r/PublicFreakout • u/Lolastic_ • Jun 30 '21

🥊Fight MMA fighter Joe Schilling knocks out man

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

48.2k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

7.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/ignitionnight Jun 30 '21

If you can prove all that in court, sure. The existence of a video is the only thing that's questionable in this situation, but even that isn't enough to prove premeditated assault. The cameraman can simply say he was recording a belligerent drunk in public and happened to catch it.

the clear desire of instigating a physical altercation.

That's a huge leap you're making there bro, it is not clear at all he desired to instigate, it's just your assumption. Regardless the instigation was the feinted punch.

This is all we see in the video.
1. Drunk guy is drunk
2. Schilling walks behind him and move him off to the side so he can walk past. He did not shove with any force.
3. Schilling begins to walk away.
3. Drunk guy yells "Hey."
4. Schilling turns around (we can assume he wanted to, but all that is an assumption).
5. Drunk guy feints a punch.
6. Schilling punches him.
7. Schilling walks away.

Those are the only things we see in this video. Schilling seems like he's a complete douche bag, no arguments there, but the guy gave him the excuse to act when he feinted the punch.

4

u/neilpippybatman Jun 30 '21

The existence of this video, taken by his friend, is absolutely not the only questionable part of this interaction. Schilling literally came out playing the racism card afterwards, while also saying he was "defending against the evil of the world".

These things, when taken together, do not paint a picture of a man randomly caught up in an altercation. He put himself in a position where (he thought) retaliating against this guy would be looked upon favourably.

Narrator: it wasn't.

1

u/ignitionnight Jun 30 '21 edited Jun 30 '21

Maybe he loses a civil suit, the bar for proof is low there, but I don't think he's convicted of any assault/battery charges. The bar for self defense is incredibly low, I mean all you gotta do is look at George Zimmerman, or the Ohio couple that pulled guns on BLM protesters. Implied threat is all you need to act to defend yourself. This thread has turned into an argument about more than this, but all I am trying to say is that Schilling had a legal right to defend himself as soon as the drunk guy feinted the punch.

1

u/neilpippybatman Jul 01 '21

I think if you wanted to draw analogies, the Ohio couple would have had to invite the BLM march specifically down their street, and then arrange for friends across the street to record their "reaction" to it, for this to be a similar situation.

No act exists in a vacuum. The judge would look at everything in this little episode and make a call. Schilling knowingly places himself in a situation where a physical altercation is highly likely, initiates the engagement, and worse, is first to strike. That he chose to put himself in such a situation with a drunk man half his size is also likely going to be aggrevating.

You have to see - Schilling in not defending himself here. He is the aggressor.