a reply to:
HanzHenry
A crime of that nature requires a victim. In this case the victim is the defense attorney and the suspect is the judge. Ultimately a determination
of charges is contingent upon the victim actually wanting to prosecute. If the victim declines, then that is the end of it.
There are very few laws on the books that allows the state to initiate a prosecution without the cooperation / consent of the victim.
in my experience the only laws im aware of concerns domestic violence and homicide. For the longest time the Prosecuting attorneys had their hands
tied when it came to people intimidating the victim of domestic violence in order for the charges to be dropped. The laws were changed that allows
the PA to initiate prosecution even with an non cooperating victim.
For homicide the state essentially takes on the roll of the deceased. More or less it implies the victim would want the person who killed them to
stand trial for the action.
The crime of assault is not against the state its against another individual.
The bailiff's could have broken up the fight, which I think they did. Once the defense attorney declined to prosecute the incident ended right then
and there. The bailiff is a witness and not a victim. Since the bailiff was not assaulted he cannot file charges.
The legal term is standing. Since the deputy was not assaulted he has no legal standing to arrest the judge.
What should, and most likely will, occur is the public defender and the judge having their actions investigated by the governing agency that has
oversight regarding law license / ethics breaches involving officers of the court (Officer of the court are lawyers / judges etc).
To add my own opinion, based on my state, its possible Florida has something called a mutual affray. Its when an altercation occurs because both
parties involved forced it. In those cases both individuals are suspects and victims at the same time. Generally if one party wants to press charges
both individuals are charged and when they don't want to press charges its over with.
Going for overly simplistic here -
There are 2 types of crimes -
* - Crimes against a person
* - Crimea's against the state.
2 people fighting is a crime against a person. It requires the victim to prosecute.
If a person is intoxicated and gets pulled over, his crime is against the state. In this example the law enforcement officer is a witness / victim to
the crime against the state.
In this situation TorqueyThePig is absolutely 100% correct.
edit on 4-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
edit on
4-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)