John Jeffrey Murray, 51, is either a fanatical anti-smoker or a reckless hoser. A court will have to decide. Murray was charged with drenching his wife with a garden house for smoking in the house and then wrestling away a phone when she tried to call the police.
Murray insisted in a statement to police that this was merely as matter of “overspray” and that he did not intend to drench his wife. He also elbowed his wife in a struggle to hang up the phone. He was charged with domestic battery.
For the flip side of a case of smokers attacking critical anti-smokers, click here.
For the full story, click here.
Bob and Jill have both presented good arguments that enable us all to obtain alternate perspectives.
I think it was the bloody lip that resulted in arrest.
Water from a garden hose presents no more physical threat than does a rain shower.
This was a juvenile act that promoted more juvenile acts.
As such, I think they both needed a “time out”.
–If the old man in the neighborhood turned on the sprinkler to deter the kids from walking across his lawn; would anyone expect him to be charged with assault? Those that say yes, I think, have become too litigious. –No if doing so resulted in damage to a suede jacket, he may be held liable for the damage; although the kids may have been trespassing.
The “full story” doesn’t provide us with enough information to make an informed decision. How did the sheriff’s dept. end up being notified? Has his wife ever sprayed him with the hose? Is that something people that live in a warm climate consider to be “acceptable”? Was she wearing a bathing suit? Did he overreact? Did she overreact? Were both parties laughing when the wrestle for the phone ensued? Was the only real damage (the split lip) accidental? Was she really going to call a friend? Does her friends number start with 91?
I have no tolerance for spousal abuse…in either direction. Respect goes both ways. She should not smoke in the house, and he should not spray her with a hose.
I think this was originally much a “dew” about nothing.
Mr. Murray has a serious problem, a perceived need to control the actions of his wife, using violence if necessary. A common attitude and a common result. He is an abuser. She needs to get the hell out. Neither of them recognizes the obvious.
No autopsy or hospitalization, no foul, and apparently, no sense of humor either. Sprayed with water, not beat with the hose. Keep a little perspective. Unless she’s the Wicked Witch of the West, she’ll recover with the aid of a towel or a strong breeze – made whole by capillary attraction and evaporation, no cops or judge required. Respect is earned, not due. That applies to everyone, married or not. Everyone involved should take a deep breath and stop taking themselves so seriously. Get back to me if this scenario arises again and he decides to put out the cigarette by forcing the hose down her throat – that’s be a real crime. This? This is extra paperwork for the cops and courts caused by ego intersecting stupidity. A waste of resources and time.
Bob,
The only change that I can think of that you mean is the smoking was illegal in the restaurant and not at the home. So I’ve been in this situation where it was not illegal. Please take everything I wrote about the restaurant and take out the illegal aspect of it. The result is still the same. The only material difference is that you consider a man harming his wife acceptable but would not consider this same man’s treatment acceptable towards a stranger. That isn’t right. Everything Ken pointed out is completely germaine to this event.
Since this all took place in Florida (and this is a legal site) take a look at the state criminal laws:
784.011 Assault,
(1) An “assault” is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.
(2) Whoever commits an assault shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0784/SEC011.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0784->Section%20011#0784.011
784.03 Battery; felony battery.
(1)(a) The offense of battery occurs when a person:
1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
2. Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person who commits battery commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(2) A person who has one prior conviction for battery, aggravated battery, or felony battery and who commits any second or subsequent battery commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. For purposes of this subsection, “conviction” means a determination of guilt that is the result of a plea or a trial, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld or a plea of nolo contendere is entered.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0784/SEC03.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0784->Section%2003#0784.03
784.041 Felony battery; domestic battery by strangulation.–
(1) A person commits felony battery if he or she:
(a) Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; and
(b) Causes great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement.
(2)(a) A person commits domestic battery by strangulation if the person knowingly and intentionally, against the will of another, impedes the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of a family or household member or of a person with whom he or she is in a dating relationship, so as to create a risk of or cause great bodily harm by applying pressure on the throat or neck of the other person or by blocking the nose or mouth of the other person. This paragraph does not apply to any act of medical diagnosis, treatment, or prescription which is authorized under the laws of this state.
(b) As used in this subsection, the term:
1. “Family or household member” has the same meaning as in s. 741.28.
2. “Dating relationship” means a continuing and significant relationship of a romantic or intimate nature.
(3) A person who commits felony battery or domestic battery by strangulation commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0784/SEC041.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0784->Section%20041#0784.041
In brief, the assault is the threat, and the battery is the intentional touching of the person against his or her will. Assuming the facts described by JT, there was a misdemeanor battery under Florida law, and probably an assault. There are also the civil torts of assault and battery to consider.
Take notes, 1L students. This will be on the exam.
I don’t know whether the man’s behavior meets the legal definition of assault, but from a moral and ethical perspective Jill is 100% correct. The lack of respect this man showed for his wife is simply inexcusable. It would be the same if she was the one who’d sprayed him. If he wouldn’t have sprayed a stranger for smoking, then he should’ve given the same minimum amount of respect to his wife. He doesn’t get to treat her like a dog just because she’s his wife.
And he certainly has no right to prevent her from calling the police. Whether she’s right or wrong in making the call, he doesn’t have the authority to prevent her doing so. She doesn’t need to seek his permission to call the police.
If he sprayed her because he was angry, then it looks like assault to my non-lawyerly eyes. If he did it because he thought it would be funny, it looks like he’s an ass. I certainly know my wife well enough to understand what she would think was funny and what she wouldn’t. Just judging from what we know, this man looks like the sort who thinks it’s his right as a husband to put his wife (chattel) in her place for disobeying him. I grew up with a father who did that sort of things to my mother and have tolerance for it. Nor should any civilized person.
Jill: “If you went to a restaurant where someone was smoking illegally outside on the patio and you picked up the garden hose and sprayed them with it, do you think they might call the police? If they started to call the police, would you run over and knock the phone from their hand?”
Jill, you do know that you’ve just changed the entire factual background of the event described above simply to fit your conclusion; don’t you?
Honestly Jill, do you think a cop or a court would allow you to make such a comparison between events in making your argument? Where in the original fact pattern are the third party liability issues, the premises liability issues, etc.?
TOTALLY different situation.
AY,
There’s a time and a place for private exchanges. I personally don’t think that this is the forum for exchanging small talk like you and SWM were doing. I’m sure others agree. I’m not going to make a big deal about it, I probably won’t even mention it again.
I just wanted you to know my opinion on the matter.
Bob,
If you went to a restaurant where someone was smoking illegally outside on the patio and you picked up the garden hose and sprayed them with it, do you think they might call the police? If they started to call the police, would you run over and knock the phone from their hand? If so, might you expect to be arrested for this action, even if you did not accidently hit the person in the mouth while you were knocking the phone from your hand? If you had accidently hit the person in the mouth while grabbing their phone would you expect the police to charge you?
I have asthma and I have been around people who light up at resturants. This is completely illegal in my city. I did not need to resort to spraying them with a garden hose or wrestling phones from their hands to resolve this issue and neither did this man. You are justifying violence because it occurs in the context of marriage–a context where too many in our society believe violence is acceptable. It is not. There is no difference between the actions described in this story and the actions I described at a restaurant. It would be consider an assult in a public place and it is an assult at the home of these people.
Jill: “Had she in fact called the police he should wait for them to come and explain his side of the story. He has NO right to wrestle a phone from his wife’s hands.”
Yes he does Jill; just as he’d have the right to wrestle her hand from pulling a fire alarm when there was no fire.
Jill, have you considered refraining from imbuing the situation with facts and issues having nothing to do with the original event?
Is spraying someone with a garden hose a crime? Is it assault? How many children or adults are arrested each year for “assault with water via a garden hose?”
Per your ‘humiliation’ argument; perhaps you’d have more traction if the man was white, the woman was black, the man professed outwardly that black people are worth less than white people, AND the man used a FIRE HOSE.
Other than that, I stand by my original focus; i.e. no domestic assault unless man intended to use elbow to assault wife irrespective of phone.
Bob,
If the husband feels his wife is making a frivoulous call he should first ask her not to call the police. She then could have told him she was calling a friend and the problem should have been solved. Had she in fact called the police he should wait for them to come and explain his side of the story. He has NO right to wrestle a phone from his wife’s hands. If he did this to a stranger you would know it was wrong. Because this person is his wife does not make the action right. We don’t do this at our workplace when we disagree with a co-worker’s actions. If we did this in a public space, for example, to someone who was sitting next to us at a baseball game, we would be open to arrest and charges. Actions are actions. Marriage doesn’t immunize actions that would otherwise be considered illegal. Remember, he is an adult male with many, many choices in this situation. His first and best choice would have been to leave the scene and arrange to speak to his wife about not smoking in their home. He chose instead, humiliation and violence. This is both immature and worse, it is ethically and legally wrong.
This is ridiculous.
Unless you can show the husband intended to harm the wife with the elbow to the mouth, as opposed to it being an accidental result of struggling for the phone to avoid a patently frivolous 911 call over the use of a garden hose, I’m afraid you don’t have a claim for ‘domestic abuse.’
Jesus H. Christ, even the Brady Bunch sprayed each other with a garden hose!
NPO,
I think that what I am trying to say is that the faces of a lot of people look regular. Unless you can get inside of these peoples heads you will never know what is going on. The old adage goes like this “You Can’t Judge a Book by its Cover”.
Do yourself a favor and visit a nursing home. There are a lot of people out there that do not have families that come and see them. Maybe you can make a difference in one persons life, do you think you can make the time? And get back to me.
Swarthmore mom,
I guess you are now suggesting that Americans are the most abused in the world! Play the victim, why not? That’ll solve the problem!
NPO Many times compulsive over eaters eat because of abuse. We do live in a country with a tremendous amount of child and spousal abuse. Understanding addiction is too deep for you. Forget it.
AY,
Question is, do I need to know who has a medical condition or not? Why are Americans the fattest in the world? I hope you don’t think that there is a highly disproportionate number of medical reasons for obesity in America!
Irresponsible people do not deserve any passes, parking or not.
NPO sounds like a bore.
NPO,
How do you tell who has the medical condition? What about the person that has COPD and has a Parking Pass that is still smoking?
Do you shoot him because he has taken the parking spot from someone that really needs it?
” Some people are predisposed to have cancer and some faiths agree that faith can heal the cancer, do you have that type of faith? Do you agree with that? ”
No and no.
“Some people with substance abuse that earnestly try and quit are they still weak to you?”
They are better than those who don’t try at all. It is not what they do to themselves that concerns me, it is what their actions do to society that concerns me.
“Have you ever obsessed over something and knowing it is not good for you but you choose the easier softer way? Do you feel that people who are over weight, can lose all of the weight that they want if they just regulate the intake?”
Yes, I obsess over chocolate from time to time, but firstly, I don’t let it affect me in any way ( by not becoming overweight or binging, etc) and secondly, my occasional weakness to chocolate does not harm the society in any shape.
People who are overweight just eat too much. When I walk in a supermarket and see an obese individual and see all that food in their carts, I am like …huh!? It is their fault- they eat too much. ( Obviously I do not include overweight individuals who have a medical reason for their condition)
“I think you need to look at that story about that city Attorney sleeping in the garbage can and restate what you feel. My heart goes out to him. Does yours? Is he weak to you?”
Part of me felt sorry for him, but I can easily imagine that guy on the road, endangering other’s lives while drunk. So, how should I feel?
SWMom,
I think you are correct. Some people never can understand another persons point of view, so maybe that is why they have reincarnation, you keep coming back over and over and over in the opportunity to learn.