Fatal annoyance

For the past couple of weeks, I've had to drive long distances back and forth from various points to and from New Jersey, and the driving is never pleasant. The roads are medieval, and tempers flare. Fortunately I am capable of holding my temper, at least to a certain degree.

No matter how angry New Jersey driving might make me, though, I've never been even close to resorting to conduct like this:

MOUNT LAUREL, N.J. -- Enraged after being cut off by a teen driver, authorities say a man then followed the high school athlete home and tried to run the youth down with his car. Instead, the 53-year-old was punched into unconsciousness and died Tuesday.

The teen was jailed, charged with aggravated assault.

Jeffrey Zucker, a lawyer for the 17-year-old, said it was a case of self-defense.

Yes, if those are the facts, I think it was a clear cut case of self defense. A car is a deadly weapon, and is it never justified to use a deadly weapon in retaliation for being cut off in traffic. (Legal weapons include the horn, your voice, and maybe a raised finger?) But there's no difference legally between trying to run someone over with a car and firing bullets at him. Both are lethal force, and are only justified in self defense, defense of others, or possibly in defense of one's home.
The charges against the boy, whose name was not released because of his age, were filed before James D. Munter died late Tuesday morning. The charges could be upgraded, but Bill Shralow, a spokesman for the Camden County prosecutor's office, said that decision would not be made Tuesday.

...Authorities said Munter followed the teen three miles to the student's home in Lindenwold, screaming through his window all the way. The teen used a cell phone to call his father, who told him to drive home, officials said.

When the teen arrived home, Zucker said, he ran across the street to his home from his still-idling truck, but he was not fast enough. With the teen's father watching, Munter drove into the youth, authorities said.

The teen, who Zucker said is about 6-foot-6 and 300 pounds, rolled off the hood of Munter's 1999 Mercury Sable, landed on his feet, walked to the driver's side of the car and punched Munter twice in the head.

Munter's son-in-law, Mark Serota, who described the man as "nice, fun-loving, goodhearted," said he lost consciousness instantly and never regained it.

A blow to the head is rarely fatal. But this was a huge, athletic kid, and on top of that his adrenaline would have been racing -- maybe even to the point of "hysterical strength." (There is such a thing; I've experienced the phenomenon twice.) Add to that the fact that the driver was still sitting in his car seat, and had less "bounce" than if he'd been standing, and I wouldn't be surprised if his skull had been crushed and his neck broken.

I don't think the kid should be charged with any crime. The driver who tried to run him down brought it all on himself.

Life's short enough. Why make it shorter?

UPDATE (09/16/05): The District Attorney has not yet decided whether or how to charge the teen. Newsday has more:

First Assistant Camden County Prosecutor James P. Lynch said an autopsy conducted Wednesday showed both blows were on left side of Munter's head _ one near his eye and one on his ear. The force caused a blood vessel to break and Munter to lose blood to his head. He never regained consciousness before he died.

Lynch said Thursday that investigators were still gathering facts to help decide whether and how to prosecute the teen. "This case could not be more serious," Lynch said. "A gentleman lost his life."

Zucker said he hopes prosecutors will drop charges. If they do not, he said, he would argue that the teen acted in self-defense, punching Munter in the heat of the moment when he legitimately feared for his life.

It was the teen, Zucker said, who called an ambulance immediately after he punched the man.

Munter's family declined to speak with reporters after Thursday's court hearing. But his widow, Nadine Munter, told the Courier-Post of Cherry Hill for Thursday's newspapers that she did not believe the teen was acting in self-defense.

"My husband never got out of the car," she said. "He was strapped to his seat. He never had a chance."

Rocco Cipparone, a criminal defense lawyer who also teaches a criminal law course at Rutgers University School of Law in Camden, said to establish self-defense in New Jersey, a suspect must show that there was a reasonable expectation of death or serious bodily harm, must not have had an escape route and must use the minimum amount of force necessary to get out of the situation.

Cipparone said that even though the teen killed Munter with his fists, usually punches would not be considered deadly force.

Assuming Professor Cipparone has stated the law correctly, the facts meet the test for self defense, although an argument might be made that the kid had an escape route because he was at home. But if he was struck by the car, it's a fact that cars move much faster than people, leaving him with no alternative than to try to stop the driver with the only force he had at his disposal. The idea that he should have run away from a car that had already struck him and was in a position to do so again is, I think, unreasonable under the circumstances. Besides, anyone who'd run a car into a human being over a traffic dispute could just as easily be expected to run it into a building.

It also occurs to me that if an aggressor chases a person all the way to his home and then attacks him there with deadly force, his victim is under no further duty to retreat. He's basically cornered.

MORE (09/19/05): There's still no word on whether the charges against this kid will be dropped, but I see that he's being forced to wear an electronic bracelet, and according to NBC, the dead man's family "wants the death penalty." Incredible.

posted by Eric on 09.15.05 at 08:40 AM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/2780






Comments

Couldn't agree more. If these are the facts - that the guy hit him with his car, then he deserved what he got - what a sad waste of his life.
I feel very sorry for the kid - he is the one who will have to live with the consequences of that "adults" stupidity and selfishness.

sabrina   ·  September 15, 2005 09:13 AM

I'm with the kid, too.

That's one main reason I don't drive a car, I walk or take the bus instead. I just don't have the patience required to be a good driver. Knowing me, I'd be honking and tailgating and all kinds of stupid and dangerous stuff just to get from point A to point B in a hurry. People like me shouldn't be allowed to drive and neither should that man. I'm choleric enough at the keyboard.

I've had two 50-or-so-year-old men road rage on me, and both times I let them go without hurting them, mostly out of pity. But I think, now, that maybe I should have beat the shit out of both of them, humiliated them in front of their wives, without seriously injuring them.

Because I bet this dude had pulled similar crap on many people, all of whom let it go to "be the bigger man" or whatever, and now he's dead and the poor kid is traumatized.

Harkonnendog   ·  September 15, 2005 06:20 PM

"A gentleman lost his life."

If he had been a gentleman, he wouldn't have been in that position.

Petro   ·  September 16, 2005 12:37 PM

Ex-ACT-ly, Petro.

B. Durbin   ·  September 17, 2005 01:52 AM

Here Here Petro

steph   ·  September 22, 2005 10:38 AM


March 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits