The law

[GJEC]

This is a hypothetical case:

A student has an argument outside the club. Blows are struck.

The police are called.

The student is unmarked as his skills have allowed him to defeat the other guy. The other guy has no skills so is a bit messed up.

The student is adamant he only reacted in self defence.

The other guy claims he was assaulted.

The police are considering charges.

Please answer the poll detailing your preferred option and state your reasons.

[curlbroscience]

SD cases in the US are treated much differently than in the UK, especially in Texas. "No - Innocent unless proven guilty."

However the US news would probably go the other way "Yes - Until charges are dropped or he is found Innocent."

[meguro]

Unless I had a bad vibe about the student from the start, I would assume innocence unless he is proven guilty. If the student has a history of violence/ legal problems, it should have been addressed before.

[MMX]

I will go with option 1. There has to be witness testimony for both sides and let the jury hear it. (in the USA anyway..)

[curlbroscience]

One of our dojo mates is a law student working as a clerk in 2nd amendment right cases. Lots of interesting, circumstantial stuff that he works on.

It's interesting to think of it from the standpoint of unarmed SD and first strike.

[GJEC]

OK lets expand this. Still hypothetical.

A young female student makes an allegation.

Is an instructor 'innocent until proven guilty'?

Or would you suspend them? In other words, when - if ever - do we view the charge as serious enough to validate suspension until such time as charges are dropped or they are found 'Not guilty'?

Gary

[curlbroscience]

Jun 4, 2014 9:36:59 GMT -5 GJEC said:

OK lets expand this. Still hypothetical.

A young female student makes an allegation.

Is an instructor 'innocent until proven guilty'?

Or would you suspend them? In other words, when - if ever - do we view the charge as serious enough to validate suspension until such time as charges are dropped or they are found 'Not guilty'?

Gary

That's a horse of a different color. Allegations made by a child or young adult(regardless of sex) towards an authoritative figure (True or False) I tend to give the benefit of doubt. If my children were in the same situation I would want it to be the same. Unfortunately allegations such as this will forever damage that person.

I am biased towards children and usually take the stance of better safe than sorry. Guilty and then later proven innocent, if that. I don't think you recover from something like that. Ever.

In the eyes of the law, should still be Innocent until proven guilty; however if that were my daughter I would react differently towards him up for even being put in to that type of situation.

[GJEC]

Here's my view. Allegations of assault or criminal activity can harm the reputation of the club and to protect that I would suspend anyone charged. If they're reasonable and value the club's reputation they will understand. If there is no case to answer and charges are dropped, they can resume training. If they felt poorly treated and decided not to return that would be a shame, but no one person is bigger than the club.

If I lost my cool and twatted someone (as distinct from pure self-defence) and the police got involved, I would stand down. I'd expect that from others.

Gary

[Ros]

Jun 5, 2014 10:48:45 GMT -5 GJEC said:

Here's my view. Allegations of assault or criminal activity can harm the reputation of the club and to protect that I would suspend anyone charged. If they're reasonable and value the club's reputation they will understand. If there is no case to answer and charges are dropped, they can resume training. If they felt poorly treated and decided not to return that would be a shame, but no one person is bigger than the club. Gary

I absolutely agree with that. It is always 'innocent until proven guilty' but suspending the person charged protects them, the accuser, the instructer, other students and also the club as a whole.
What a nasty situation it would be, though.

[hokuto12]

The Yoshinkan Aikido Honbu kept Mike Tyson photo up in their dojo until he was actually found guilty.
It is a tough one especially if it was just a matter of self defence. If self defence then I think he should be supported as he was doing what they have been taught in the dojo.
However if the second scenario then yes suspended until it is sorted out.

[GJEC]

It's a tricky one.

'Self-defence' is usually claimed by both parties after any one on one brawl. As an instructor taking a 'good behaviour matters' stance you always get the "Don't you believe me sensei? I'd never lie to you!" plea that makes you feel like a Judas if you don't immediately take their side.

But - as responsible citizens - we have to believe that the police (UK) rarely waste time on stuff that has no evidence. So if a person is charged, there is/was probably a reason.

Gary

[meguro]

Jun 8, 2014 2:40:41 GMT -5 GJEC said:

But - as responsible citizens - we have to believe that the police (UK) rarely waste time on stuff that has no evidence. So if a person is charged, there is/was probably a reason.

Gary

In the UK, this may be the case. My experience in the US, and elsewhere is that the police are as prone to making mistakes, or committing crimes as anyone. Also, I think it is a mistake to believe that any organization police or otherwise is as efficient or logical as one might want to believe. Bureaucracy tends to impose procedures and convoluted ways of thinking that can at times work at cross purposes to their stated objectives, in the case of law enforcement, justice. People of all types make mistakes, and when law enforcement does it, it is very difficult to correct.

[GJEC]

Jun 8, 2014 9:16:39 GMT -5 meguro said:

Jun 8, 2014 2:40:41 GMT -5 GJEC said:

But - as responsible citizens - we have to believe that the police (UK) rarely waste time on stuff that has no evidence. So if a person is charged, there is/was probably a reason.

Gary

In the UK, this may be the case. My experience in the US, and elsewhere is that the police are as prone to making mistakes, or committing crimes as anyone. Also, I think it is a mistake to believe that any organization police or otherwise is as efficient or logical as one might want to believe. Bureaucracy tends to impose procedures and convoluted ways of thinking that can at times work at cross purposes to their stated objectives, in the case of law enforcement, justice. People of all types make mistakes, and when law enforcement does it, it is very difficult to correct.

Fair point well made. One would hope that any mistakes by the police would be exposed in court, but undoubtedly there are miscarriages of justice.

But what's the alternative? If we let someone train that is under investigation and they injure a club member, the question "why was he still welcome?" is a hard one to answer.

I posted this as I'm sure a few of us have been put in this position. It's good to have a policy the members understand and buy into rather than applying rules on the hoof.

Gary

[meguro]

You are right to be concerned for the welfare of the club members. I was flashing back to some unpleasant memories of the boys in blue.

[GJEC]

I understand completely.

Most of my interactions with police have been positive (at work at RTC's etc) but occasionally we'd be sorting out an incident and a real idiot would turn up and start throwing his weight around. Pointing out that the Fire Service has command of extrication and the inner and outer cordons never even broke their stride. They expected to be obeyed and couldn't see past that.

But that was the few. Still makes you wonder how they got into a public service though.

Gary