Man hurt after falling off hood of moving car

[atommom]

Posting the whole story, since it is only 4 paragraphs.

A man was critically hurt early Thursday morning when he fell off the hood of a moving car near 53rd Street and Mersington Avenue.

According to police, the woman driving the car was attempting to leave a party when a man came out after her and told her he didn't want her to go.

The man hopped on top of the car. Police said the woman drove a little bit and then stopped the car suddenly. She apparently did that several times until the man finally fell off. He hit his head on the concrete.

KMBC reported that the woman was taken into custody. She could face charges.

I'm thinking that if someone jumped onto the hood of my car, I'd feel threatened, and I'd do the same thing she did to get away from that nutcase. Thoughts?

[bleedingheart]

1. She could have just locked her doors....moving the car

if he didn't have a weapon or a way to get in the car is dangerous...


Now if he had a gun or something that could break through glass...I would have floored it...

[windlight]

2. I would like to think

That using a Cell phone followed by moving the car as to not allow the guy to get off would be an ideal course of action. But that is thinking with a clear head after the fact... If some loon jumped on my car i think would have likely done much the same as she did (speaking as a man that is)

[Orrex]

3. I think I'd have tried the wipers first

More seriously, it's analogous to a guy being verbally aggressive to you through the car's side window--you can drive away without running him over.

But did she have reason to believe that he was an actual threat rather than a boorish nuisance? If so, then I'd say that she was justified in attempting to flee. But if she merely found him annoying, then he's liable for any damage he caused to the car, but she's liable for his injury (and, potentially, she might be charged with assault with a deadly weapon).

Hey, I don't like it either, but that's how I suspect that the law would view it.

[atommom]

6. I wondered about their interactions at the party. If she had reason

to think he might be a threat, then she probably panicked. I like to think I'd use my cellphone, but if the guy had already spooked me I might not be that level-headed.

[mike_c]

4. sounds like incredibly poor judgement on BOTH their parts....

eom

[FearofFutility]

5. I know of someone

who accidentally killed her boyfriend in a scenario very similar to this one. Very sad..

[ForrestGump]

7. Sometimes, I get carried away...

...on the hood of NSMA's car....

[nini]

13. haha I knew you were going to bring up the hood of NSMA's car

:thumbsup:

[KansDem]

8. Haven't some states adopted "lethal force is OK" in road rage incidents?

...If the driver can show she felt she was in mortal danger? I don't know where this particular incident took place, but if it was one of these states, it seems the act of jumping on a car hood to "kidnap" the driver (holding her against her will) would be enough to use "lethal force."

[Deep13]

30. Not aware of any. Lethal force can usually only be used to protect...

...life or limb. If she reasonably thought she was about to be killed, then lethal force is justified. In this situation, however, there is no lethal force. In this case lethal force would be allowing him to stay on the hood and eventually fall off at 50 or 60 m.p.h. rather than stopping to shake him off.

[Deep13]

9. Wrong person was arrested.

Seems like he had several chances to get off the hood. Her only logical conclusion was the he meant to do her harm by restraining her liberty. Objects in a person's immediate possession are part of the person for assault purposes. Clothing is the most common example. When idiot jumped on the car, he was not just being inconvenient, he was assaulting her person. She had a right to defend herself and it seems that she used reasonable force.

[Orrex]

10. That's a tough case to make, IMO

If the idiot jumps on the porch of her house, he's not assaulting her, even if she's in the house. The same would seem to apply here.

He's an idiot, to be sure, but the law still might not favor her reaction.

[Deep13]

14. Her only other option was to stop and risk being a victim.

If he was on the porch of her house and there was cause to be in fear for her life, she would be justified to shooting him. Here there was no lethal force, just an attempt to escape.

[Orrex]

16. I think we agree on that, but...

The law might very likely call it assault with a deadly weapon, if not attempted murder.

At issue, as someone else in-thread mentioned, is the pair's extenuating behavior prior to the event.

[Deep13]

27. Don't think so.

She did not put him on the hood. Prior events are irrelevant. Even if there was a fight inside, it was over by the time she left the house. The only thing that matters is at that time, was she in reasonable fear or apprehension of her safety? If so, was this reasonable force to thwart and attack? In truth, it was the only option at her disposal that did not cause further danger. He was not killed, so it was not lethal force and she just wanted him off, not hurt. Again an attack does not have to be a rape or a beating, it could simply be a restraint on her movement since once she has been captured, there is every reason to suppose that further harm will result.

[Orrex]

31. Can't exclude prior events

If you do that, then his jumping on the hood must be excluded from her response to it, and that's clearly nonsensical. On what basis do you dismiss the extenuating circumstances? What if (hypothetically) she'd stolen his insulin and he was hoping to avoid going into shock? Would that prior circumstance be irrelevant?

What if (again, hypothetically) he'd already assaulted her ten times previously, and she was fearful of another assault? Would that prior circumstance also be irrelevant?

In addition, you can't argue that attack =/= rape/beating while also declaring that her use of the car against him =/= lethal force. The force (i.e., the moving car) was used, so that's the end of it. The fact that he wasn't killed is his good fortune (and hers, for that matter).

once she has been captured, there is every reason to suppose that further harm will result.

In other words, shoot first, right?

Sorry, but until we get more info, we have no basis for concluding that circumstances justified her actions.

[ucmike]

11. why assume an "attack". article says "didn't want her to go"

why assume it was a man attacking a woman? i thought maybe they were playing around and he went into his TJ Hooker routine. maybe she had to go to work in the morning, he was available to party and wanted to continue the good time being had by all at the party and jumped on the hood good naturedly, playing around with his old friend.

not much info there.

[LisaL]

12. He jumped on the hood of her car.

I would say that's an attack. And sounds like he wouldn't get off, considering she would drive and stop, and he still stayed on the hood of the car. I would say the guy is an idiot, and she probably shouldn't be charged with anything.

[ucmike]

15. that's all it says

"jumped on the hood of her car".
no mention of an attack. nothing about her trying to escape. nothing about being intimidated. doesn't say anything about the nature of their relationship. nothing about what charges may be filed. nothing about what the police determined.

it doesn't say she was being raped, or accosted, or harassed. it says he didn't want her to go, not that she was being held against her will, or that there was any violence involved.

seems that because it was a man on the hood, and the woman driving that many people are assuming the worst of the man with nothing to indicate that this was violent or non-consentual.

maybe there are other details not mentioned in this little blurb. could be the possible charge is DUI, and the police are awaiting a blood test to file charges. maybe the guy was trying to stop his friend from driving drunk or stoned? based on the lack of details, you might assume she was stealing his car. i don't thinks its hard to imagine he jumped on the hood as a joke, she took it to the next level and thought it would be a good laugh to dump her friend on his ass in the middle of the street.

why assume the worst of the man based on a couple vague sentences?

[Orrex]

17. For the sake of the devil's advocate...

What if all the known facts were the same, but she'd jumped on the hood of his car?

[Deep13]

28. Not chauvanism to recognize that men are typically stronger than women.

If he was in reasonable fear for his safety and that was the only way to escape, same result.

If he was foot taller than her and she was in heels, he might have a duty to flee on foot rather that shaking her off the car. If he can lift 100 lbs. and she can lift 30, the possibility of being restrained in liberty might not be so compelling.

[Orrex]

32. Can't assume "typical" strength when one person is wielding a vehicle

Whether he is twice or half her height, the fact is that she was driving a ton or so of steel and he was sitting on it. Relative strength doesn't reasonably enter into it until it's a competition of strength vs. strength instead of strength vs. car.

[Deep13]

37. That totally misses the point.

The alternatives to driving away are staying still and either fighting or getting captured or running. The issue is what the reasonable alternatives are to shaking the him off the hood. A man might have alternatives while the woman does not.

I am sick of this topic.

[Orrex]

38. Please explain

Staying in the car is a reasonable alternative to shaking him off the car. Unless he has a weapon, then he can't really do her any harm while he's on the hood. And if he gets off the hood to accost her through the door, then she can drive away.

Can you come up with any scenario that doesn't magically entitle the person-in-the-car to inflict potentially fatal harm upon the person-on-the-hood?

[Deep13]

22. "didn't want her to go" can = assault or even kidnapping.

[Orrex]

35. That's called selective sampling.

It can also mean that:

She was stealing the car
She was in no condition to drive
She'd stolen someone's wallet and was fleeing
She'd hit his car and was trying to escape
She was leaving to rob a bank
She was about to run over a basket of puppies
Her car was on fire and she didn't know it

and a bunch of others...


By assuming an outcome that favors your argument, you commit a logical error.

[ucmike]

18. Victim Mentality on display here

a lot of assumptions that the man was acting in a hostile manner, or that the woman was in peril. the article says nothing to that effect. many of you are assuming that she was escaping him. no one has suggested that the woman may have instigated this, but many assumptions that it must be the man who was threatening violence.

this story, all 8 sentences of it, is full of missing facts and details, yet we are having a discussion with ideas like "justifed lethal force" being thrown around.

(as i posted elsewhere on this thread, it doesn't even say it was her car. maybe she was stealing his car and thats what the possible charges relate to)

there's discussion here that the wrong person was charged. based on what? what detail, in this story, suggests that?

seems to me that some of you are automatically assuming the worst of men.

reading this thread i get the feeling that many of you feel that men are evil, and women are always the victims.

[Starlight]

19. IMO jumping on the hood of someone's car IS acting in a hostile manner!

If he was crazy enough to jump on her car when she tried to leave and refuse to get off even when she started driving, he certainly wasn't behaving in a normal manner!

[Xithras]

20. Or it could be that he was just playing around.

I can think of several similar incidents at parties when I was younger, though none of them ended up in the hospital. In every case, it was just a bunch of drunks having fun, and in one case a friend of mine got a three mile ride on the roof of a car out of it!

I agree with the OP, that there's just too little information here to judge this fairly.

[Deep13]

24. Being drunk is not an excuse.

In fact, it is an aggravating circumstance. Who knows what he was doing, except it was very provokative.

[ucmike]

21. so if your friend jumps on your car hood

begging you not to leave because everyone's having fun, then you assume the next step is an attack?
maybe your friend is an annoying jackass, but that doesn't mean he's a violent jackass.

now i don't know what happened, but neither does anyone else based on the article in the OP.


(this was a reply to #18, #19 wasn't on the board when i started to reply)

[Deep13]

25. I'm confining the analysis to the facts in the article ...

... as if it was a hypothetical fact pattern. All we know from what is written (and for the purposes of this discussion, assuming its veracity) is that she was trying to leave and he seemed to be trying to stop her by immobilizing her only way of departing in safety.

[Orrex]

34. That's Making a leap

he seemed to be trying to stop her by immobilizing her only way of departing in safety.

That's reading into the article as written. It seems unlikely that he really thought he could "immobilize" her by jumping onto her car. At best, he may have thought that he could dissuade her from leaving, but that's hardly the same.

If he'd wanted to "immobilize" her car, he could have slashed the tires, parked her in, taken her keys, etc.

I'd like to reiterate that he sounds like a jackass to me, but I'm reluctant to condemn him based on incomplete facts, just as I'm unwilling to exonerate her.

[Deep13]

23. Is there some other reason ...

...he would jump on the hood of a moving or soon to be moving car except to prevent her from moving?

[ucmike]

26. because they were friends and they were goofing around

maybe she had too much to drink and he didn't want her to kill someone on the way home.
maybe it happened because all women are lousy drivers. (another stereotype, but no different than assuming that this poor woman was escaping a violent man)


my point here is that most everyone is assuming the man had some evil intent and the article doesn't indicate that.

[Deep13]

29. Intent can be inferred from actions.

He did not have a right to restrain her to prevent a DUI accident. His recourse would then be to call the police. Goofing around by jumping on a moving car? Don't think a jury would buy it.

[ucmike]

33. not a strict legal right, but i don't refer to the law

before interacting with my friends, family, etc.
if my brother is too drunk to drive i will wrestle him to the ground,and the rest of the family will help hold him down. let him file charges in the morning.

if the guy was harrassing her, or was a stranger, or acting like a lunatic (i don't assume that getting on a hood of a car is crazy, depending on circumstances) then she was justified in trying to drive away, but it doesn't say that in the article.

again, the article offers only vague background on what led him to be on the hood of the car and it seems to be the consensus here that the only circumstance that led to this incident was because a man victimized a woman.

[Xithras]

36. Actually he DID have the right to restrain her, and I've done THAT myself.

A friend and his girlfriend were at a party and they BOTH had way too much to drink. When they tried to leave (with her driving) we had to physically take her keys (she did NOT want to give them up and INSISTED on driving them both home) and call them a cab. She was furious with us, screaming and cussing the whole time, but she did get in the cab when it showed up.

When she came back to pick up her car the next afternoon, she thanked us.

You may think that people don't have a right to do that, but IMO allowing her to be imprisoned for DUI would have been far more callous. Friends don't let friends go to prison when they could have stopped the damned crime in the first place. Anyone who knowingly watches while a drunk driver gets in their car and drives off should be prosecuted as an accessory IMO.

[atommom]

41. I've had a lot of male friends over the years, and can't imagine any of

them jumping on my car hood. (And yes, these were all guys who liked to goof around.) I think that most people would consider that an aggressive act, whatever his intentions might have been. Many women have had incidents where they have been intimidated by aggressive men, so most of us would get a little anxious if one hopped onto our car. I am in no way implying that all men are bad, or even that this particular man is bad. I'm just saying that this was a bad, bad idea on his part.

[redqueen]

39. Had a guy do that to me outside of a club.

Except he had his hands on my window and the hood of the car. We danced inside the club, and he figured that meant I was going to take him home and have sex with him. He was very aggressive and I was more than intimidated. I drove away as well.

Glad he didn't bump his head. I might've ended up in jail.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

40. I had a somewhat similar incident...

when I was in my 20s. A girlfirend and I were leaving a club at night. We got in my car (we were the last car in the lot) and a man approached us and started to masterbate against the window. We slammed the locks shut and I started the car. He then went in front of the bumper and put his hands on the car hood. I had the car started at this point and hit reverse, hitting him with the front bumper as I turned the wheel.

I was in a vehicle with the doors locked and a passanger, but I didn't know what this guy was up to or capable of. Did he have a weapon? Was he going to try to break in the window? I was terrified and got the hell out of there as fast as I could. And I don't feel bad/guilty in the least that I got him with the bumper.

Circumstances in the posted case are of course different, but a guy jumping on my hood would freak the shit out of me and I certainly might have done the same.

[atommom]

42. I'll keep an eye out, and let you all know when more details come out.

This is an interesting discussion, but it would be nice to know a little more of the story.

[atommom]

43. Update: The man has died from his injuries. No further details as yet. nt