James Hackett, 26, is accused of assault with a dangerous weapon in Lowell, Massachusetts. The weapon: french fries. Hackett was arguing with this wife when his stepdaughter stepped in. Hackett responded by throwing french fries in her face. We have seem assault with everything from flatulence to a hug to a pillow attack to bubble, but not a french fry.
The charge does raise some mechanical questions. First, the charge would indicate that the entire container of french fries is a dangerous weapon. Otherwise, it would be a couple dozen charges of assault with a dangerous weapon for each french fry. If the standard McDonald’s french fry container (assuming he got the standard and not the large size) holds at least thirty fries, that would allow thirty individual counts. Here it appears that it is en toto a weapon. Second, if the entire container is needed to constitute a dangerous weapon, is it a defense if he ate some before the assault. That would be like biting off the barrel of a 38 – would it still be a gun? Third, the standard fry throw results in a french fry pattern much like a shotgun. It is likely only a few fries hit the girl. Is that still an assault with a deadly weapon? I assume yes in the same way that being hit by one pellet of a shotgun would suffice. (If he ate some of the fries before the police arrived, is it destruction of evidence?) Finally, if the french fries cooled during the argument, do they remain dangerous weapons? After all, they could have been just limp potatoes at that point.
Of course, the dangerous aspect could be accidental ingestion leading to hardening of the arteries, heart conditions, and obesity. It could be akin to throwing a prohibited large sugary drink at someone in New York.
Notably, the child was not seriously hurt. However, I want to know if the police are going to arrest Ronald McDonald as a supplier of the weapon or his gang including “The Fry Kids.”
Now before McDonald’s accuses these prosecutors and police of blatant and ridiculous overcharging, I would like to see the forensic expert and witnesses that the prosecutors intend to call. One shady character comes to mind who may be willing to turn state’s evidence:
Source: CBS
sounds like he was facing overwhelming odds against his wife and stepdaughter and was just standing his ground. if he threw an extra large fry remember they do allow high volume clips.
but i’m waiting for a statement from mayor mccheese.
In this case, is overcharging “super-sizing”?
hilarious write up!
Yes, bettykath, and the charging authority clearly needs a good dose of common sense! 🙂
He clearly needs some help with anger management.
“The charge does raise some mechanical questions. First, the charge would indicate that the entire container of french fries is a dangerous weapon. ”
Nah, it just indicates that the number of french fries needed to be a deadly weapon is greater than 50% of the total fries of the box. At least assuming that you couldn’t charge someone with 1.99 counts of assault with a deadly weapon.
And THIS is what we’ve come to as a society? Maybe, as the Mayans believed, we will all cease to exist on 21 December and humanity will have the opportunity to re-make itself. God knows WE’RE hopeless! 🙂
So does a Food Fight constitute Riot?
RCW 9A.84.010
Riot.
(1) A person is guilty of the crime of riot if, acting with three or more other persons, he or she knowingly and unlawfully uses or threatens to use force, or in any way participates in the use of such force, against any other person or against property.
(2)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, the crime of riot is a gross misdemeanor.
(b) The crime of riot is a class C felony if the actor is armed with a deadly weapon.
I suppose it would stand to reason if French Fries were used, Felony Riot would be chargeable.
Step away from those Fries or we will have to Taze you Bro!
Un-freaking-believable… prosecutor with too much time on their hands.
Got three things to say
1. Hot grease
2. Salt
3. Eyes
even a word can be deamed a deadly weapon when levied at a child from an adult that that child is dependant upon….even a word….
He should have eaten the evidence before the police arrived.
I would ask for a long trial date in the hope the evidence might disappear.
The cynic in me smells a divorce case coming up, needing ammunition for settlement purposes.
I’d like to assume that the charges stem from an attempt to impress upon this kid the necessity of controlling his emotions, particularly when dealing with a child in his care. If we later learn that he agrees to some deal whereby he get some professional help and no record then its a win.
Melvin Belli was the master of courtroom drama and the use of props to demonstrate points. I can only imagine what he might come up with if he were the defense lawyer in a case such as this. Or maybe I can’t. His creativity knew no bounds.
Here you go again with the line of heresy….. This time against McDonalds……reverend Frye……is gonna get ya……
I shudder to think what these type folks see when they look at an inkblot when engaged with their shrink.
Some commenters must be logging in from asylums, for example, those who pummeled JT for advocating a 19 member Supreme Court.
I mean, seeing French fries as a weapon in the context of these facts, but not seeing them that way in the context of eating them is a bit mental.
A virtual epidemic of diabetes is caused by “food” that is a dangerous weapon when eaten, but sorta soft when thrown.
Hyper-charging is the link … an urge to overcharge … an urge to make a mountain out of a molehill.
I always have a salt on my french fries.
Then I go for the apple tort.