Dave Chappelle tackled onstage

[red 928]

LA district attorney strikes again

Dave Chappelle’s attacker won’t be charged with assault with deadly weapon, DA’s office says
The district attorney’s office has referred the case to the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office for consideration of misdemeanor filing

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/dave-chappelle-attacker-wont-be-charged-assault-deadly-weapon-da-office-says

"Anyone who arms themselves with a deadly weapon, in this case a knife, and violently attacks an innocent person, famous or not, should be charged accordingly," Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Jonathan Hatami told Fox News Digital.

"With only a misdemeanor charge, the person could be released soon, with only a slap on the wrist. That fails to provide justice to the victim, accountability for this person's actions and safety to the general public. These concepts, however, like public safety and justice, that most of us value, are concepts George Gascón can care less about."

[Tervuren]

Ehh.

He didn't use the knife?

[Mike Andrew]

Originally Posted by red 928

LA district attorney strikes again

Dave Chappelle’s attacker won’t be charged with assault with deadly weapon, DA’s office says
The district attorney’s office has referred the case to the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office for consideration of misdemeanor filing

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/dave-chappelle-attacker-wont-be-charged-assault-deadly-weapon-da-office-says

I retract my earlier statement based on this development.

He didn't get nearly what he deserved from the security staff.

[sc_rufctr]

Apologies for the gross photo... Dislocated shoulder?

[Tervuren]

I can put my arm in that position.

[Mike Andrew]

Should have tapped out sooner.

Nice nail polish.

[sc_rufctr]

Playing the Devil's advocate: Could he sue Dave for the injuries he sustained?

I only ask because of the history of litigation by criminals in recent times.

[T77911S]

shoulder or broken arm
looks like his upper arm is bent where it should not be.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by sc_rufctr

Playing the Devil's advocate: Could he sue Dave for the injuries he sustained?

I only ask because of the history of litigation by criminals in recent times.

He can absolutely try. It helps his case that Dave can be heard saying, "stomp him," on the video of the event. His lawyers could argue that the others assaulted the guy on Chappelle's orders, or to please the famous dude, etc....

[911 Rod]

The world is going to ****e!

[gacook]

Originally Posted by speeder

He can absolutely try. It helps his case that Dave can be heard saying, "stomp him," on the video of the event. His lawyers could argue that the others assaulted the guy on Chappelle's orders, or to please the famous dude, etc....

He may win in a lawsuit, but he definitely deserved that ass beating.

More of these fools need to understand there's consequences to their actions.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by gacook

He may win in a lawsuit, but he definitely deserved that ass beating.

More of these fools need to understand there's consequences to their actions.

The interesting thing is that you can win a lawsuit but not get any/much money.

When I was a teen, I backed into (barely, super lightly) an old junker van in a parking lot. I'm not even sure that I hit it, really, and the van was covered in dents. But two guys got out and said that I hit them. We chatted, they were nice, no weirdness.

Then nearly a year later, my parents' ins co says "we're being sued for an accident in a parking lot." I don't think it made it to court until 4-5 years after it occurred.

By that time the guys were saying that I'd slammed into them, they were covered in drinks that spilled when I hit them, they were injured and out of work, etc.... They were seeking a big settlement.

My testimony ended up being "yes, I backed into them, but very lightly. I didn't even realize it. No, they seemed fine and weren't covered in coffee/soda/whatever."

The results of the case were "we find in favor of the plaintiff and award $1."

Basically, yeah, he admitted to backing into you, but we don't believe you lost work or anything else.

[rusnak]

He can sue from but he can't win. The guy was armed with a weapon and had to be detained for everyone's safety. DC can counter-sue for emotional distress.