Assault with deadly weapon or not

[Sexyangel329]

What do ya THink



FRESNO, California (AP) -- Advocates for an 11-year-old girl who was arrested on a deadly weapon charge for throwing a 2-pound rock during a water balloon fight say the charge in no way fits the crime.

But Fresno's mayor and police chief say Maribel Cuevas's case was handled appropriately, and that assault with a deadly weapon is the proper charge for an act that might have had fatal consequences.

The case was to go to trial Wednesday in the Juvenile Delinquency Division of Fresno Superior Court. In an unusual move for a case involving a minor, the trial will be open to the public.

Maribel was arrested in April for throwing the rock at a neighborhood boy who had pelted her with a water balloon. The rock gashed the boy's forehead, and the girl spent five days in Fresno's juvenile hall and a month under house arrest after police said she resisted arrest and scratched an officer's arm.

Lisa Bennett, a legal assistant for defense attorney Richard Beshwate Jr., said efforts to avert a trial were fruitless. "Even though there may or may not be good offers, having her plead guilty to a crime is not acceptable," Bennett said Tuesday.

Alvin Harrell, the Fresno County assistant district attorney who supervises juvenile cases, said court rules prohibited him from commenting.

In a statement issued shortly after The Associated Press published a story about the case, Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer defended his department's actions.

"The simple fact is that we have an 11-year-old girl who struck a boy in the head with a jagged-edged, two-pound river rock, that required him to have stitches," Dyer said. "That is a felony, assault with a deadly weapon, and we are very fortunate that that act did not cause a more serious injury, even death."

Elijah Vang, the boy who was injured by Maribel and who has acknowledged throwing a water balloon at her, was expected to testify at the trial.

 

[ChuckD]

Yup!

No one thinks that getting hit with a rock is gonna feel good. That stupid brat knew just what she was doing, now let her face the consequences of her actions.

 

[Nyasia]

I think it fit the crime, the rock is a weapon, the other kids forhead was gashed, what if it hit him in the eye and permanently blinded the kid, or hit him in the temple and killed him? so yeah, he trough her a water ballon and she throws him a 2-poind rock? I hope she learned her lesson!

 

[imfromqueenz]

yeah unfortunately being a criminal justice major, ive seen similiar stories....it reminds me about the kids who threw a frozen turkey at over an overpass and hit a car, i dont remember if they actually killed the driver or not....but they definitely knew what they were doing....i think they were charged with attempted manslaughter....an 11 year old possess enough maturity to know that a rock will hurt....the question is, did they possess the mentality to know the extent of the damages that could have occurred....each case must be handled with extreme caution when it comes to children....she definitely needs counseling, not jail or juvi....

 

[taezee]

"caught between a rock and a hard place"

 

[kxrider375]

Yeah, but the parents should also answer for this since she is so young and a reflection of how she is being raised and the amount of attention and care she's received from her parents, or lack there of.

I feel that way because she is so young and she also has a history of doing this type of stuff. Where the hell are her parents or gaurdians? It's quiet obvious that this kid has emotional and mental issues and usually that comes from neglect or abuse.

My 2 cents.

 

[Brklyn345]

I think the charge of assault w/ deadly weapon is extreme...yeah she threw a big ass rock, but if the intent to kill him wasn't there she shouldn't be charged as such....but she should get a major pela from her parents.

 

[imfromqueenz]

I think the charge of assault w/ deadly weapon is extreme...yeah she threw a big ass rock, but if the intent to kill him wasn't there she shouldn't be charged as such....but she should get a major pela from her parents.

here is how the law breaks it down:
''A person is guilty of assault in the first degree when . . . [w]ith intent to cause serious physical injury to another person, he causes such injury to such person or to a third person by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument.''
For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) that the defendant intended to cause serious physical injury to another person; (2) that the defendant caused serious physical injury to that person or to a third person; and (3) that he caused that injury by means of a [deadly weapon] [dangerous instrument].

''Physical injury'' is defined as impairment of physical condition or pain. ''Serious physical injury'' is something more serious than mere physical injury. It is more than a minor or superficial injury. It is defined by statute as physical injury that creates a substantial risk of death, or that causes serious disfigurement, serious impairment of health or serious loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ.

The state must first prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended to cause serious physical injury to another person. What the defendant intended is a question of fact for you to determine.


since there was no intent to kill...that is the reason she isnt being charged with attempted murder with a deadly.....in a case like this, the child is fully evaluated to determine whether she could even possibly have the mentality to be able to have the intent.....assault with a deadly weapon is described/defined as ANY object that can kill....it is usually described as a gun or a knife, but in some previous cases courts have deemed rocks and other things i wont mention hear as a deadly weapon. Basically in laymen's term, she set out to hurt him and she did, even if she didnt hurt him, but hurt an innocent bystander, the charge would be the same because of the intent. its hard to understand sometimes, especially when dealing with children. The law works in stupefying ways.....im gonna post a new thread about a dui case and you'll see what i mean....if anyone has any questions that might be puzzling, pm me and i will try to explain better....

 

[Nyasia]

Nice..imfromqueenz, I remember when I wored at the NY Law School I had to read all these cases for the students handouts..I remember reading alot of stuff that seemed extreme to me at that point, but when you really read what it covers, hey it all falls into it....