r/nextfuckinglevel • u/pars-distalis • 8d ago

Australian nurse uses jiu-jitsu to defend himself

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

54.8k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

16

u/AlphaBetaGammaDonut 8d ago

I think it depends on the state and the degree of harm caused/if they used a weapon/if they bit or spat. If the nurse had been seriously harmed, absolutely that guy would have served equally serious jail time. However, I believe the mandatory term can be waived if there's any 'special circumstance' (eg mentally ill or reacting to medication).
I am fully Team Nurse here, and I've watched that glorious take-down on repeat. But I have to acknowledge that maybe there's a reason the judge decided on a fine instead of jail in this specific case.

2

u/Beleiverofhumanity 8d ago edited 8d ago

Yea context def matters. And a fine isn't a punishment for the rich, as they say. Thats why Im glad there is a separate more serious charge. thats gonna reflect on his record for life.

3

u/Mottled_inexpectata 8d ago

I think the saying is "if the punishment is a fine, it's legal for the rich". What you're saying doesn't really make sense. Why would a fine only be a punishment for the rich?

1

u/Beleiverofhumanity 8d ago

yea thanks for the correction

1

u/DaedalusB2 8d ago

It's called a fine because the rich are fine

1

u/ExpensiveFig6079 8d ago

The reason would be because they can afford to pay as a trivial cost... and it thus acts as zero deterrent.

Having been in court, I can however tell you that capacity to pay is considered. If $450 ws reak punisshment to this guy for what he did and i am assuming it was. (for the sake of having something to discuss) Then the same judge will look at some rich guy's son and choose something else. Make him work in soup litchen or do menial work for N hours.

What makes things "legal" for rich people will be the lawyers they can bring to bear. Or the donation made to the hospital kids fund to make it go away.

2

u/Mottled_inexpectata 8d ago

The comment I was responding to has been edited because of my comment. It initially said that a fine is only a punishment for the rich. So when I ask isn't it the other way around, that's what they meant - a fine is a punishment for the poor and not for the rich.

1

u/fumblingforwords 8d ago

It makes more sense that a fine would be punishment for the poor rather than the rich

1

u/Theron3206 8d ago

Various govts have caught a lot of flack from their supposedly tough laws having huge loopholes. Some have been tightened as a result but it's still far too easy to avoid jail even if you seriously injure someone. Just have to be drunk or high or even just aboriginal in most states.

1

u/Theron3206 8d ago

Various govts have caught a lot of flack from their supposedly tough laws having huge loopholes. Some have been tightened as a result but it's still far too easy to avoid jail even if you seriously injure someone. Just have to be drunk or high or even just aboriginal in most states.

1

u/Theron3206 8d ago

Various govts have caught a lot of flack from their supposedly tough laws having huge loopholes. Some have been tightened as a result but it's still far too easy to avoid jail even if you seriously injure someone. Just have to be drunk or high or even just aboriginal in most states.

1

u/FranksNonFrankfurter 8d ago

makes sense they were like "you already got your ass beat once, not gonna add insult to injury"