Medical student assaults girlfriend

PeterParker957

Deleted User wrote: »

Thoughts about an unrelated assault in the UK?

None really.

But then again, it would be like me linking an attack where someone is kicked and punched to death in China and saying "thoughts?". It has no relevance to this case.

It's a man pushing food into a woman's face.

Whereas you've directly posted that a woman pushing food into a man's face is nothing.

Fine, blindly carry on white knighting.

Chrongen

Don Kiddick wrote: »

When someone says that woman got everything she deserved... that shows a deep rooted hatred of women imo .... but you're welcome to say otherwise

And I will say otherwise. I stated that most people would say that a woman in the scenario that I described got everything she deserved.

If a mother neglects, beats, tortures or even kills her children and is sent to prison then I would say she got what she deserved just as much as if a father did the same thing. There's nothing deep-rooted or misogynistic about that as you claim is your opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion but in this case, quite frankly, your opinion is inane.

PeterParker957

Chrongen wrote: »

And I will say otherwise. I stated that most people would say that a woman in the scenario that I described got everything she deserved.

If a mother neglects, beats, tortures or even kills her children and is sent to prison then I would say she got what she deserved just as much as if a father did the same thing. There's nothing deep-rooted or misogynistic about that as you claim is your opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion but in this case, quite frankly, your opinion is inane.

+1

Think about it logically - we wanted equality. No one would bat an eyelid if two men had a bit of a barney so why is there such a catastrophe when it happens to a woman ??

If I started a fight with a bloke and got the worst of it - I'd be the lamest kind of hypocrite to start with the "you can't hit a girl!!". Why not ? I hit him.

Sustained, unprovoked domestic violence is NOT the same as starting a fight and anyone who does that deserves everything they get.

Chrongen

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you equivocating the two?

Tbh, I think society is less at risk from food-in-face-pushers than people who beat and kick others to the ground, try to break down a door to get to them etc. If the latter costs someone their career, so be it.

Not at all. But would you call what she did "assault"? Forget about what HE did. We can all agree that his actions amounted to assault.

Should she be charged too with some degree of assault or affray or some reduced charge? She did after all slap him as well. Should she be convicted and stricken from the register?

Billy86

PeterParker957 wrote: »

Love how you refer to it as "food-in-face-pushers" like it's nothing.

http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/derby-man-threw-food-assaulted-755241

Thoughts ?

PeterParker957 wrote: »

It's a man pushing food into a woman's face.

Whereas you've directly posted that a woman pushing food into a man's face is nothing.

Fine, blindly carry on white knighting.

My thought is you may not have read your own link:

23-year-old Derby man accused people in a chip shop of staring at him then went to his then partner’s home and threw food and assaulted her.

A court heard how James Hooper also slapped the woman, grabbed her by the throat and threatened to punch her after smoking cannabis and drinking alcohol.

Dr Brown

davo10 wrote: »

Unfortunately for him, this kid's medical career is ruined. A conviction would probably have resulted in sanction from the medical council up to removal from the register. But any hospital scheme/medical position he applies for will throw up the details of this assault when his name is googled. I can't imagine any Hospital/Clinic would take a chance on employing him. A career in research beckons.

And rightly so. Would you want a scumbag like him treating your family ?

lillycakes2

all because he is a doctor - he gets away lightly. everyone should remember his name, I wouldn't want him examining me or anyone I care about that's for sure. He should be ordered to go to AA and Anger management.........

PeterParker957

Billy86 wrote: »

My thought is you may not have read your own link:

23-year-old Derby man accused people in a chip shop of staring at him then went to his then partner’s home and threw food and assaulted her.

A court heard how James Hooper also slapped the woman, grabbed her by the throat and threatened to punch her after smoking cannabis and drinking alcohol.

I know - I'm not arguing he's anything other than a pathetic bully.

It's the "food pushing", I was curious whether it was okay as a woman did it - that was the insinuation from a previous post.

riffmongous

PeterParker957 wrote: »

+1

Think about it logically - we wanted equality. No one would bat an eyelid if two men had a bit of a barney so why is there such a catastrophe when it happens to a woman ??

If I started a fight with a bloke and got the worst of it - I'd be the lamest kind of hypocrite to start with the "you can't hit a girl!!". Why not ? I hit him.

Sustained, unprovoked domestic violence is NOT the same as starting a fight and anyone who does that deserves everything they get.

Deserves everything they get, really? The law says otherwise anyway but do you really think that?

Billy86

PeterParker957 wrote: »

I know - I'm not arguing he's anything other than a pathetic bully.

It's the "food pushing", I was curious whether it was okay as a woman did it - that was the insinuation from a previous post.

But he didn't just "push food in her face" in the story you linked to - he also slapped her and grabbed her by the throat. That's like someone calling another person a cnut before headbutting them, then complaining that they're being arrested for "just saying words".

Lollipops23

I looked this cretin up on Facebook out of curiosity and nosiness. He's shared several quotes from Nigel Farrage.

I didn't need the help making my mind up about him...but still.

Don Kiddick

Chrongen wrote: »

And I will say otherwise. I stated that most people would say that a woman in the scenario that I described got everything she deserved.

If a mother neglects, beats, tortures or even kills her children and is sent to prison then I would say she got what she deserved just as much as if a father did the same thing. There's nothing deep-rooted or misogynistic about that as you claim is your opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion but in this case, quite frankly, your opinion is inane.

So mysoginistic tendencies are the norm according to you?

PeterParker957

riffmongous wrote: »

Deserves everything they get, really? The law says otherwise anyway but do you really think that?

I might be missing something here but yes, I do believe that anyone who uses psychological or physical abuse to a partner on a sustained, unprovoked basis does deserve absolutely everything the law can give them.

They seem to rarely get it though.

Triceratops Ballet

Chrongen wrote: »

Makes sense, and I'm not condoning the reaction. But not all perpetrators of violence are dangers to society. Case in point would be a bullying victim. He/she may snap one day and pummel the tar out of their tormentor in a fit or uncontrollable rage but they would never dream of hurting anyone else ever. I don't think this guy is a danger to society either. Maybe an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal if he adheres to certain conditions such as attending some anger management sessions, is squeaky clean for the next couple of years, etc.

I'm loathe to give guys a pass just because they have a "bright career" ahead of them and certainly I despise seeing rich kids get sprung because daddy has influence like those scum who killed the guy outside annabel's nightclub. But by the same token I don't see how society is served by handing this guy a conviction that will effectively put an end to his medical career. The woman also assaulted him. Should they both be convicted and stricken from the medical register or whatever the Pharmacist equivalent is?

The woman instigated the altercation, I don't think you'll find someone who can or would argue otherwise. However, he did not press charges for assault, so she can't be charged.
In my mind this incident is in two stages.
Stage 1 she throws chips and a slap, he throws a slap. At this point someone has to make a choice to de-escalate the situation so she leaves the room. At this point she has slapped him and for want of a better expression "got her comeuppance"
stage 2
he follows her punches her, knocks her to the ground, kicks her, pours coke on her, follows her again when she leaves and tries to break down the door of the room she's hiding in.
There are 5 actions he took in this stage, he had the opportunity to stop and de-escalate 5 times and didn't. He's not a victim here.

Stage 1 should never have happened, but it's not an excuse for a sustained attack. It should have ended when he slapped her and she walked away. Had that happened there would be no case she hit him, he hit her back had they called the police then he could have pressed assault charges and claimed self defence. it is arguably fair, and in that scenario she'd have a criminal record and it would impact her career.

He made the choice to follow her and further escalate the situation, and so is to blame for everything that happened after that and should be held accountable for it, I have a big problem with the idea that you can beat the crap out of someone and if you can afford to pay them compensation then that's it. I'd like to see perpetrators of this nature with a record of assault, mandated anger management, and some community service. Buying his way out of the scenario isn't going to serve him or society in the long run.

riffmongous

PeterParker957 wrote: »

I might be missing something here but yes, I do believe that anyone who uses psychological or physical abuse to a partner on a sustained, unprovoked basis does deserve absolutely everything the law can give them.

They seem to rarely get it though.

Ah you meant everything the law can give them? I thought you meant like in a physical beating way, that it's ok to beat the **** out of someone because they started it. I don't have anything against violence being returned when necesarry but within a similar level if you know what I mean.

PeterParker957

riffmongous wrote: »

Ah you meant everything the law can give them? I thought you meant like in a physical beating way, that it's ok to beat the **** out of someone because they started it. I don't have anything against violence being returned when necesarry but within a similar level if you know what I mean.

Totally!

ceadaoin.

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

The woman instigated the altercation, I don't think you'll find someone who can or would argue otherwise. However, he did not press charges for assault, so she can't be charged.
In my mind this incident is in two stages.
Stage 1 she throws chips and a slap, he throws a slap. At this point someone has to make a choice to de-escalate the situation so she leaves the room. At this point she has slapped him and for want of a better expression "got her comeuppance"
stage 2
he follows her punches her, knocks her to the ground, kicks her, pours coke on her, follows her again when she leaves and tries to break down the door of the room she's hiding in.
There are 5 actions he took in this stage, he had the opportunity to stop and de-escalate 5 times and didn't. He's not a victim here.

Stage 1 should never have happened, but it's not an excuse for a sustained attack. It should have ended when he slapped her and she walked away. Had that happened there would be no case she hit him, he hit her back had they called the police then he could have pressed assault charges and claimed self defence. it is arguably fair, and in that scenario she'd have a criminal record and it would impact her career.

He made the choice to follow her and further escalate the situation, and so is to blame for everything that happened after that and should be held accountable for it, I have a big problem with the idea that you can beat the crap out of someone and if you can afford to pay them compensation then that's it. I'd like to see perpetrators of this nature with a record of assault, mandated anger management, and some community service. Buying his way out of the scenario isn't going to serve him or society in the long run.

He slapped her first, she slapped him back. Then the sustained attack started

RayM

PeterParker957 wrote: »

I might be missing something here

A sense of perspective, maybe?

Triceratops Ballet

ceadaoin. wrote: »

He slapped her first, she slapped him back. Then the sustained attack started

Oh! The indo article doesn't specify who went first. I just read it on the Herald now. He doesn't deserve to get away with only a fine

Chrongen

Don Kiddick wrote: »

So mysoginistic tendencies are the norm according to you?

No they're not. Are you going out of your way to get the wrong end of the stick or are you just being immature by playing games?

Are you trying state that if a person thinks it's a good thing that Myra Hindley wound up behind bars, or Molly Martens Corbett or Amy Fisher then they are a misogynist?

Please, don't waste my damn time.

PeterParker957

RayM wrote: »

PeterParker957 wrote: »

I might be missing something here

A sense of perspective, maybe?

Any need for that ?

Don Kiddick

Chrongen wrote: »

No they're not. Are you going out of your way to get the wrong end of the stick or are you just being immature by playing games?

Are you trying state that if a person thinks it's a good thing that Myra Hindley wound up behind bars, or Molly Martens Corbett or Amy Fisher then they are a misogynist?

Please, don't waste my damn time.

So you are projecting mysoginistic tendencies on the masses on boards?

Chrongen

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

The woman instigated the altercation, I don't think you'll find someone who can or would argue otherwise. However, he did not press charges for assault, so she can't be charged.
In my mind this incident is in two stages.
Stage 1 she throws chips and a slap, he throws a slap. At this point someone has to make a choice to de-escalate the situation so she leaves the room. At this point she has slapped him and for want of a better expression "got her comeuppance"
stage 2
he follows her punches her, knocks her to the ground, kicks her, pours coke on her, follows her again when she leaves and tries to break down the door of the room she's hiding in.
There are 5 actions he took in this stage, he had the opportunity to stop and de-escalate 5 times and didn't. He's not a victim here.

Stage 1 should never have happened, but it's not an excuse for a sustained attack. It should have ended when he slapped her and she walked away. Had that happened there would be no case she hit him, he hit her back had they called the police then he could have pressed assault charges and claimed self defence. it is arguably fair, and in that scenario she'd have a criminal record and it would impact her career.

He made the choice to follow her and further escalate the situation, and so is to blame for everything that happened after that and should be held accountable for it, I have a big problem with the idea that you can beat the crap out of someone and if you can afford to pay them compensation then that's it. I'd like to see perpetrators of this nature with a record of assault, mandated anger management, and some community service. Buying his way out of the scenario isn't going to serve him or society in the long run.

You make very good points. It appears he did lose the rag and go overboard. I don't think he should be rewarded for what he did but by the same token I don't think this should ruin his life. I would be in favour of a sealed record so that while there is no visible conviction to destroy his medical career any further transgressions down the line and the seal is opened and the conviction implemented and made public. That to me would be fair.

Doc07

Just to clarify one factor as the article doesn't make it clear:

This man a medical student at some stage but did not graduate as a doctor and was never on the medical register.

Lollipops23

Lollipops23 wrote: »

I looked this cretin up on Facebook out of curiosity and nosiness. He's shared several quotes from Nigel Farrage.

I didn't need the help making my mind up about him...but still.

there are several threads about him on twitter from ex-housemates and schoolmates, none are positive.

He is apparently well known in his hometown for leaving 'you look ugly' comments on random girls instagram pictures, as well as using multiple Facebook accounts to send messages to people about their dead relatives. Old housemates say he has no ability to talk to or form relationships with people.

pitifulgod

PeterParker957 wrote: »

It's a man pushing food into a woman's face.

Whereas you've directly posted that a woman pushing food into a man's face is nothing.

Fine, blindly carry on white knighting.

There is zero justification for his behaviour. If it was two men, I would have the exact same feelings. People have died as a result of similar events. You have a seriously messed up view of the case but this seems to be par for the course given your remarks on rape and sexual harassment. It's a deeply worrying attitude.

Chrongen wrote: »

You make very good points. It appears he did lose the rag and go overboard. I don't think he should be rewarded for what he did but by the same token I don't think this should ruin his life. I would be in favour of a sealed record so that while there is no visible conviction to destroy his medical career any further transgressions down the line and the seal is opened and the conviction implemented and made public. That to me would be fair.

If he killed a woman the next time then he could have his good name tarnished instead? His behaviour was entirely warped.

pilly

PeterParker957 wrote: »

It's a man pushing food into a woman's face.

Whereas you've directly posted that a woman pushing food into a man's face is nothing.

Fine, blindly carry on white knighting.

This is the funniest post on this whole thread. YOU PP are accusing people white knighting?

I don't know what I would call what you're doing but I would say it's even worse than of white knighting.

It's just screaming out, "I'm a woman but I think the rest of them are all bitches and men are saints". It's either for male attention or you're a WMO.

Can't figure out which.

Chrongen

Chrongen wrote: »

Not at all. But would you call what she did "assault"? Forget about what HE did. We can all agree that his actions amounted to assault.

Should she be charged too with some degree of assault or affray or some reduced charge? She did after all slap him as well. Should she be convicted and stricken from the register?

Did he complain? Is there some suggestion that he went to the police and said he was the victim of an assault and they questioned her about the food-pushing aspect, or the slap?

Sure if he didn't regard himself as having been assaulted, and she wasn't charged with assault, the issue is all very moot. Isn't it? You say "she did after all slap him". I'm not sure that was ever put to her in the case at all. We can't make any presumptions about her conduct, she wasn't in the dock.

"All women are bitches....except me. I'm cool like you guys. Totally got your back."

pilly

Candie wrote: »

"All women are bitches....except me. I'm cool like you guys. Totally got your back."

All my friends are men too.

pilly

pilly wrote: »

All my friends are men too.

Girls are just soo bitchy, I can't stand being around them. So shallow and entitled.

I'm like one of the guys, really.

Triceratops Ballet

Chrongen wrote: »

You make very good points. It appears he did lose the rag and go overboard. I don't think he should be rewarded for what he did but by the same token I don't think this should ruin his life. I would be in favour of a sealed record so that while there is no visible conviction to destroy his medical career any further transgressions down the line and the seal is opened and the conviction implemented and made public. That to me would be fair.

Why? I think he should be held accountable for his actions. If we were talking about a parking fine or other minor misdemeanour, a sealed record would be grand, but a violent assault on another human especially when this man wants to work in a caring profession, not a chance.

dresden8

She should have read her Machiavelli

Wars begin when you will, but they do not end when you please.

If you start a fight, be it physical, verbal, or emotional, you might not find it as easy to withdraw as you might like. You may find you bit off more than you could chew, and suddenly have to deal with the consequences of your actions. And that can get ugly very quickly.

http://philosiblog.com/2012/10/06/wars-begin-when-you-will-but-they-do-not-end-when-you-please/

pitifulgod

dresden8 wrote: »

She should have read her Machiavelli

Wars begin when you will, but they do not end when you please.



http://philosiblog.com/2012/10/06/wars-begin-when-you-will-but-they-do-not-end-when-you-please/

Why in the name of Christ are you behaving as if it was deserved? It reads almost as if you're gloating about a violent assault. He committed an extreme form of violence alongside humiliating her.

dresden8

pitifulgod wrote: »

Why in the name of Christ are you behaving as if it was deserved? It reads almost as if you're gloating about a violent assault. He committed an extreme form of violence alongside humiliating her.

Where did I say she deserved it.

But the fact remains, she waited up until 3.30 am to start a fight. And she got one. She made the first move. Should have read her Machiavelli.

Triceratops Ballet

PeterParker957 wrote: »

+1

Think about it logically - we wanted equality. No one would bat an eyelid if two men had a bit of a barney so why is there such a catastrophe when it happens to a woman ??
/QUOTE]

Of course they would, someone on this thread mentioned the attack outside Annabels over which there was plenty of public outcry.

Do you think nobody would care if this was a case of him and his boyfriend and he assaulted him in this way? guess what, he'd still be an animal and deserving of any punishment the courts doled out to him

Triceratops Ballet

dresden8 wrote: »

Where did I say she deserved it.

But the fact remains, she waited up until 3.30 am to start a fight. And she got one. She made the first move. Should have read her Machiavelli.

Well if she made the first move then sure why didn't he go ahead and finish her off? what did she expect? few chips in the face, sure that's worthy of a beating. Machiavellian Justice! let's dispense with the courts altogether!

pilly

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Well if she made the first move then sure why didn't he go ahead and finish her off? what did she expect? few chips in the face, sure that's worthy of a beating. Machiavellian Justice! let's dispense with the courts altogether!

Worthy of a killing if you ask me. :rolleyes:

kylith

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Oh! The indo article doesn't specify who went first. I just read it on the Herald now. He doesn't deserve to get away with only a fine

If he hit her first it sounds to me like he took umbrage at her slapping him back and decided to teach her a lesson.

Should she have thrown/pushed food in his face, of course not. But it should have ended there or when they'd each gotten a slap in. She walked away and he went after her with the intention to do serious damage.

pilly

Gijoseph wrote: »

I was responding to your post that stated all women are innocent delicate flowers that wouldn't hurt a fly.

Yeah, except that wasn't a post?

dresden8

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Well if she made the first move then sure why didn't he go ahead and finish her off? what did she expect? few chips in the face, sure that's worthy of a beating. Machiavellian Justice! let's dispense with the courts altogether!

Now where did I say that?

pitifulgod

dresden8 wrote: »

Now where did I say that?

Would you be discussing Machiavelli if he killed her? Logically you would see some form of justification as you do at moment.

dresden8

pitifulgod wrote: »

Would you be discussing Machiavelli if he killed her? Logically you would see some form of justification as you do at moment.

Where did I try to justify anything?

Triceratops Ballet

dresden8 wrote: »

Now where did I say that?

where did I say you said that?

You didn't actually say anything, you came in and suggested reading Machiavelli to the victim of a violent crime.

What were you trying to say with that suggestion?

dresden8

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

where did I say you said that?

You didn't actually say anything, you came in and suggested reading Machiavelli to the victim of a violent crime.

What were you trying to say with that suggestion?

What I was saying is that it is a bad idea to start fights because you don't control how it ends. It's age old wisdom. Like I posted.

Starting fights is bad, mkay?

dresden8

dresden8 wrote: »

Where did I try to justify anything?

Your posts seem to be in the she played with fire and got burned vein.

Exhibit A:

But the fact remains, she waited up until 3.30 am to start a fight. And she got one. She made the first move. Should have read her Machiavelli.

Certainly sounds like you think she got her just desserts. Though how you know her motivation for being awake at 3.30 am is beyond me.

dresden8

Candie wrote: »

Your posts seem to be in the she played with fire and got burned vein.

Exhibit A:



Certainly sounds like you think she got her just desserts. Though how you know her motivation for being awake at 3.30 am is beyond me.

Ah another one who makes stuff up to fit their world view. Starting fights is bad, mkay?

Or do you people think starting fights is good?

ceadaoin.

pitifulgod wrote: »

Would you be discussing Machiavelli if he killed her? Logically you would see some form of justification as you do at moment.

Yeah well you know, women want equality, they're gonna get it in droves. That will teach them to not start **** , if she ended up dead oh well, she shouldn't have pushed food into his face. Etc etc

dresden8

dresden8 wrote: »

Ah another one who makes stuff up to fit their world view. Starting fights is bad, mkay?

Or do you people think starting fights is good?

Nobody thinks she was an angel who behaved perfectly. Nobody should be pushing food in anyones face.

You, however, said she waited up to start a fight, and got one. How you know why she was up is a mystery. And she didn't get a fight, she got a beating and a humiliation way out of proportion to her own behaviour.

When I directly quote your words from your posts, I'm not making stuff up.

kylith

Candie wrote: »

Certainly sounds like you think she got her just desserts. Though how you know her motivation for being awake at 3.30 am is beyond me.

Exactly; she could have been up because she was worried sick that he wasn't home.

dresden8 wrote: »

Ah another one who makes stuff up to fit their world view.

Like you with your 'she waited up to start a fight' speculation that we're supposed to take as gospel?