Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

1
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/sh ... d/3487562/

https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/ne ... g/3487763/

https://www.wcvb.com/article/man-shot-n ... n/62180049
The armed guy who was attacked...
...is charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, as well as violation of a constitutional right causing injury, following a violent confrontation, Middlesex County District Attorney Marian Ryan said.

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

3
Link to vid. It's not gory, but viewer discretion advised. https://x.com/KassyAkiva/status/1834398 ... Xbvtw&s=19

If someone charges from across the street and tackles you on concrete isn't "reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death", I'm not sure what is.

One smack of the noggin to the concrete can definitely kill you even if the attacker doesn't have a weapon (which is difficult to assess as you're being tackled on concrete).

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

4
Hayes was attacked and feared for his life, seems like the DA was too quick to file charges before the investigation is complete. Reports are that Hayes legally owned the gun, but did he have a license to carry it?
A GoFundMe in support of Hayes has raised over $37,000 in less than 12 hours since being launched.
https://whdh.com/news/police-investigat ... in-newton/


This is a picture of Scott Hayes with his gun.

Image

This link from The Times of Israel has video of the incident.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/man-shot- ... on-suburb/
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

5
So, someone basically bum-rushed Mr. Hayes and attacked him, knocking him down? And Mr. Hayes defended himself? And the DA wants to charge Hayes with a crime?

How about charging the attacker with assault and battery?

I also note the different description between WCVB Boston and The Times of Israel. According to WCVB, the attacker came across the street *after* Hayes shot him; granted that they were quoting the DA Marian Ryan. I quote:

'"There was a scuffle that was going on the street, and at some point, Mr. Hayes used a gun and fired a shot that struck the individual who then came across the street," Ryan said.'

The Times of Israel says otherwise, i. e. Hayes fired at his attacker after being tackled, and the video footage supports this. Again, I quote:

"A video of the incident showed a man confronting the pro-Israel crowd, accusing them of supporting genocide as they shouted back. The man then rapidly crossed the street and tackled one of the demonstrators.

The two continued to scuffle with the man who had been assaulted appearing to fire a single shot from a pistol."


So, it appears the DA (Ms. Ryan) has an agenda to make Mr. Hayes look bad in the "Court of Public Opinion" by putting her thumb on the scale. This, despite the video. If that's really true, then remind me never to go to Massachusetts. Wow.
"SF Liberal With A Gun + Free Software Advocate"
http://www.sanfranciscoliberalwithagun.com/
http://www.liberalsguncorner.com/
Image

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

6
Pepper Spray.

To quote John from Active Self Protection " Pepper spray, something between a harsh word and a gun". Had they pepper sprayed the guy it probably would have ended there. I say that being pretty sure here in CA it would be a crime to carry pepper spray at a protest, not sure about MA.

Looks like there certainly is the "great bodily harm" justification at least. Also even after he is shot it takes several people to pull him off. I'd guess the DA could claim at the time of the shot they were on the ground grappling or wrestling and the fear of death or great bodily harm wasn't reasonable.

The DA has yet to charge the perpetrator with assault and battery? What a croc! Certainly if they charged the defender. Really bad that "GUN!" had such an affect. Kinda like the person in the video who's response was "SCREAM!"

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

8
Yeah, in California you'd definitely be arrested and charged. Pretty clear in my mind that a person charging across the street and tackling you on concrete is a deadly threat.

Head knocks to concrete kill quite a few people and leave quite a few more with brain damage. But an example will likely be made that we are to wait on the police and never utilize our right to self defense.

Apparently, this is the same DA that charged Caetano for daring to be armed with a stun gun against her abuser, eventually resulting in SCOTUS action.

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

9
featureless wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 1:33 pm Yeah, in California you'd definitely be arrested and charged. Pretty clear in my mind that a person charging across the street and tackling you on concrete is a deadly threat.

Head knocks to concrete kill quite a few people and leave quite a few more with brain damage. But an example will likely be made that we are to wait on the police and never utilize our right to self defense.

Apparently, this is the same DA that charged Caetano for daring to be armed with a stun gun against her abuser, eventually resulting in SCOTUS action.
People in the anti gun group are very quick to dismiss the idea that a person can be killed with just bare hands. If a person of diminutive stature and weight is attacked by someone in a greater weight class they are likely going to suffer greatly or even die. There’s a reason in some sports there are weight divisions, but self defense is not a game or sport.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

10
That's true. In this particular case, size wasn't as much of a difference. Rather, it was more of a younger assailant against an older victim. In such a contest, assuming equal skill, the younger person is going to have a physical advantage. That's why there's the ol' folks saying that goes, "I'm too old now to fight ya, son; I'm just gonna shoot ya."
"SF Liberal With A Gun + Free Software Advocate"
http://www.sanfranciscoliberalwithagun.com/
http://www.liberalsguncorner.com/
Image

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

11
CowboyT wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 2:21 pm That's true. In this particular case, size wasn't as much of a difference. Rather, it was more of a younger assailant against an older victim. In such a contest, assuming equal skill, the younger person is going to have a physical advantage. That's why there's the ol' folks saying that goes, "I'm too old now to fight ya, son; I'm just gonna shoot ya."
Pretty much the position I would be, too old and a lightweight to boot.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

12
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 1:54 pm
featureless wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 1:33 pm Yeah, in California you'd definitely be arrested and charged. Pretty clear in my mind that a person charging across the street and tackling you on concrete is a deadly threat.

Head knocks to concrete kill quite a few people and leave quite a few more with brain damage. But an example will likely be made that we are to wait on the police and never utilize our right to self defense.

Apparently, this is the same DA that charged Caetano for daring to be armed with a stun gun against her abuser, eventually resulting in SCOTUS action.
People in the anti gun group are very quick to dismiss the idea that a person can be killed with just bare hands. If a person of diminutive stature and weight is attacked by someone in a greater weight class they are likely going to suffer greatly or even die. There’s a reason in some sports there are weight divisions, but self defense is not a game or sport.
More than twice as many people are beaten to death (no weapon beyond fists and feet) than are killed with all rifles (including "assault weapons") every year. Scarry, eh?!

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

13
"Assault fists"? "Assault feet"? You know, with those scary, dangerous, hardened "assault rubber" soles on those shoes? Kinda reminds me of the infamous "assault Pop-Tart" about 10 years ago when a 7-year-old chewed a Pop-Tart into this shape.

Image
.
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/07 ... 34x416.jpg
"SF Liberal With A Gun + Free Software Advocate"
http://www.sanfranciscoliberalwithagun.com/
http://www.liberalsguncorner.com/
Image

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

14
BKinzey wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 1:13 pm Pepper Spray.

To quote John from Active Self Protection " Pepper spray, something between a harsh word and a gun". Had they pepper sprayed the guy it probably would have ended there. I say that being pretty sure here in CA it would be a crime to carry pepper spray at a protest, not sure about MA.

Looks like there certainly is the "great bodily harm" justification at least. Also even after he is shot it takes several people to pull him off. I'd guess the DA could claim at the time of the shot they were on the ground grappling or wrestling and the fear of death or great bodily harm wasn't reasonable.

The DA has yet to charge the perpetrator with assault and battery? What a croc! Certainly if they charged the defender. Really bad that "GUN!" had such an affect. Kinda like the person in the video who's response was "SCREAM!"
I won't carry pepper spray because, speaking as an instructor, it is 100% effective on some people, and "partially" effective on about 80% of the population. And on a small percentage of the population it doesn't work at all. It's like spraying them in the face with water. They can wipe it out of their eyes, rub it in, and nothing happens, except they go from annoyed to wet and annoyed.

Then it gets complicated, but not for civilians. (In this context, "civilians" means someone who is not law enforcement.) Law enforcement has a duty, if not by statute then by policy, to use the minimum force necessary to resolve a given situation. For that reason, they carry pepper spray. I'm using very general terms, because the specifics are quite different between cities, towns, counties, states and law enforcement agencies. (That's why cops need additional training when they switch departments, even if they were last on duty yesterday.)

Generally speaking, pepper spray is included in one step on the Use-Of-Force continum. For a cop, it is usually the fourth step, which is where the National Institute of Justice puts it. But not all agencies use the NIJ contiuum, and many agencies use a modified verstion of it.

https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/use-force-continuum

Now, note that it is the government and law enforcement that are bound by this. It's not a good guideline for anyone else, because you and I are not required to use any of the Use-Of-Force continuum. You and I are usually (again, it varies state-to-state, and I don't know, don't teach and don't care about what the law is wherever your happy ass happens to be sitting) bound by a legal theory referred to as the "reasonable man theory". (Although I see Wikipedia has changed that to the politically correct "reasonable person theory." I guess I better get caught up with society. Shit is changing...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person

You and I are not required to use any of the Use-Of-Force continuum, although it remains a valuable teaching tool. So if we are in fear for our lives, we can go straight from nothing to "I think he's dead" with no intervening steps. So we can skip that step that might not work.

Cops carry pepper spray because they are required to use non-lethal force if they can. So to do so, they are trained in when and how to use it. And more importantly, they are trained in how and when not to use it. You and I are not required to use non-lethal force and most of us are not trained how to use pepper spray. (I'm not. I mean, why? All the pepper spray training I've witnessed run by civilians left a lot to be desired, in my opinion.)

The final point is that if you had pepper spray available, all that will do is complicate matters if you end up shooting someone. No pepper spray, no complication. More tools is not always better. Too many tools can make a decision too complicated, especially when the bad man actually sounds like he's fucking growling as he runs at you.

I have always taught that it's a potential failure point, so don't carry it unless you're required to do so.

P.S. One of my nightmares goes like this: "You had pepper spray. Why didn't you use it?" Another version goes "your pepper spray didn't work. Did you use it correctly? Do you know how to use pepper spray? Have you been trained in it? Why were you carrying pepper spray when you're not a cop? No, we can't ask him if pepper spray works on him, you shot him, and he's dead."
Last edited by Ylatkit on Fri Sep 13, 2024 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"When I have your wounded." -- Major Charles L. Kelly, callsign "Dustoff", refusing to acknowledge that an L.Z. was too hot, moments before being killed by a single shot, July 1st, 1964.

"Touch it, dude!"

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

15
Agree, Ylatkit.

Watch the video. There's no time for making a decision beyond the one thing of "threat of great bodily harm or death." This shit happens incredibly fast.

As an example, even sparing for fun/practice, knowing full well someone is trying to pop you in the face or put you on the ground, you don't block or dodge all of 'em. People that have never done force on force (empty hand or otherwise) seem to have no appreciation for how fast things happen. I'm surprised the guy was actually able to draw in this case.

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

18
Update:
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/ne ... g/3487763/
Few details have been shared by authorities about the altercation that preceded the shooting, including in Newton District Court earlier Friday, where Scott Hayes of Framingham appeared to face a charge of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. A not guilty plea was entered on his behalf.
No mention of the "violation of a constitutional right causing injury" charge.

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

19
From DM's link.
They revealed that the person who was injured, a 31-year-old from Newton who otherwise was not identified, is now expected to survive. They had previously said his injuries were life-threatening.

Hayes spoke briefly as the judge and lawyers discussed the conditions of his $5,000 bail, which they said he would meet, and his lawyer told the judge, as part of discussions on the conditions of his release, that he's a full-time contractor.

From the Boston Herald newspaper:
The Jewish community is scrutinizing Middlesex County District Attorney Marian Ryan’s handling of an investigation into a pro-Israel demonstrator allegedly shooting an anti-Israel protester who tackled him to the ground at a rally in Newton. Newton Police immediately arrested Scott Hayes, 47, of Framingham, on charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and violation of a constitutional right causing injury after a “scuffle ensued,” Ryan told reporters Thursday night. Appearing for arraignment at Newton District Court Friday afternoon with scratch marks and bruises on his face and nose, Hayes, pleaded not guilty to the assault and battery with a dangerous weapon charge. The violation of a constitutional right causing injury was dropped prior to arraignment. Police responded around 6:40 Thursday evening to a small pro-Israel rally near Washington and Harvard Streets in the Newtonville neighborhood, Ryan told reporters just after 10:30 Thursday night. “During that scuffle, the individual who had come across the street was shot by a member of the demonstrating group,” Ryan said at Newton Police headquarters. The district attorney highlighted the charges against Hayes, identified as an “American Iraq War Veteran,” and how the shooting victim, a 31-year-old from Newton whose name has not been released, was being treated at a hospital for life-threatening injuries and did not face immediate charges.

Betar, a 100-year-old national Zionist Jewish organization, called it “absolutely shameful” that Hayes has been charged. “We say shame on Middlesex County District Attorney Marian Ryan,” the organization wrote in a statement. “Hayes should not be charged. Shame on you Ms. Ryan. The only thing anyone should say to Scott Hayes is thank you. We say thank you Scott Hayes for serving America and for standing with the Jewish and Pro-Israel community. During Hayes’ arraignment, Prosecutor Laura Miller, however, told the judge that the victim is set to be charged with assault and battery on a criminal complaint, not an arrest. The victim is expected to survive. “We do appreciate the court’s patience as this was an evolving situation,” Miller told the judge. “We were continuing to assess the evidence as it relates to the entire situation especially as video was being gathered and witnesses interviewed.” The judge set a $5,000 cash bail for Hayes. Conditions for his release are that he wears a GPS monitoring device, does not have any weapons, stays away from the victim and the City of Newton, and is confined to his home during the hours of 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. daily. His license to carry has also been suspended.

Videos shared with the Daily Wire, which have gone viral, show the anti-Israel protester, wearing a Palestinian pin and a surgical mask around his neck, shouting at the group of pro-Israel demonstrators from across the street, calling them “sick” and accusing them of “defending genocide.” The protester is then seen bolting across the road before tackling Hayes to the ground. GoFundMe page, set up in support of Hayes’ legal defense, detailed the hectic scene. It surpassed its initial $60,000 goal, with over $133,000 raised from 1,900 gifts as of Friday afternoon. The targeted amount is now $180,000. “Scott was wrestling with him when a gun went off,” the GoFundMe, which identified Hayes as an “American Iraq War Veteran,” states. “As soon as Scott noticed his assailant was hurt he provided emergency medical treatment.” “Even though Scott is not Jewish,” it continues, “he has been defending the Jewish people and its right for self determination and governance all across Boston, its surroundings and all around New England and the US. He now needs help as this turmoil entered his life.”

The Anti-Defamation League of New England reacted to the incident minutes after midnight, highlighting how it was “aware that an anti-Israel protestor was shot after charging across traffic and violently tackling a pro-Israel demonstrator to the ground in Newton, MA.” “Reports that charges were immediately filed prior to completion of the investigation are concerning,” the ADL wrote in an X post. “Protests should not subject anyone to violence. We encourage Newton Police and the Middlesex District Attorney to conduct a thorough investigation of the entire incident. We are concerned about escalating tensions and remain in contact with law enforcement and community officials.” Newton Mayor Ruthanne Fuller, during a news conference late Thursday night, called the shooting a “frightening incident” and asked for everyone to remain calm as police investigate. “I know people will have a lot of questions, and we will share information with Newtonians and the press when we are able,” Fuller said. “It’s really early stages of an active investigation.”

Acting Newton Police Chief George McMains asked witnesses to provide investigators with photos or videos of the confrontation. He said police would provide extra patrols at “houses of worship” over the next several days. The Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston, in a statement Friday afternoon, said it welcomed that Ryan dropped Hayes’ civil rights charge and that the person who charged and tackled him would face a criminal complaint. “There should be no question that violence of any kind in our democratic society is abhorrent,” the council wrote in a previous statement on the incident. “People’s right to gather in civil, non-violent public demonstrations must be sacrosanct.” Some reacting to the incident felt Hayes’ quick arrest appeared “politically motivated.” Gerard Filitti, senior counsel for the Lawfare Project, a national non-profit focused on protecting the human and civil rights of Jewish communities worldwide, called the dilemma “highly concerning.” “To put it bluntly, based upon this video, the charges appear to be (expletive)-backwards,” Filitti wrote in an X post early Friday morning. “The wrong person was charged. This may well be a violation of Hayes’s civil rights.”
https://www.bostonherald.com/2024/09/13 ... -arrested/

Hayes’ lawyer, Glenn MacKinlay, called the incident “a textbook case of self defense.” He said a charge that Hayes violated the alleged victim’s constitutional rights has already been dropped. “We’re confident that the investigation, when it’s completed, will clear Mr. Hayes of all charges,” MacKinlay said.

The shooting victim, Caleb Gannon, of Newton, was brought to Beth Israel hospital with life threatening injuries, and he remains hospitalized. His father told Newton police officers, according to records, that Gannon is mentally unstable and possibly autistic, and that he has been “hyper-focused” on Hamas and the Israel-Hamas conflict.

At Newton District Court Friday, dozens of people who identified themselves as friends of Hayes defended him, describing him as a military veteran and “a kind person.” ”He stands on his side, he doesn’t cross the line. He doesn’t let other people cross the line. He’s military, he’s fought for our country,” Adina Troen-Krasnow said. Dave Sherman of Needham wore a white shirt and a tie with “Free Scott” written in black marker on strips of white duct tape running across his chest. Sherman said he was standing next to Hayes when he was tackled. He believes Hayes kept him from getting hurt.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/09/13/ ... nstration/

Someone who is mentally ill and violent can still be dangerous.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

20
I wonder if this will make national news, or just stay local. If it were to go national and become viral, I'd imagine that plenty of Jewish people--which includes certain heads of large companies with lots of lobbying dollar$--would be concerned. Guess which political Party wants to institute more gun control and make it more difficult for people, including supports of Israel, to carry? Guess which political Party the anti-Israel demonstrators tend to identify with? I wonder if that will have an effect at the ballot box. And that's why I suspect this might not make national news, especially with the election this close.

We'll see.
"SF Liberal With A Gun + Free Software Advocate"
http://www.sanfranciscoliberalwithagun.com/
http://www.liberalsguncorner.com/
Image

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

21
CowboyT wrote: Sun Sep 15, 2024 12:40 pm I wonder if this will make national news, or just stay local. If it were to go national and become viral, I'd imagine that plenty of Jewish people--which includes certain heads of large companies with lots of lobbying dollar$--would be concerned. Guess which political Party wants to institute more gun control and make it more difficult for people, including supports of Israel, to carry? Guess which political Party the anti-Israel demonstrators tend to identify with? I wonder if that will have an effect at the ballot box. And that's why I suspect this might not make national news, especially with the election this close.

We'll see.
At this time CT, it looks like Newsweek is the only national media source carrying the story, the rest of the outlets are in the Boston area, local TV stations and the Boston Globe and the Boston Herald.
Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, told JNS that there is no question that the man who crossed the street and tackled the pro-Israel rallier committed a crime. “I think the first thing that’s clear is that the person who assaulted the veteran should be arrested as well,” Dershowitz said. “The fact that he hasn’t been arrested raises some serious questions.”

The legal scholar told JNS that the question whether the shooter acted in self-defense “will be determined based on all the evidence.” “The shooting raises questions that require a deep investigation as to precisely when the shot was fired, what the circumstances were, what the feelings and beliefs of the person who shot were,” he said. “That requires an extensive investigation.” Dershowitz told JNS that he is concerned that the alleged shooter was charged before the investigation was complete.

“It seemed to me that the first person to be arrested should have been the person who did the initial assault, because there’s no doubt about that. That’s on videotape. You can see it,” he said. “So the fact that the person was not arrested, charges were not filed against the person making the original charges, raises serious questions about the fairness of the entire process.”
https://www.jns.org/dershowitz-serious- ... ael-rally/

Last year there was an incident in Ventura County, CA during dueling Israel-Palestine protests where a Jewish man was pushed and hit his head on concrete and died the next day. The Ventura County Sheriff's Dept spent days conducting witness interviews, collecting statements and video and finally the DA charged a man. The Newton situation seems to be an activist DA and an acting Newton police chief who wants to be the police chief. Scott Hayes has a large pot of donations to date, so he could pursue this to the highest courts to get justice.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Demonstrator shoots attacker in Newton, Massachusetts

23
featureless wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:06 amIf someone charges from across the street and tackles you on concrete isn't "reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death", I'm not sure what is.
Every case is different. A person who is a dangerous attacker in one scenario can be a harmless victim in another.

There is a four prong test written by the Supremes about just this issue.

Generally speaking, this case would probably revolve around disparate abilities rather than aggressive action. The action speaks to the intent prong and the immediacy prong, but it does not address the ability prong. All four are necessary for a good shoot and even then, here, the questions about "there but for your actions" are going to come up.

That all said, I'd have lit that fucker up too.
"When I have your wounded." -- Major Charles L. Kelly, callsign "Dustoff", refusing to acknowledge that an L.Z. was too hot, moments before being killed by a single shot, July 1st, 1964.

"Touch it, dude!"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests