Yesterday, we discussed the fight between a Jets fan and Patriots fans recently caught on YouTube. One of the issues for discussion was the focus of the media on a New York Jets fan, Kurt Paschke, punching a woman in a Patriots jersey. Many were outraged that he hit Jaclyn Nugent, 26, and that anger grew when it was learned that he was a former felon. However, the full video showed Paschke being attacked first by Nugent, at least in that incident. Well, it turns out that the police was not so confined in its search. Charges were filed Tuesday afternoon against Amanda MacDowell of Marlborough, Mass.; Jaclyn Nugent and David James Sacco, both of Boston, and Kurt Paschke of Holbrook, N.Y. I remain unclear as to why Paschke is even charged since what was shown on the video seems a legitimate act of self-defense. It may be misleading in terms of what occurred before, but he is shown hitting Nugent after she attacks him.
The charges generally are a welcomed development for many fans who no longer go to games because of idiots like these.
Paschke’s mother, Colleen, insisted that the Patriots fans were harassing them throughout the game and pursued them after the game. She says that the Patriots fans yelled “get them” and were throwing punches. She insists her son was protecting her. She says that Nugent and the others were upset over the close loss and went looking for Paschke.
All four are charged with simple assault and disorderly conduct charges MacDowell and Nugent allegedly kicked and punched Paschke. He then allegedly punched Nugent in the face. Sacco also allegedly hit Paschke in the face. They will all have to go through a special class for unruly fans (i.e., how to act as a civilized person in a crowd) to be allowed back into the stadium. I fail to understand why they are not banned. It is a little late to learn how to act like an adult for these people. If their parents failed to teach them in their first twenty or so years not to drink and brawl in public, I am not sure some film and a class will make up for it.
Yet, Nugent is still being portrayed as the victim under the standard that a man should never hit a woman even after she hit him repeatedly. The law does not see it that way. If he hit her after an unprovoked attack, it would appear an act of self-defense.
Notably, Nugent is a graduate from the University of Massachusetts where she graduated with a bachelor’s degree in Criminal Justice and Corrections. She has been working for Meditech, a health care technology company, as an Application Specialist for three years and three months. She is tasked with resolving customer issues among other duties. Presumably, she applies a less hands on approach to such conflicts at Meditech. Do you think that involvement in this type of high-profile brawl should be grounds for termination by a company like Meditech?
Paschke’s conviction for a killing in a fight outside of a restaurant may have warped the analysis of the case as did the clip of his hitting a woman. His mother and father insist that he was defending himself and his elderly mother. I have not seen anything on the clip that would justify his being charged but it will be interesting to see how this story unfolds. In New York, the privilege of self-defense would seem to cover such a circumstance as does common law:
Sec. 35.05 Justification; generally. Unless otherwise limited by the ensuing provisions of this article defining justifiable use of physical force, conduct which
would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when:
1. Such conduct is required or authorized by law or by a judicial decree, or is performed by a public servant in the reasonable exercise of his official powers, duties or functions;
or
2. Such conduct is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no fault of the actor, and which is of such gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding such injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the injury sought to be prevented by the statute defining the offense in issue. The necessity and
justifiability of such conduct may not rest upon considerations pertaining only to the morality and advisability of the statute, either in its general application or with respect to its application to a particular class of cases arising thereunder.
Whenever evidence relating to the defense of justification under this subdivision is offered by the defendant, the court shall rule as a matter of law whether the claimed facts and circumstances would, if established, constitute a defense.Sec. 35.10 Justification; use of physical force generally. The use of physical force upon another person which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the following circumstances: . . .
6. A person may, pursuant to the ensuing provisions of this article, use physical force upon another person in defense of himself or a third person, or in defense of premises, or in order to prevent larceny of or criminal mischief to property, or in order to effect an arrest or prevent an escape from custody.
Whenever a person is authorized by any such provision to use deadly physical force in any given circumstance, nothing contained in any other such provision may be deemed to negate or qualify such authorization.
In the meantime, it is good to see charges for such conduct. It remains the exception as stadiums are taken over by the most obnoxious and juvenile element of our society.
Source: Daily Mail
English is my primary language and I read well. I can read Italian, ok, and a little Spanish and French. I was looking @ it professionally, as an expert in video evidence, and as a former prosecutor’s investigator. I was analyzing it on the facts presented and said we did not have all the facts. Do you want a prosecutor to ignore prior convictions of violence causing death of a victim, and incarceration of the defendant, in deciding whether or not to prosecute?? That would be malpractice.
I will put aside my adamant belief that a man should not hit a woman. Do you think this convicted violent felon could have used force just a bit less than A HAYMAKER? I suppose it’s better than the last person we know of that this guy attacked. He stabbed him to death. He’s trending in the right direction, I guess? Here’s what is puzzling me. A man who professes to be, and I believe is, a lover of women and a big supporter of fighting violence against women, is taking this stand. There’s a dynamic that is below the surface here and may have nothing to do w/ this case per se. I’m just surprised, that’s all. If asking a very legitimate question, “Do you have all the facts,” is baiting. Then I plead guilty.
“I will put aside my adamant belief that a man should not hit a woman. Do you think this convicted violent felon could have used force just a bit less than A HAYMAKER?”
You realize of course that this is a “when did you stop beating your wife” question because it is framed with “convicted felon” which as you said yourself couldn’t be used in court. If the DA were to charge him and in her/his conclusion to the jury pointed to the man and said “Do you think this convicted violent felon could have used force just a bit less than A HAYMAKER?”, there would be an immediate sustained objection by the defense and the possibility of the trial being thrown out.
Mike S.,
It is kind of off-topic, but I have been hit by a woman. A woman attorney who had a bad habit of hitting people in the shoulder when she didn’t believe what you were saying. After a few “hits” I had to respectfully suggest that she keep her hands to herself. Of course, neither of us had consumed alcohol at a football game. Thankfully, I never had another deal with that attorney!
Fanaticism in sports carried a bit too far ya think! Nothing like being a poor sport
And AY, You do realize this poor victim, Mr. Blashke, will not have his criminal record be part of the adjudication part of any trial. The jury will find guilty or not guilty based on the facts presented ON THIS CASE ONLY. So, there’s that.
Police reports are not supposed to be public prior to a case being adjudicated. They’re for the prosecution and defense only @ this point.
AY, You’re getting in touch w/ your inner child, which is often good. However, in this instance it’s just being childish. I have said, TWICE, I don’t have all the facts, and NEITHER does anyone here. This is silly. You’re better than this.
Nick,
You have the police report available? If so, please post it here…. I can’t seem to find it….
AY, You have NOT READ THE POLICE REPORTS! The charges were based on the police reports, not the NY Post!!
AY, I’m trying to understand what principles would cause some folks here to take up the cause of this poor, felonious, assaultive, white male throwing a haymaker @ a woman. As I said, I agree w/ the woman being charged. Gee, what is causing this? What’s the dynamic in play??
Nick,
From all of the sources I’ve read this Felon in my opinion is being singled out…. Does his prior conviction have anything to do with him being assaulted? I think that, but for his record he would be viewed as an unruly fan….. There are many sources to get more information…. What does his prior record have to do with what happened at the game other than to make him out to be a bad person that hits women….
You’re baiting and attacking Mike S for basically saying the same thing I did….
“However, it seems Mr. Pascke found himself in a situation where he was being attacked and responded appropriately, but due to his prior conviction this story went viral”
“Do you have all the facts?”
Can you read English and do you understand that “it seems” is conditional based on the facts presented, or is it as AY said you are just again childishly trying to bait me. Jonathan asked peoples opinion based on the story presented. It is a common technique used at law school.
I’m not certain this video went viral because of Plaschke’s criminal record. It’s a VISUAL. Videotape was my specialty. This is a large man throwing a HAYMAKER @ a woman. That’s going viral in and of itself because of THE VISUAL, not the history of one the puncher.
I don’t.
Do you have all the facts?
I have never hit a woman, nor have I been hit by one and I can’t envision a circumstance in my life that would change this state of affairs. However, it seems Mr. Pascke found himself in a situation where he was being attacked and responded appropriately, but due to his prior conviction this story went viral. That any exchange of words would lead these Boston fans to attack him is the absurdity that plagues fandom. People with little sense of boundaries feel they have a right to vent their anger over a game.
Jets fan who punched woman once killed a man
http://nypost.com/2013/10/21/cops-interview-jets-fan-that-slugged-woman/
“The dad of his previous victim, Ferrer, told The Post that Paschke was a ticking time bomb.
“I wrote the judge a letter that this guy is going to kill again,” said Robert Ferrer, 80.
“He killed for no reason. He went out of his way to get a knife to stab my son. My son was involved in a fist fight, and he went out to get a knife and stabbed my son. They were the same age. They were the same size. He had no business killing my son.”
Antoine Ferrer, the victim’s brother, added, “[The punched fan] should be thanking her lucky stars — she’s alive, my brother is not.”
According to the 2008 book “A Criminal Injustice: A True Crime, a False Confession, and the Fight to Free Marty Tankleff,” Paschke simply fell in with the wrong crowd, not realizing they were neo-Nazis, before the stabbing.
When he tried to break free from the group, they jumped him one night, and the man he killed, a skinhead, fingered him as he lay dying, the book said.
Ferrer’s family has denied he was a skinhead.”
======
The whole story stinks.
When I went to games in these venues, and when ANYONE w/ sense does, they comport themselves differently if they are supporters of the visiting team. That’s not a law, it’s just common sense. However, common sense is lacking. We have a convicted bully, on his home turf. You have the visitors of an archrival. I DON’T KNOW what happened PRIOR to the camera rolling, but I know very well the dynamic. There are visitors who don’t comport themselves prudently. Maybe this woman didn’t. NOBODY here knows what transpired, we have a snapshot[metaphorically] of something that was occurring over a longer period of time.
AY, There were police reports w/ statements from all involved and hopefully witnesses. This incident did not start when the cameras started rolling.
I don’t think Paschke should have hit the woman, but I HAVE NO PROBLEM, and applaud, the woman being charged. She appears to have been the aggressor. However, w/ Paschke’s criminal history, I have to wonder what occurred prior to the camera rolling. That’s why we have trials.
What’s wrong with this picture is the person exercising self defense has a prior felony, in my opinion is being singled out from what I’ve read. People’s records of convictions should not be used in situations like this…. Unfortunately we used to look at folks with some record as redeemed once they’ve completed their sentence…. Today, they are tagged for life….
That’s my opinion….
At least it’s just a common brawl….and then we have….
You just can’t make this stuff up…
AUNT CARES MORE ABOUT FOOD STAMPS THAN THE LOSS OF HER THREE YEAR OLD NEPHEW WHO DIES IN A FIRE
Two children, 2-year old Catareon Dunn and 3-year old Ladareon Dunn, were left home alone shortly before a fire broke out. The two boys were left unattended while their mother and aunt left the house to go drop off a friend.
The children’s aunt, Marilyn Wilson, who left the house with the mother, said she had no regrets about leaving the children home alone, No, I really don’t because if they had been there by themselves, I don’t know if the boys set the house on fire or somebody threw something in there to set it on fire. I really need to get in there to see if my purse burned up. I had my Food Stamp Card and everything in there.