McCoy's nightclub fight and the ongoing investigation

[Doc]

WEO's two examples probably are, but it's a close call. Pennsylvania courts have found the following to be "serious bodily injuries":

 

- Skull fractures and a concussion with memory loss

- Facial fractures, multiple cracked ribs, a brain hemorrhage, and a punctured lung

 

But these are not:

- Broken nose, two black eyes, and facial lacerations

- A person who, while lying prone on the floor, was "punched and kicked all over the face and body," resulting in "bruising of his ribs, face, back and legs, cuts on his eyelid and lip, and swelling, lumps and cuts on his head"

- Striking someone's head on a door, but the person remained conscious

- "bump on the head"

- Broken nose and minor facial lacerations

 

The rib fractures, at least in this case, don't fit the legal definition of "serious bodily injury" since they weren't life-threatening, not seriously/permanently disfiguring, and shouldn't lead to protracted loss or impairment. As for the orbital bone fracture (do we even know if this really happened?), it doesn't fit the criteria for being life-threatening or seriously/permanently disfiguring. Whether it leads to loss or impairment remains to be seen.

[YoloinOhio]

 

The rib fractures, at least in this case, don't fit the legal definition of "serious bodily injury" since they weren't life-threatening, not seriously/permanently disfiguring, and shouldn't lead to protracted loss or impairment. As for the orbital bone fracture (do we even know if this really happened?), it doesn't fit the criteria for being life-threatening or seriously/permanently disfiguring. Whether it leads to loss or impairment remains to be seen.

interesting note on loss/impairment with the orbital - I had mentioned earlier that Derrick Rose took and elbow and experienced an orbital fracture earlier this season (it was in the fall, I think). I read this week that he's still seeing double sometimes. Not sure if that would/could be the case here too but I'm sure they'll say it is possible. Edited February 12, 2016 by YoloinOhio

[JohnC]

 

So, if an off duty police officer starts to act as an officer of the law, he is then considered to be "in the performance of duty" and an assault against him is considered an aggregated assault. If an off-duty officer sees a robbery or assault in progress and identifies himself "Police! Drop your knife, put your hands up!", that's a slam-dunk he's acting as an officer of the law.

 

If an officer drinking in a bar says "that's my champagne, get your hands off of it" or the like, is he then acting?

 

If he's been drinking, is he supposed to be acting?

 

 

Well, that, and credit to Bandit for turning this up in an earlier part of Threadzilla here:

 

D. In situations where an officer is using intoxicants

or taking medications that have impaired his/her

physical and mental abilities, the officer will not

take action, other than calling 9-1-1 to report the

incident.

E. An officer will not be considered acting within the

scope of his/her employment if he/she takes police

action while using intoxicants or taking

medications that have impaired his/her physical and

mental abilities.

 

The police (and maybe the DA) would probably like to see an aggravated assault charge, based upon the fact that these were police officers and could be considered as "acting within the scope".

 

3 bottles of champagne between 3 guys would kind of argue "using intoxicants" and "will not be considered acting"

 

So then the question do the actions otherwise constitute aggravated assault?

This is my opinion. The aggravated charges are going to be mostly related to the level of injuries than to the off-duty officers identifying themselves (or not) as being officers. The injured officers went to the hospital so their injuries are documented.

 

As I stated in a prior post the DA very often goes with the more serious charge in order to have more bargaining room with the defending attorney.

 

In my opinion the level of injuries do rise to the level of an aggravating assault charge. (Agree with WEO.) Will the complainants (injured cops) be willing to go along with a lesser charge? That question is probably related to compensation for pain and suffering.

Edited February 12, 2016 by JohnC

[Doc]

interesting note on loss/impairment with the orbital - I had mentioned earlier that Derrick Rose took and elbow and experienced an orbital fracture earlier this season (it was in the fall, I think). I read this week that he's still seeing double sometimes. Not sure if that would/could be the case here too but I'm sure they'll say it is possible.

 

The cynic in me was going to post that I fully expect the cop to say that he's seeing double. Regardless of whether he truly is or not.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Doc

[fridge]

This is my opinion. The aggravated charges are going to be mostly related to the level of injuries than to the off-duty officers identifying themselves (or not) as being officers. The injured officers went to the hospital so their injuries are documented.

 

As I stated in a prior post the DA very often goes with the more serious charge in order to have more bargaining room with the defending attorney.

 

In my opinion the level of injuries do rise to the level of an aggravating assault charge. (Agree with WEO.) Will the complainants (injured cops) be willing to go along with a lesser charge? That question is probably related to compensation for pain and suffering.

 

Did you read the injuries on the police report? No medical report is public knowledge, all we have is what's in the report. Right now, I know this much, the police report was TRYING its best to make it sound worse than it really was.

 

Example:

 

 

 

possible skull fracture

 

It does not take days to figure out if there's a skull fracture. They asked to be examined for a skull fracture, and there was no skull fracture...so it's highly misleading to report that there was a possible skull fracture because it implies further damage than was there. When you say possible skull fracture, you are subliminally telling people that there's a skull fracture, and I've seen it mentioned dozens of times in this thread alone.

[JohnC]

interesting note on loss/impairment with the orbital - I had mentioned earlier that Derrick Rose took and elbow and experienced an orbital fracture earlier this season (it was in the fall, I think). I read this week that he's still seeing double sometimes. Not sure if that would/could be the case here too but I'm sure they'll say it is possible.

The lingering after effects certainly would be a factor relating to the seriousness of the injury because the injured officer can't return to full duty until vision issue is resolved.

[Mr. WEO]

 

WEO's two examples probably are, but it's a close call. Pennsylvania courts have found the following to be "serious bodily injuries":

 

- Skull fractures and a concussion with memory loss

- Facial fractures, multiple cracked ribs, a brain hemorrhage, and a punctured lung

 

 

 

 

 

The rib fractures, at least in this case, don't fit the legal definition of "serious bodily injury" since they weren't life-threatening, not seriously/permanently disfiguring, and shouldn't lead to protracted loss or impairment. As for the orbital bone fracture (do we even know if this really happened?), it doesn't fit the criteria for being life-threatening or seriously/permanently disfiguring. Whether it leads to loss or impairment remains to be seen.

 

See GKG's above bolded.

[Go Kiko go]

See GKG's above bolded.

 

Just for the avoidance of doubt, the court in that case found that all of those injuries, together, constituted serious bodily harm (i.e., one person suffered from "facial fractures, multiple cracked ribs, a brain hemorrhage, and a punctured lung" following an attack). It's not clear if just cracked ribs, alone, would be enough, since it's hard to say that a blow that causes a rib fracture is necessarily one that "creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious, permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ." But, cracked ribs + an orbital fracture might be enough.

 

Here's another example of serious bodily injury that might be closer to home:

 

After they were about three hundred feet away from the bar, Mr. Judge turned around and saw [the defendant] and another male exit Brownie's and proceed to follow them down the alleyway. [The defendant] caught up to the men and asked the complainant “Are you a tough guy?” When Mr. Frenz turned around, [the defendant], without provocation, delivered a closed fist blow to the victim's left eye. Mr. Frenz fell to the ground unconscious[.] When Mr. Frenz's head struck the concrete he sustained a scalp laceration which began to bleed profusely. Mr. Frenz tried to get up, lost his balance and fell back down. An ambulance subsequently arrived and he was transported to Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. Doctors determined that he suffered an orbital blowout, frontal rim and sinus fractures. During his five day hospitalization, surgery was performed to attach a plate on the bottom eyelid. Mr. Frenz also received eight staples to close the wound to the back of his head. At the time of trial, some six (6) months later, Mr. Frenz still suffered from straight upward double vision gaze.

 

That still sounds more serious than the reports we have here, but we just can't say with any level of certainty without knowing the precise nature of the injuries.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Go Kiko go

[JohnC]

 

Did you read the injuries on the police report? No medical report is public knowledge, all we have is what's in the report. Right now, I know this much, the police report was TRYING its best to make it sound worse than it really was.

 

Example:

 

 

It does not take days to figure out if there's a skull fracture. They asked to be examined for a skull fracture, and there was no skull fracture...so it's highly misleading to report that there was a possible skull fracture because it implies further damage than was there. When you say possible skull fracture, you are subliminally telling people that there's a skull fracture, and I've seen it mentioned dozens of times in this thread alone.

The medical report is not released publicly at this time But it will be released (authorized by the injured parties) for the case if need be. Not only will the initial hospital report be submitted but the post hospital and post initial treatment will be used in this case to support the case. The police can have their thoughts about the injuries. But the authoritative voice on the that issue are the medical experts, not the laymen.

 

I agree with you that the police pursuing this case are trying to promote the seriousness of the injuries. If it goes to trial it is reasonable to believe that the defense is going to use their medical experts to review the medical records and minimize the severity of the injuries.

Edited February 12, 2016 by JohnC

[Mr. WEO]

 

Just for the avoidance of doubt, the court in that case found that all of those injuries, together, constituted serious bodily harm (i.e., one person suffered from "facial fractures, multiple cracked ribs, a brain hemorrhage, and a punctured lung" following an attack). It's not clear if just cracked ribs, alone, would be enough, since it's hard to say that a blow that causes a rib fracture is necessarily one that "creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious, permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ." But, cracked ribs + an orbital fracture might be enough.

 

Here's another example of serious bodily injury that might be closer to home:

 

After they were about three hundred feet away from the bar, Mr. Judge turned around and saw [the defendant] and another male exit Brownie's and proceed to follow them down the alleyway. [The defendant] caught up to the men and asked the complainant “Are you a tough guy?” When Mr. Frenz turned around, [the defendant], without provocation, delivered a closed fist blow to the victim's left eye. Mr. Frenz fell to the ground unconscious[.] When Mr. Frenz's head struck the concrete he sustained a scalp laceration which began to bleed profusely. Mr. Frenz tried to get up, lost his balance and fell back down. An ambulance subsequently arrived and he was transported to Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. Doctors determined that he suffered an orbital blowout, frontal rim and sinus fractures. During his five day hospitalization, surgery was performed to attach a plate on the bottom eyelid. Mr. Frenz also received eight staples to close the wound to the back of his head. At the time of trial, some six (6) months later, Mr. Frenz still suffered from straight upward double vision gaze.

 

That still sounds more serious than the reports we have here, but we just can't say with any level of certainty without knowing the precise nature of the injuries.

 

 

Thanks for the clarification. I don't know if one guy got the orbit and rib fracture.

[JohnC]

 

 

 

See GKG's above bolded.

WEO, I agree with you on the issue of whether these injuries rise to the level of aggravating assault. The medical reports and not laymen's opinions on this matter are going to be the most influential factor on that issue. Go KiKo Go's comments and quotes are relevant and potent.

[Doc]

Thanks for the clarification. I don't know if one guy got the orbit and rib fracture.

 

One guy got the orbit and the other got the ribs.

 

WEO, I agree with you on the issue of whether these injuries rise to the level of aggravating assault. The medical reports and not laymen's opinions on this matter are going to be the most influential factor on that issue. Go KiKo Go's comments and quotes are relevant and potent.

 

Yup.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

 

Thanks for the clarification. I don't know if one guy got the orbit and rib fracture.

 

Per the published police complaint and published follow up, not one guy

 

Complainant#1 transported himself to the Hospital where he was treated for a laceration to his right eye, broken nose, broken ribs, and a sprained thumb.

Complainant#2, was admitted to the Hospital where he received eight stitches over his left eye and is currently receiving treatment for a possible skull fracture (later reported as orbital fracture, though if it took a while to dx chances are it's not multiple fractures or displaced much)

 

I believe Complainant #2 is described as the officer who tried to break up the fight (eg not on the ground) and was reportedly clocked with a bottle (type of bottle not specified; champagne bottle that was the original point of dispute said to have broken causing the fight to rev up)

 

If someone clocked me in the head with a champagne bottle my personal opinion would be that they were attempting to cause me serious injury. Those things are stout. But I would also think that would apply to the bottle-swinger, not necessarily the whole group.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Hopeful

[Hapless Bills Fan]

In my opinion the level of injuries do rise to the level of an aggravating assault charge. (Agree with WEO.) Will the complainants (injured cops) be willing to go along with a lesser charge? That question is probably related to compensation for pain and suffering.

 

Do the police officer complainants get a voice in what charges the DA files? For ordinary folks, it seems the citizen files a complaint, the DA decides whether and what charges will be filed, and that's that.

 

And isn't compensation for pain and suffering a civil matter, separate from the criminal case?

Edited February 12, 2016 by Hopeful

[3rdand12]

Here's the thing about the off duty police officers. If they tried to use their power of the badge they would all be fired so they probably never told anyone they were police officers. Once a police officer has any alcohol in their system they lose the power of the badge. It was basically a fight between some guys at a bar and the fact that they were police officers have nothing to do with it. I'm not sure how it all started but they cannot be charged with an assault on a police officer. When I was a law enforcement officer 2 guys in our department tried to push their badge on people in a bar after they had been drinking and they were fired the next day.

Thanks for sharing the real world Exp.

Most folks have not lived in your shoes, and the sense of reality you offer helps balance all the conjecture and guessing going on here.

So what do you think happened here.

The busted up guys show up to work Monday and are unable to perform their duties? what happens then?

 

Interesting the hear that feedback from a trooper. My guess is he's spot on. And I suspect the same, maybe these guys pull this off all the time and this time were charging their tab to Shady's party and they caught on to the scam and confronted them. The off duty cops got an attitude of so what, we're cops so what are you going to do about it? And then things got out of hand. So now the cops and the DA are holding back on the arrest warrants until they can come up with some kind of cover story and get everybody involving singing the same song.

nope. If they had identified themselves, none , i mean none of this would have reached the point of a beat down.

[3rdand12]

 

 

GKG, a bit wordy but good analysis.

Agreed. Very well presented and a worthy read GKG.

Thanks!

[3rdand12]

 

So, if an off duty police officer starts to act as an officer of the law, he is then considered to be "in the performance of duty" and an assault against him is considered an aggregated assault. If an off-duty officer sees a robbery or assault in progress and identifies himself "Police! Drop your knife, put your hands up!", that's a slam-dunk he's acting as an officer of the law.

 

If an officer drinking in a bar says "that's my champagne, get your hands off of it" or the like, is he then acting?

 

If he's been drinking, is he supposed to be acting?

 

 

Well, that, and credit to Bandit for turning this up in an earlier part of Threadzilla here:

 

D. In situations where an officer is using intoxicants

or taking medications that have impaired his/her

physical and mental abilities, the officer will not

take action, other than calling 9-1-1 to report the

incident.

E. An officer will not be considered acting within the

scope of his/her employment if he/she takes police

action while using intoxicants or taking

medications that have impaired his/her physical and

mental abilities.

 

The police (and maybe the DA) would probably like to see an aggravated assault charge, based upon the fact that these were police officers and could be considered as "acting within the scope".

 

3 bottles of champagne between 3 guys would kind of argue "using intoxicants" and "will not be considered acting"

 

So then the question do the actions otherwise constitute aggravated assault?

i thought it was 4 bottle between 3 officers? regardless they were on the prowl for kitty or worse

[boyst]

this is as much fun as watching CJ Spiller run up the middle.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Here's the thing about the off duty police officers. If they tried to use their power of the badge they would all be fired so they probably never told anyone they were police officers. Once a police officer has any alcohol in their system they lose the power of the badge. It was basically a fight between some guys at a bar and the fact that they were police officers have nothing to do with it. I'm not sure how it all started but they cannot be charged with an assault on a police officer. When I was a law enforcement officer 2 guys in our department tried to push their badge on people in a bar after they had been drinking and they were fired the next day.

 

Hey Offsides thanks for the gouge! It does seem by PA/philly own policy, they couldn't be acting as police officers while imbibing but, notable that the police themselves don't seem to be taking that view.

From FOP president John McNesby: “The bottom line is once you take action, you’re on duty and you’re acting as a police officer,” said McNesby. “Those guys probably should have known that — meaning McCoy and his clan — but I don’t know whether or not that was actually relayed to them or not.”

 

McNesby's claim does not appear to align with the PA internal police policy linked here, which agrees with you pretty much

i thought it was 4 bottle between 3 officers? regardless they were on the prowl for kitty or worse

 

I was making the ASSumption the bottle Porter allegedly grabbed was still full

[Doc]

Hey Offsides thanks for the gouge! It does seem by PA/philly own policy, they couldn't be acting as police officers while imbibing but, notable that the police themselves don't seem to be taking that view.

From FOP president John McNesby: “The bottom line is once you take action, you’re on duty and you’re acting as a police officer,” said McNesby. “Those guys probably should have known that — meaning McCoy and his clan — but I don’t know whether or not that was actually relayed to them or not.”

 

McNesby's claim does not appear to align with the PA internal police policy linked here, which agrees with you pretty much

 

It obviously wasn't relayed to anyone, hence the reason they also got tossed out on their asses.