I have to say, it's a first as far as I've heard.
www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmo...68011-sun.html (external - login to view)
aside from LW.... I haven't seen a definate stance on this.....
Personally, I agree with LW....what kind of a moron does crap like this? There is NO excuse.
A definate stance? The charges should be dropped, because they won't hold up on the guy. Assault with a weapon? A rubber nipple? Come on people.... unless the baby was alergic to rubber, then it couldn't be considdered assault for what was actually done.... let alone be labeled a weapon.... a weapon is something used to cause harm or death, no harm or death was going to occur to the child (And besides, even if the kid was alergic to rubber, why did the mother have it there in the first place?)
There maybe no excuse for this guy to do something as stupid as he did, but it doesn't even remotely come close to assault, let alone assault with a weapon.... and charging him with something I would considder could have been delt with so little as a warning, I think the mother and the authorities over-reacted to the situation.
Would you consider a sow bear tearing you limb from limb because you inadvertently stepped between her and her cub as over-reacting? Give yourself a little ping on the nose and tell us if you felt it.
Children are THE most vulnerable. He had no right touching this child period, for any reason. It doesn't matter what the child was doing...the kid could have been in the middle of a full blown temper tantrum, and that moron still didn't have the right to tough it....regardless of what the mother was or was not doing. Since he hit the kid with an object, that makes it assault with a weapon.
Praxius. I have a friend who's been put away for the rest of his life for grabbing a boob on the bus. No word of a lie. Sometimes the charge may seem out of proportion, but the behavior that prompted it, and the history behind the individual, is why the judges throw everything they've got at it.
No... I never said it was an unwarranted sentence. He was a young white male. Alcohol was not a factor. Lack of impulse control due to abuse was the issue. He's been institutionalized, seriously for life... not a 25 year sentence, but actual honest to goodness life. The wording of his sentence was something along the lines of 'until such time as he can demonstrate impulse control.' For a man who'd had any notion of impulse control starved out of him as a toddler, it's a life sentence. Going into court, they threw the book at him too, charged him severely out of proportion with a boob grab, because they knew they needed to do something drastic with him before his issue became one way worse.
Well if it had been my kid and I was there I'd be a bit more than cranky and he would be missing his balls.............
"Mark Robert Nugent, 45, was charged with assault and, due to the use of the baby bottle nipple, assault with a weapon and possession of a weapon."
How can any reasonable thinking person premise that a nipple is a weapon? It's outrageous. Charge the fellow with assault but don't insult us by pumping up the definition of a weapon like this. Obviously we have no real legal system when a "nipple" can be classified as a weapon. It is simply ridiculous.
What's next? A nipple registry?
I hate the government.
Without having been there, how can we honestly say that they are "overreacting"? Perhaps he was swearing at the same time, and saying that he was going to do something to the baby ?