Posted on 11/20/2004 6:32:10 PM PST by monkapotamus
Posted on Sat, Nov. 20, 2004
Ron Artest has no business in the NBA
By MICHAEL ROSENBERG
Detroit Free Press
AUBURN HILLS, Mich. - Go away, Ron Artest. Go far, far away.
Last week, you were an amusing circus act.
For much of Friday night, you were the best basketball player in the building.
And then you were something beyond Idiot and several miles past Nuts.
And now you need to disappear - not for a week, not for a month, and not for any amount of time that can be defined in conventional basketball terms. We're not measuring this in games missed. It goes beyond that.
An intense regular-season basketball game morphed into one of the ugliest nights in sports history Friday, and it's all because of Artest, the Pacers forward. Without him, there is no riot at the Pistons-Pacers game. Period.
Let's replay what happened: Artest committed a hard foul on Ben Wallace, which happens. Wallace retaliated with a shove to Artest's face, which was over the top, but it happens.
Artest went to lie down on the scorers' table like a sunbather and briefly grabbed a headset from the Pacers' broadcast team - which doesn't happen, but wasn't a huge deal. As other players scuffled, a fan threw a water bottle at Artest's head.
That was stupid and irresponsible - BUT IT HAPPENS. It shouldn't, but it does. And the expected level of decorum for players and coaches is higher than it is for fans.
Then Artest jumped up and ran into the stands with fists flying. He got there so fast, he almost knocked me over before I knew he was there.
Stupid me, I was watching the court.
Then Pacers Jermaine O'Neal, Eddie Gill and Steven Jackson jumped into the stands. Pistons broadcaster Rick Mahorn, trying to play peacemaker, followed. It was hard to tell who was trying to break up fights and who was trying to start one. Fans screamed "I punched Artest!" Or, if they were on the receiving end, "He hit me! He hit me!"
The next thing you knew, Artest coldcocked somebody, and O'Neal was said to have done the same, and chairs flew at the Pacers.
And a lot of it was inexcusable. But none of it would have happened if Artest had done what athletes are trained to do forever: ignore the fans.
You never, ever, EVER run into the stands. And if you dispute that, please tell me one time, just when, when a situation got better when a player bolted into the crowd.
As Palace President Tom Wilson said, "we're paid a lot of money" to maintain poise in that situation.
"I don't know that there was a security failure," Wilson said.
Wrong. Somebody let Artest into the building.
That can't happen for a long time, and it won't. Expect the longest suspension in NBA history. And expect police charges, although none was filed Friday.
What Ron Artest did has nothing to do with sports, nothing to do with the Pacers-Pistons rivalry and very little to do with the water bottle. He has teetered on the wall between sanity and insanity for a while, and Friday he fell on the wrong side. No, not fell. Jumped.
This is obviously a man in need of some serious help. Last week, when he asked coach Rick Carlisle for some time off to promote his CD, he was an amusing sideshow. There goes Ron-Ron again. Ha ha.
And Friday, he played brilliantly. He was the reason the Pacers won, 97-82. Then he was the reason the game ended with 45.9 seconds left.
Over the loudspeakers, fans were asked to leave the Palace. Then, and only then, did the clock wind down from 45.9. It was way, way, way too late.
Finally, long after the game was officially over, the Pacers' team bus departed the parking lot. It moved past the Pistons' cars, all of which were running, so that the Detroit players could make a quick exit. (None of them spoke to the media.)
Rain fell on the Palace parking lot. And as the bus wedged between a dozen or more police cars and a few ambulances, this much was clear: Ron Artest was in the wrong vehicle.
Throwing beer does not constitute either assault or battery, and the fans didn't fight with the players until the players went into the stands to attack them. The incident was unfortunate, but a few fines will more than serve the demands of justice.
You couldn't be more wrong.
Assault - a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact.
Battery - an offensive touching or use of force on a person without the person's consent.
You can assault by spitting at someone, and battery by actually landing the lunger on them. Please be more careful when you debate facts.
Apparently, some in Detroit consider it a defensive measure. The guy that ran up to Artest and threw the drink in his face while he was trying to pummel the little white guy paid dearly for that. Ouch.
It certainly was worthy of an English soccer brawl.
Assault and battery depend largely on the context. The reality is that beer throwing and other things happen at sporting events and are not treated as anything other than disorderly conduct. That's a fact, and your best efforts at ignoring that fact don't change anything. Ron Artest's overreaction only shows that he isn't mature enough to play in the NBA. What's fast becoming apparent in your own posts is that you are overreacting as well. Please grow up a little before trying to comment on events and issues.
For someone to continue to post such an ignorant statement even after I've provide the definition of both assault and battery tells me I'm dealing with someone with the mental capacity of an ear of corn.
That's about 100 points higher in IQ than the nitwits who pay money to watch this loathesome "sport." Artess should be given reign to whip the whole lot of these losers.
More information for the stupid. This comes right from the prosecutor in this NBA case:
Gorcyca said anyone who threw a cup or a punch -- including players and fans -- could face criminal charges. "The throwing of an object and striking someone constitutes an assault," said Gorcyca.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/sports/3938054/detail.html
Hey, buddy, knock off the personal attacks, we don't need another riot here.
Your own comments could amount to assualt, in some contexts.
By the way, your definition of assualt is not complete. Many jurisdictions include verbal assault, to include fighting words and insults.
Huh? Throwing beer in somebody's direction = assault. If beer makes contact = battery.
I think it was complete enough to convey the idea that you don't actually have to have hit someone for them to claim to have been assaulted. The exchange was with a not too bright type, so I didn't want to overwhelm his rather diminished mental capacity.
Talk about a self identifier. What part of my comments do you take personally?
He's having trouble understanding the concept.
I think he's simply using legal terminology without understand that the terms themselves have legal definitions.
I agree. But were that you or I, I think we would appreciate being provided the actual information or definition. I can't see us purposefully ignoring such assistance.
In court, the actual threat of bodily harm by the "assault" and "battery" is the major factor in the judgment. You can find legal terms defined as such and such, but how they play in court in another thing entirely.
But, then, using your quaint rheoric, someone who doesn't know that must be stupid, right.
Perhaps you need more of an education in life. The definitions stand on their own. The prosecutors own statements support both my original statement and the definitions. What additional information or help does your post provide the readers of this thread? In that context, what do any of your posts provide the readers of this site? (crickets crickets crickets). Now take your cute little boy icon and move along.
And you'll soon be posting proper authority to back your (at this time) retorical claims?
But, then, using your quaint rheoric, someone who doesn't know that must be stupid, right.
Actually, I would say that label would be more appropriate for someone making the claim that you made (that one element of the charge of assault matters more in court) without providing authority.
In the context of a sporting event, this definition is ridiculous. Artest created a conflict with a very stupid and willful foul and was being disrespectful by lying on the scorer's table. Someone threw a beer on him. The guy who threw the first beer should pay a small fine, but the situation does not require any further action on the part of the criminal justice system. If Artest had been minding his own business sitting in a restaurant after the game, the situation would be entirely different, and assault/battery charges would be warranted. Artest was being an idiot, and his idiocy drew other people's idiocy.
Artest and the others should pay fines for the fans that they attacked in the stands. After the first beer was thrown, he had no justification for believing that his life or health was threatened. His attack of the fans could likewise be considered assault and battery if one wanted to be technical, but again, this context doesn't justify that kind of response. A small fine and a very small settlement for the fans who were attacked more than meets the demands of justice.
Fans shouldn't have gone onto the court, but those who did were roughed up a little. The demands of justice have been more than met in those cases.
If someone like Artest is stupid enough to attack fans in the stands and people throw beer on him while he walks to the dressing room, that's his problem. He wasn't harmed, and the criminal justice system has more important work to do than bother people who throw beer on a spoiled millionaire at a basketball game.
Case closed!
Bill
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.