Greater Greater Washington

Report a Comment

I was on a jury about 4 years ago hearing an assault case that dealt with this issue. We struggled with the language of the law because a literal reading would mean that just getting in the officer's way (i.e., "impeding") would be considered "assault." We debated this back and forth, with some saying that we didn't care what the language said, assault meant physically, intentionally hitting the officer; the other side took the literal reading and insisted that just "impeding" the officer was assault, and therefore our defendant was guilty.

We were so confused that we went back to the judge for clarification; he would not give it to us, merely re-read the statute (my case was apparently before the Court of Appeals decisions noted in the article, which might have provided the judge an opportunity to explain more).

In the end, we acquitted the defendant on one count of assault and were hung on the 2nd count (there were two correctional officers involved; the defendant was an inmate at the DC Jail, which apparently doesn't have any cameras because they were never submitted as evidence).

by drk on May 26, 2011 1:01 pm • linkreport

Does this comment violate Greater Greater Washington's comment policy? If so, you can report it using this form and an editor will take a look.

What is the major reason you believe the comment violates the policy?
Comment is spam.
Comment attacks other individuals personally.
Comment criticizes the level of knowledge of another commenter or contributor.
Comment discourages others from posting their ideas.
Commenter is impersonating someone else.
Comment uses profanity or abusive language.
Comment advocates violent acts or harm to another.
Comment was posted in multiple areas of the site.
Comment is arguing about the comment policy.
Other:

Your name:
Your email:

Administrator pagespam