Foiling an attempted rape. What are your thoughts?

Question

A man driving a car saw two men chasing after a half-nude woman. The woman crossed the street ahead of his car, followed by both men, still in hot pursuit. In order to save the woman from being raped, the driver accelerated and hit one of the men.

Now, as it turns out, neither of the men was trying to rape the woman. One was her boyfriend and the other a friend. She was drunk and had stormed out of the house after an argument with the boyfriend. The men were simply trying to catch up and bring her home.

The driver was charged with aggravated assault for striking one of the men with his vehicle.

Here's the question. Should the driver's punishment be lessened because he believed the pursuers were attempting to rape the woman? Should he go free, since his intentions were good? Should the punishment be more severe because he struck an innocent man? What are your thoughts?

Answer 1

punishment should be the same. the military calls it "escalation of force", he should have worked his way up to murder, not started with it.

Answer 2

Before I read the details of your question, I thought that it was going to mean something else entirely. With the included information, it definitely presents a conundrum in my opinion. Since there are many documented instances of people (often women in particular) who have died because no one interceded in their behalfs even though they were seen or heard being abused, even murdered, I tend to believe that, if the driver was indeed sincere in his efforts to assist the woman, who appeared to be the object of a probably perilous pursuit, by the only means which he had at his immediate disposal (however unfortunately the incident transpired), the judgment against the perpetrator should not have been excessively harsh. What would the penalty be for aggravated assault? Most likely the judge or jury rendering the verdict would have taken into account the concept that the driver might possibly have employed some other less drastic measure to deal with the situation, but he could not have known whether the "assailants" were armed. Hopefully, his eventual sentence would be no more severe than probation as apparently the victim survived...

Answer 3

OH MY! This really is a dilema, First thing that came to mind after reading this was he should not be charged! I was watching Dateline a couple of nights ago " To Catch A Thief ", yes I too was surprised that they actually showed something besides " To Catch A Predator ", and they showed people who ignored someone breaking into a car and getting assistance from a hotel maid to gain access to a room without showing any proof of that room being his. Would these people be held accountable for not saying anything? No, and my opinion is better to do something than nothing at all. The women should be charged for drunk in public and the harm of the man hit by the car, after all her actions are what led up to the events. o think that the DA would even bring charges disheartens me to what our society has become! OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!!!!!!! The man should absolutely go free. After posting I read some comments and cannot beleive the ignorance of have the answers, how can you say he should have established their intent first? Was he suppose to stop the car get out and ask politlely if they were planning on raping her? In this situation he made a judgment call that I think a lot of us would have made if put in his shoes!

Andrea

Answer 4

Tough one---now lets take the exact same scenario and change just a couple elements------the man driving the car saw the two men chasing after a half-nude woman....the woman crossed the street ahead of his car,followed by both men,still in how pursuit.

In order to save the woman from being raped, the driver accelerated and hit one of the men.

Now as it turns out the men had been taking turns raping her repeatedly for six hours-----she seized an opportunity to flee for her life and that is when the man driving the car came in.---- he being physically unable to fight the two rather large and athletic men and had no phone to call 911 did the only thing he could think of to try and help-------no picture this woman is your sister or best friend----------how much time should he have to be locked up for now?

I'm not trying to be hostile or anything-----just wondering if it is ok for any of us to try to protect those who are being harmed without having to serve time and come out with prison tatts-----see my point?

Answer 5

I think that because he willingly hit the man, not knowing the situation, he should be placed on probation or something similiar. Because he didn't know what the situation was and thought that he was saving a woman from being raped, I think he should be acknowledged in some way as an individual who prevented what could have been a serious offense. I know that if this was my sister or daughter, or even myself; I would hope that someone would at least try to help me. My motto: If it looks suspicious, investigate!

Maybe I am wrong for thinking this way, but what if he did nothing, and she was raped or killed? Ask yourself that!!!

Answer 6

hmmm.....

It's all about intention as far as I'm concerned - This guy didn't maliciously run the other down! - He just wanted to save the woman; he was probably in shock and wasn't thinking straight. All this needs to be considered but we can't ignore the fact that he has just hit a man with his car - on purpose! So he does need to be charged. But not as severely as you might punish a man who was just running someone down because he was drunk or because he wanted to hurt him.

The circumstances need to be taken into consideration - both the fact that he was trying to save the poor woman (who he thought was being raped!) and also the fact that he accelerated with the intentions of hitting a man...

It's all relevent, but ultimately, yes, his intentions mean he should be punished less, but his actions mean he should be punished.

Answer 7

Of course his punishment should be lessened. Intent is a huge factor in this case.

Seeing a half nude girl being chased by men is not an everyday occurrence, and he did the noble(but wrong) thing. Sending this guy to jail on an aggravated assault charge would be a travesty.

Answer 8

The charge should stand. Let's say that instead of just hitting the innocent person he killed said person. Then what? Would you still want the crime lessened? What if it were a relative of yours? Would you want it lessened? What if the girl was running away and gonna commit suicide? They were trying to catch her to keep her from doing it? Should it still be lessened? If you want to get involved you don't hit them with a car. The police should have been called. If he wanted to get involved he should have done it, IN PERSON, with no kind of weapon, the car being considered a weapon. Unfortunatly he was wrong. Sometimes good intentions don't always work out that way. It's kind of like if you do the hymlick (SP?) maneuver on someone that is choking and you crack their ribs or kill them accidently, you are still at fault and can be charged for it. It sucks but that's the way it is. That's why people don't get involved. Such a shame. Myself I would have taken sides with the driver. But according to law he is wrong. Dead wrong.

Answer 9

My thoughts are it is always a stupid idea to hit someone with your car. He could just as easily have deterred any real rapists by chasing them in the car or on foot, or even screaming at them out the window. Real rapists would more than likely have been deterred by a witness.

The other side of that is that had they been real rapists, they could have had guns and the one he did not hit could have shot and killed him.

I guess some people don't think well under pressure - or under perceived pressure. I don't know what to think about his punishment, but his insurance had better take care of the guy's medical bills.

Answer 10

I've always thought the same... It's like distinguishing between murder and attempted murder. Should the criminal really get off with a lesser punishment because they were unsuccessful? Their intentions remain the same... Still, with murder versus attempted murder, I've heard the difference is that for one of them, you have a corpse. The legal system is a complicated thing, and it makes me glad I'm in a science related-field (not that that's any less complicated, but it's certainly less philosophical).

Answer 11

The "good Samaritan" acted without any facts or any basis for his supposition. He did not witness any act of rape or sexual assault.

The aggravated assault charge against the driver of the vehicle is valid. Plea bargain it down to a misdemeanor and be done with it.