this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
376 points (98.7% liked)

Not The Onion

12429 readers
719 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 143 points 8 months ago (2 children)

"His defense attorney, Matt Fregi, said he harbored “no ill will toward” his client, who had already cycled through several attorneys before him. “Nothing serious,” he said of his injuries. “Everyone thought it was a lot more serious than what it was.”"

That's a cool lawyer

[–] aditya3w3733@lemmy.world 42 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] Duranie@literature.cafe 18 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The radar technician? Dude, Matt straight up sucks.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 months ago

Matt's more of a sonar kind of guy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 30 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Actually, that guy is completely fucked. That attorney will make sure that there is zero chance that guy can ever appeal any of his cases.

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Are you suggesting that he'll purposely do a bad job? That sort of thing could get him disbarred.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 13 points 8 months ago

No, he'll defend it fully to his duty so that the defendant can't claim lawyer incompetence.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago (14 children)

Sorry, I'm not following. You mean the defendant is fucked and his lawyer he stabbed will try to get revenge on him?

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Vex_Detrause@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 months ago

I bet that attorney has so much good will for his client that he will give the best defense even though his client is a-hole.

[–] NounsAndWords@lemmy.world 86 points 8 months ago (1 children)

according to a source at the scene, Randle jammed the pen into Fregi’s head and again near his jaw.

Well shit. I was imagining, like, the shoulder, or something.

[–] JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

I had to go back and re-read the title, i thought it said he 'slipped and stabbed lawyer' and i was like 'how the fuck did it happen twice?'.

[–] sir_pronoun@lemmy.world 49 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I want that same lawyer so bad I'm willing to commit a crime for that

[–] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 7 points 8 months ago

He's got top class courtroom etiquette and empathy.

[–] tobogganablaze@lemmus.org 41 points 8 months ago (15 children)

assault with a deadly weapon

If a pen qualifies as a deadly weapon, what doesn't? Assault with bare hands?

[–] JohnnyCanuck@lemmy.ca 45 points 8 months ago

I guess that whole "it's mightier than the sword" thing is coming back to bite.

[–] DoctorSpocktopus@lemmy.ca 20 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Randle jammed the pen into Fregi’s head and again near his jaw

I suppose it’s to do with how deadly it could have been? Not sure why it isn’t attempted murder, but I am not a lawyer.

[–] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

I suppose because it's harder to prove murder. Since he failed, they'd have to prove motive, and he could argue he only wanted to harm the lawyer.

But assault is about facts, no feelings.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 18 points 8 months ago

Depends on the hands. A professional fighter can be charged with AWALW using their hands, or feet if that's part of their martial arts training, although their body parts can't legally be registered as such.

This guy clearly intended that pen to be lethal and likely had the strength for it, but was fortunately restrained.

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago

You haven't been to prison I take it. Pens can definitely be a deadly weapon.

[–] TriPolarBearz@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

pen

John Wick glares menacingly

[–] Breezy@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Dude broke through restraints, clearly a pen is a deadly weapon in his hands.

[–] tobogganablaze@lemmus.org 4 points 8 months ago (5 children)

I guess. But you can also smother someone with a fluffy pillow. So that's a deadly weapon, too? Like where is the line between "deadly weapon" and "any random object".

[–] quindraco@lemm.ee 11 points 8 months ago

There is no such line. The pillow counts as a weapon and all weapons count as deadly.

[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

I think it might just be a line of how they used the random object could have reasonably resulted in death. So if you smack someone in the face with a fluffy pillow, it's not a deadly weapon. If you try to smother them with it, it is.

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'll be honest, if I roll 99 on a crit roll with a pillow I damn well expect an instant kill.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Why are you using a d100 for attack rolls?

[–] Hazmatastic@lemm.ee 7 points 8 months ago

It's a homebrew weapon from their last campaign in Pathfinder that they ported over, but the stats are legit and it's balanced trust them

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Seems quite simple to me. Things like guns, swords, daggers and the like are designed to be weapons. So they're generally going to be assumed to be a weapon any time they're used/brandished.

But literally anything can be used as a weapon. So, in normal use they're not a weapon but if used as a weapon, they become one in that instance.

[–] tobogganablaze@lemmus.org 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Yeah, but then the term "deadly weapon" is kind of meaningless as it basically just means "assualt with a thing".

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 5 points 8 months ago

Yeah, I'd agree there. It should be whatever the US equivalent of aggravated assault is. But the charges you could levy bearing in mind he aimed for the head could go as far as attempted murder I guess.

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

I think on a legal level it means it was an object that was being wielded as a weapon, and from the attack in the specific instance it was meant to kill and the object was capable of achieving that. Hence a deadly weapon.

[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 8 months ago

Not entirely useless. "Assaulted with thing that could kill or maim under the circumstances at that time" is pretty relevant, even if it is super broad.

Spitting on someone Is assault. If I was on trial for spitting on someone I'd hate to get lumped together with the guy who caved someone's head in with a lead pipe.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Pretty much anything can be a deadly weapon in the right (or is it wrong) hands.

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

That's the thing.
Literally anything is a weapon. Banning weapons will only go so far, it'll definitely make it a lot harder for most mass killings to occur but if someone is determined enough they will make it happen.

Eventually we won't have a choice but to address the underlying mental health issues plaguing at least half the population.

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

True, although many countries in the world disagree with the US that banning firearms wouldn't make a huge difference. By virtue of, well, them having done so and it having made a huge difference.

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

I'm not saying don't ban firearms, I'm saying don't ignore the underlying problems too. The rest of the world doesn't have easy access to firearms but they also have much better access to mental health services.

[–] BugleFingers@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

That's the other thing too, even objects not typically considered weapons can be made so, some more brual for mass killing/destruction than guns. Propane tanks, pressure cookers, even bleach and ammonia, even liquor has been used (quite effectively) historically.

None of it is right, but when you start considering banning cooking supplies (pressure cookers I believe around Boston marathon bomber time) you are right, we do have to address the underlying issues

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 4 points 8 months ago

"Assault with a deadly weapon or instrument other than a firearm" (CPC 245(a)(1)) can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the exact circumstances.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 8 months ago

The intent makes it so.

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago

I feel like it's context-dependent, though. It's hard to argue that a pen in your head/jaw/neck does not have the potential to kill you.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] solrize@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The guy is bonkers and needs medical intervention before he is fit for trial.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You're absolutely right and it's nice to see correct medical nomenclature here on Lemmy. Unlike some places where someone would say he's wacko and belongs in the crazy hospital.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Where does "looney bin" fall on this scale?

[–] DontTreadOnBigfoot@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

"Looney bin" is for the zany crazies and sits above the crazy hospital in the hierarchy.

At the bottom is the "nuthouse", which is reserved for the sickos.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›