the system asked you to do and you didn't create the system. You also may have prevented somebody else from being punched in the face for the next six months. That was the idea. Hopefully so. Butcher knife wielders in the company. Yikes. I shake like a leaf when I bring a knife out to cut a cake, worried that I'm going to turn my back, fly away into ADD Land, and let the kinfe get slipped into someone's sock. It's a silly worry, considering that I don't wand these guys when they come in and am living on faith that they're not all capable of pulling a shiv on a moment's notice.

Edgy DC Jul 30 2011 08:38 PM Re: 180 Days

Notice in the mail today says Charles Shank is filing an appeal.