Upload
grant-warren
View
213
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
IS
AN OFFENSE?
Two school boys Sydney Australia Spark
International debate on the right to self-defend
RITCHARD GALE12 Years Old
Chifley CollegeSydney AustraliaDivorced Parents
CASEY HEYNES15 Years Old
Chifley College Sydney Australia
Years Of Being Bullied
Cell Phone Camera Video Taken by Bystander
http://www.caseyheynes.com/
The Result for The Boys
• Equal length suspensions for BOTH boys
• Video spread virally over internet and both boys will live with it over their heads for the remainder of their lives
Two Sides Of The TaleCasey Supporters Ritchard Supporters
• Didn’t start fight•Tried to block and self defend peacefully•Pushed around for years•Didn’t continue violence against Gale•Casey is the true victim
• Gale claims that Heynes had been insulting him•Two years younger•Heynes attack was over aggressive •Difficulty with parents divorce•Ritchard is the true victim
From Canadian Criminal CodeDefence of PersonSelf-defence against unprovoked assault34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is
justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.
Extent of justification
(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in
repelling the assault is justified if(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the
violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 34; 1992, c. 1, s. 60(F).
From Canadian Criminal CodeDefence of PersonSelf-defence against unprovoked assault
34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous
bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.
Extent of justification(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in
repelling the assault is justified if(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the
violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 34; 1992, c. 1, s. 60(F).
For anyone interested in the story: all or most sources on this story are extremely biased so it would be a good Idea to check out numerous
websites. A good place to start is: http://
www.caseyheynes.com where you can find videos and articles biased
for Casey and also for Ritchard.
Casey Heynes was NOT justified in defending himself in the manner
which he did?
Casey Heynes was NOT justified in defending himself in the manner
which he did?
The school was justified in punishing both boys in the same manner?