Jesse Ryder Seriously Injured during attack at Christchurch bar

[_Ed_]

https://twitter.com/DijaRyder/status/318641649423106049 Haha.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Legend!

 

[Teja.]

That's awesome. Fair play.

 

[Jono]

The hashtag was the best part

****ing gun.

 

[Jezroy]

Are we allowed to say that the guys names are xxxxxxx - Edited due to name supression but you can find them on the internet if you want to know.

Uncle and nephew?

Or have their names been suppressed since this morning?

 

[_Ed_]

The articles I've seen don't name them, so I think they probably have been given suppression, yeah.

The defence's case sounds a little far-fetched to me so far...

Defence lawyer Jonathan Eaton told the Christchurch District Court the incident was not a "Jesse Ryder hate crime". He said the pair were having a family dinner and had a "convivial meeting" with Ryder.

He also claimed Ryder did not suffer a fractured skull or a collapsed lung.

Convivial meetings don't often lead to induced comas, Mr Eaton.

 

[Flem274*]

FB stalking aws

 

[BackFootPunch]

Their names are suppressed now. All over the internet already obviously but yeah I imagine James would want the post edited.

 

[Flem274*]

Might have found the guy on FB. Profile points towards him being a ****.

 

[Jezroy]

Might have found the guy on FB. Profile points towards him being a ****.

Think I found him too. Are you looking at the one with the **** pink hat?

 

[Flem274*]

Think I found him too. Are you looking at the one with the **** pink hat?

yep

 

[Jezroy]

yep

Would LOVE to see him one on one with Ryder. Boom.

 

[Flem274*]

Kinda looks like a bogan Justin Bieber.

 

[Bahnz]

The articles I've seen don't name them, so I think they probably have been given suppression, yeah.

The defence's case sounds a little far-fetched to me so far...

Convivial meetings don't often lead to induced comas, Mr Eaton.

I think the argument he's probably making is that the serious concussion was caused by Ryder smacking his head on the pavement, rather than by the accused smashing his head in (hence the lack of intent).

The bit about Ryder's injuries is probably a matter of medical record, so he presumably knows what he's talking about in saying that Ryder didn't suffer a fractured skull or collapsed lung. Will be interesting to see how the case progresses.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

I think the argument he's probably making is that the serious concussion was caused by Ryder smacking his head on the pavement, rather than by the accused smashing his head in (hence the lack of intent).

.

I'm 90% sure that smacking someone in the head and causing them to fall over and smack their head, are identical under law, the intent to harm is still there

 

[Bahnz]

I'm 90% sure that smacking someone in the head and causing them to fall over and smack their head, are identical under law, the intent to harm is still there

I honestly don't know enough about criminal law to say one way or the other, but this is a quote from the stuff article:

The uncle, a 37-year-old builder, faces a charge of injuring Ryder with reckless disregard for Ryder's safety, and a joint charge of assaulting him.

His nephew, 20, a carpet layer, of Christchurch, is charged with assaulting Ryder, as well as the joint charge of assault.

Eaton said the charge of injuring with reckless disregard meant the police were alleging there had been no "intentional infliction of injury".

 

[ohnoitsyou]

I honestly don't know enough about criminal law to say one way or the other, but this is a quote from the stuff article:

What makes it confusing is "no intentional infliction of injury" alongside "assault". Surely "assault" means that there was "intentional infliction of injury", i guess it will all come down to how the lawyers argue it

 

[Bahnz]

What makes it confusing is "no intentional infliction of injury" alongside "assault". Surely "assault" means that there was "intentional infliction of injury", i guess it will all come down to how the lawyers argue it

Assault's a pretty wide offence, and can include just threatening someone.

If he threw a punch, then it's obvious that he intended to injure Ryder to some extent. Perhaps the lawyer is arguing that he didn't intend for Ryder to be injured as badly as he was (e.g. wanted to knock Ryder on his arse but nothing more). That would seem to corresponde with the whole "reckless disregard" bit.

 

[honestbharani]

How big of a crime is negligence in NZ law when it results in such severe injuries?

 

[Hurricane]

I wonder if Jesse remembers?