• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Former WF Hoops Asst Coach Jamil Jones gets probation for 3rd degree assault (update)

I don't believe the allegation reported in the NY Post (by Jones' lawyer and an unnamed law enforcement person) that Szabo "shattered" the rear window of Jones' BMW.

It's very difficult to break a car window with your hands or fists. For example:

https://youtu.be/Ia23XWYdfbs

It can be done with a proper tool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QCz4nXDq7w

I don't believe that Szabo broke the window even if he had been (tapping, knocking, banging-choose one) on it. Modern car windows simply don't break that easily. I also find it ridiculous to believe that Szabo just happened to have a window breaking tool on him or that he picked up a big rock and spontaneously decided to use it in order to get the attention of someone that he thought might be his Uber driver.

I don't know who broke the window or when it was broken. The allegation that Szabo broke it sounds like a desperate attempt to justify what Jones did to Szabo. But even if Szabo did somehow break the window, then I still don't think it was a good reason to kill him.

Let’s do “anecdotal bullshit” for $100, Alex.
 
Hey guys. What if the window already had a crack, but he then pounded on it and it smashed.

Can we get an assessment on if that’s plausible?
 
If you’re speaking of civil negligence, you’re correct. Not the case for criminal law however. In order for the mens rea to rise to recklessness (which would be needed for it to elevated to a felony) there would have to be a substantial likelihood of death, and “there is a chance it could happen” doesn’t get you there.

The amount of armchair lawyers on this thread pretending they know what they’re talking about is hilarious.

You're hilarious, go look up appellate cases that upheld convictions in similar circumstances. A jury could find Jones intentional act of raising his fist and punching the deceased in the face could constitute purposeful conduct designed to cause serious bodily injury. A jury reasonably could find purposeful intention from the mental and physical effort Jones must have exerted to strike that blow resulting in a 1 punch knockout. That is enough for a DA to argue Jones' conscious objective was to cause serious bodily injury, and that a person who inflicted such a blow to a man's head would have known that the injury to the head and brain created a substantial risk of death when combined with creating a loss of consciousness resulting in a fall where the head meets concrete.

At a minimum, a jury reasonably could find that Jones' act demonstrated an awareness that his conduct would cause serious bodily injury, and thus the alternative knowing standard of culpability could be found to exist. Additional evidence supports that. For example, Jones' leaving the scene before medical assistance or police arrived, could be regarded as evidence that Jones' was aware that the now deceased was significantly injured and that there was a substantial risk that what Jones' had just done was the cause.

BTW while you sitting on your high horse thinking you're the greatest of all time, remember not to bounce to hard on that dildo stuck all the way up your ass.
 
You're hilarious, go look up appellate cases that upheld convictions in similar circumstances. A jury could find Jones intentional act of raising his fist and punching the deceased in the face could constitute purposeful conduct designed to cause serious bodily injury. A jury reasonably could find purposeful intention from the mental and physical effort Jones must have exerted to strike that blow resulting in a 1 punch knockout. That is enough for a DA to argue Jones' conscious objective was to cause serious bodily injury, and that a person who inflicted such a blow to a man's head would have known that the injury to the head and brain created a substantial risk of death when combined with creating a loss of consciousness resulting in a fall where the head meets concrete.

At a minimum, a jury reasonably could find that Jones' act demonstrated an awareness that his conduct would cause serious bodily injury, and thus the alternative knowing standard of culpability could be found to exist. Additional evidence supports that. For example, Jones' leaving the scene before medical assistance or police arrived, could be regarded as evidence that Jones' was aware that the now deceased was significantly injured and that there was a substantial risk that what Jones' had just done was the cause.

BTW while you sitting on your high horse thinking you're the greatest of all time, remember not to bounce to hard on that dildo stuck all the way up your ass.

Look out, we’ve got a 1L on the loose.
 
I don't believe the allegation reported in the NY Post (by Jones' lawyer and an unnamed law enforcement person) that Szabo "shattered" the rear window of Jones' BMW.

It's very difficult to break a car window with your hands or fists. For example:

https://youtu.be/Ia23XWYdfbs

It can be done with a proper tool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QCz4nXDq7w

I don't believe that Szabo broke the window even if he had been (tapping, knocking, banging-choose one) on it. Modern car windows simply don't break that easily. I also find it ridiculous to believe that Szabo just happened to have a window breaking tool on him or that he picked up a big rock and spontaneously decided to use it in order to get the attention of someone that he thought might be his Uber driver.

I don't know who broke the window or when it was broken. The allegation that Szabo broke it sounds like a desperate attempt to justify what Jones did to Szabo. But even if Szabo did somehow break the window, then I still don't think it was a good reason to kill him.

 
With Jones on staff, we probably beat HBU.
 
 
You're hilarious, go look up appellate cases that upheld convictions in similar circumstances. A jury could find Jones intentional act of raising his fist and punching the deceased in the face could constitute purposeful conduct designed to cause serious bodily injury. A jury reasonably could find purposeful intention from the mental and physical effort Jones must have exerted to strike that blow resulting in a 1 punch knockout. That is enough for a DA to argue Jones' conscious objective was to cause serious bodily injury, and that a person who inflicted such a blow to a man's head would have known that the injury to the head and brain created a substantial risk of death when combined with creating a loss of consciousness resulting in a fall where the head meets concrete.

At a minimum, a jury reasonably could find that Jones' act demonstrated an awareness that his conduct would cause serious bodily injury, and thus the alternative knowing standard of culpability could be found to exist. Additional evidence supports that. For example, Jones' leaving the scene before medical assistance or police arrived, could be regarded as evidence that Jones' was aware that the now deceased was significantly injured and that there was a substantial risk that what Jones' had just done was the cause.

BTW while you sitting on your high horse thinking you're the greatest of all time, remember not to bounce to hard on that dildo stuck all the way up your ass.

I'll side with the person who spent the first part of his career as a lawyer working in the DA's office. He just might know what he is talking about.
 
I'll side with the person who spent the first part of his career as a lawyer working in the DA's office. He just might know what he is talking about.
Yeah, but does he know more than the guy about to crush his Crim Law exam?

That's fine I've worked in a DA's office too. Let me clue you both in on how charging works. There is a thing called "prosecutorial discretion." It means the District Attorney who is prosecuting the case can choose what he wants to charge Jones with, if he wants to plea bargain, etc. Good DA's go with the highest charge they can get and include all lesser available charges as well. That strategy provides leverage and a position of power if the DA wants to plea bargain. If Jones goes to trial and gets convicted on the highest charge all that matters is when Jones' attorney appeals, will that charge hold up in appellate review? The answer is it can, but feel free to do your own legal research on the matter if you want to double check my work.
 
Back
Top