Martial artist fights off attackers

A few issues with awareness and avoidance, but a good response under pressure. Even muted praise from the police.

Cheers

JKA


http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/5071328/Karate-student-floors-attackers

A young waitress used her karate skills to fight off two attackers as she walked home from a night shift in central Wellington, earning praise from police.

The woman, 18, has studied martial arts for seven years. She elbowed one man in the chest, then punched his accomplice in the stomach.

"We are well and truly impressed. Often we don't encourage people to fight back, because it can make things worse, but she acted with a great degree of bravery and she's done a great job," Detective Sergeant Shane Dye said.

"And she's not a big girl, either."

The woman was walking home past the old Amalgamated Video store in Taranaki St about 6.15 on Saturday morning, when she noticed a man leaning against a car, smoking a cigarette and watching her. Mr Dye said the woman told police the man grabbed her from behind as she passed.

"She's been doing karate for about seven years, so she elbowed him in the chest and stomped on his foot.

"She was then attacked by a second male who she hadn't seen, and he began to pull at her handbag – then she punched him in the stomach."

The woman fell to the ground as she fought off her assailants, and the first man came at her again while she was down.

"She kicked out at him and then managed to get to her feet and run away."

The first attacker was about 1.7 to 1.75 metres tall, about 30 years old, with light skin and "on the tubby side rather than muscular". He was wearing a smoky-green hoodie with a cream-coloured logo, baggy dark-blue jeans, and had close-cropped, slightly balding black hair, with stubble on his face.

The car he was leaning on was an older-style maroon four-door sedan.

The second man was tall and skinny with olive skin, about 35 years old, with long, dark, oily hair down to his shoulders, and a moustache and beard.

He was wearing a black zip-up jacket and jeans, and woollen gloves.

Senior karate instructor Sensei Rajesh Ravji was pleased to hear that the woman had used her skills to escape the attackers.

"When someone is bigger than you, it is always a difficult thing to combat, but that's the beauty of martial arts, you learn how. Those attackers would have been surprised to have someone come back at them like that."

No digs at you JKA, but it annoys me how people think the police here will actively look to prosecute victims who fight back against their attackers. Complete hogwash!

I've attended many incidents where a victim has got one back on an attacker, I've shaken their hand and said "well done mate". One incident a middle aged Samoan guy caught a teenager breaking into his car, he gave the kid a good going over before calling us but I didn't even think about arresting him for assault. The kid started to bitch a bit but I said "what if you caught someone breaking into your car, what would you do?". He seemed to understand then....that's about all they understand!

Some people just think we're all a bunch of idiots!

Hi Mr Nobody,

I certainly wasn't having a go against the police, as I have friends in the job who have done the same as you describe.

I was more passing comment on the almost automatic response from the police in media statements, that the victim should not fight back. In this case the officer used common sense, something that the legal beavers in HQ will no doubt already be wringing their hands over.

Keep up the good work.

Cheers

JKA

Very cool, I shall be sharing this one.

Mr Nobody wrote:No digs at you JKA, but it annoys me how people think the police here will actively look to prosecute victims who fight back against their attackers. Complete hogwash!

I've attended many incidents where a victim has got one back on an attacker, I've shaken their hand and said "well done mate". One incident a middle aged Samoan guy caught a teenager breaking into his car, he gave the kid a good going over before calling us but I didn't even think about arresting him for assault. The kid started to bitch a bit but I said "what if you caught someone breaking into your car, what would you do?". He seemed to understand then....that's about all they understand!

Some people just think we're all a bunch of idiots!

It's the usual thing. People blame the majority for the wrong doings of the minority.

I'm interested that she punched to the gut. I know we did a lot of that in my old karate school but not sure if its still popular in karate these days.

Its possible that was the best target of course but I wouldn't mind knowing what karate style she does and a few more tid bits.


Well done to her.

Ok found the school. She does Okinawan Goju-Ryu


Looks very traditional. Nick might want to see this. Defo think they like belly targets

JKA wrote:Hi Mr Nobody,

I certainly wasn't having a go against the police, as I have friends in the job who have done the same as you describe.

I was more passing comment on the almost automatic response from the police in media statements, that the victim should not fight back. In this case the officer used common sense, something that the legal beavers in HQ will no doubt already be wringing their hands over.

Keep up the good work.

Cheers

JKA

I know you're on our side mate and didn't mean to sound like I was having a go at you.

Some of the media and public are just complete twats though. In saying that, I don't agree with the blanket Police statement of not fighting back against your attacker. This would create more victims who would suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder than do good.

Most of the offenders are cowards and generally pick a victim who they believe they can dominate, if the tables are turned they will run away like a scared puppy. From a victims point of view, it can often be empowering to "win" against an unjustifed attack as well.

Studies have shown (I don't have the links sadly), that rape victims who fought like hell against their attackers and did all that they could to avoid the incident, recover faster mentally than those who give in. I think this is the whole "black dog" thing that Geoff Thompson talks about. The little voice in the back of your head saying "you could have done better than that". I can imagine it would drive people nutty.

I did a presentation for retailers in a mall last year and told them that I would leave it up to them whether they wanted to risk physically stopping a shoplifter. I said I was not their mother and that they deserved to be trusted to use common sense when the situation demands it. I explained reasonableness but said that we definitely wouldn't prosecute those who successfully fought back against an attacker. I explained to them Section 48 of the Crimes Act and they, hopefully came away understanding that they do have the right to defend themselves.

Most case law in NZ regarding those who were prosecuted after defending themselves clearly show the charges being either dismissed or the defendant being acquitted. The guy who ran the gun shop in NZ a few years ago and who shot the guy trying to rob him is a perfect example or the guy in Northland who shot at the guy stealing his quad bike et al.

My opinion is: if you were targetted as a victim and you successfully fought back in a manner that ensured you were able to safely get away and you didn't use excessive force eg, pounding the attackers unconscious body into the pavement repeatedly, then you deserve praise. But every situation is different and should be treated as such.

This is just my generalised view but I have never charged anybody who has successfully defended themselves and hope I never have to.

Thanks for this clarification about Section 48, and it ties in with my lay-persons view of the law. I have often thought that most people wo claimed self defence were simply fighting.

I wonder if this should be moved to Chris's forum on the law for expansion and discussion.

Here is a recent example of someone who probably took things past Section 48, and has been charged as a consequence. It seems similar to the case in the UK where a business owner marched a thief down to the local station with a sign around his neck. We can all understand the thoughts behind this, but the law is pretty clear. It's still before the courts so it will be interesting to see the result.

Cheers

JKA



http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/4981091/Charges-after-theft-suspects-tackled

A North Canterbury businessman is fighting charges of kidnapping and assault after tackling two alleged burglars at his Kaiapoi premises.

Clemence Drilling owner Dave Clemence was arrested after the April 8 incident, during which he and several employees tackled two men believed to have stolen diesel from the Smith St site.

Clemence declined to comment yesterday, saying he did not want to "pervert the course of justice".

However, he told the Northern Outlook newspaper last month he could not understand why he had been charged.

He said he took the men to the Kaiapoi police station on April 8 and did not know how the pair had been injured.

"It's unbelievable. Kidnapping? We dropped them off to the police," Clemence said.

He said he would plead not guilty to the charges when he appeared in the Rangiora District Court on Wednesday next week.

Clemence said several of his workers tackled the men and held them down while he dialled 111. One of the pair broke free, but was chased down.

Two weeks later police asked him to make a statement, he said.

His company premises had been burgled six times in recent months, and his ute had been stolen on March 16, Clemence said.

Detective Sergeant Rex Barnett said the two men told police they had been kidnapped and assaulted by Clemence, the paper reported.

Police considered the injuries to be serious and "consistent with the claims of assault", he said.

The men required treatment at hospital.

Yesterday, Barnett said a kidnapping charge could include "just detaining someone".

However, he said he could not comment further because the case was before the courts.

Two Kaiapoi men, both in their 20s, have appeared in court charged with burglary and possession of instruments for committing burglary. They were bailed.

Yesterday, Clemence said he had received a lot of support since the case became public. No charges have been laid against his staff.

Jagunco wrote:Ok found the school. She does Okinawan Goju-Ryu


Looks very traditional. Nick might want to see this. Defo think they like belly targets

Not sure if this is the style she used, it is just the style of the quoted karate instructor.

It is likely that the journalist called the first karate instructor they could find, and asked them for a quote. The police would be unlikely to know the style of karate she studied, and the victim (if that's the right word!!!) would not be identified by the police, unless she wanted to be. This means that she couldn't be interviewed for the story and her perspective wouldn't come out.

Several years ago we did a story on a young, small, very attractive Swedish woman who was attacked by two men. She crippled one by destroying his knee joint with a stomping kick, and knocked the other one out by giving him a tarmac facial. Put a warm glow in my heart it did.

Cheers

JKA

JKA wrote:Thanks for this clarification about Section 48, and it ties in with my lay-persons view of the law. I have often thought that most people wo claimed self defence were simply fighting.

I wonder if this should be moved to Chris's forum on the law for expansion and discussion.

Here is a recent example of someone who probably took things past Section 48, and has been charged as a consequence. It seems similar to the case in the UK where a business owner marched a thief down to the local station with a sign around his neck. We can all understand the thoughts behind this, but the law is pretty clear. It's still before the courts so it will be interesting to see the result.

Cheers

JKA



http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/4981091/Charges-after-theft-suspects-tackled

A North Canterbury businessman is fighting charges of kidnapping and assault after tackling two alleged burglars at his Kaiapoi premises.

Clemence Drilling owner Dave Clemence was arrested after the April 8 incident, during which he and several employees tackled two men believed to have stolen diesel from the Smith St site.

Clemence declined to comment yesterday, saying he did not want to "pervert the course of justice".

However, he told the Northern Outlook newspaper last month he could not understand why he had been charged.

He said he took the men to the Kaiapoi police station on April 8 and did not know how the pair had been injured.

"It's unbelievable. Kidnapping? We dropped them off to the police," Clemence said.

He said he would plead not guilty to the charges when he appeared in the Rangiora District Court on Wednesday next week.

Clemence said several of his workers tackled the men and held them down while he dialled 111. One of the pair broke free, but was chased down.

Two weeks later police asked him to make a statement, he said.

His company premises had been burgled six times in recent months, and his ute had been stolen on March 16, Clemence said.

Detective Sergeant Rex Barnett said the two men told police they had been kidnapped and assaulted by Clemence, the paper reported.

Police considered the injuries to be serious and "consistent with the claims of assault", he said.

The men required treatment at hospital.

Yesterday, Barnett said a kidnapping charge could include "just detaining someone".

However, he said he could not comment further because the case was before the courts.

Two Kaiapoi men, both in their 20s, have appeared in court charged with burglary and possession of instruments for committing burglary. They were bailed.

Yesterday, Clemence said he had received a lot of support since the case became public. No charges have been laid against his staff.

I don't understand this story mate. There must be more to it than we're being told. You're allowed to use force if someone takes your property, usually this involves just snatching it back rather than beating someone into submission. This is covered under Section 53 of the Crimes Act and if the person starts to fight you, then you can use Section 48 as justification to defend yourself.

As for kidnapping? This is beyond me. I would have thought a citizens arrest would be more likely. I think there is probably more to this than we initially see on the surface. It's debatable whether it's a good thing or a bad thing but the NZ Bill of Rights Act does say that we have the right not to be unlawfully detained. Maybe this is the path the Police are following?

As for Section 48.....this is why we need independent witnesses to confirm whether someone was attacked or whether 2 people both decided to participate in a street fight.

Most of the time, expecially and primarily with young males, an incident may start out as one person provoking another but then that person lets his ego get in the way and agrees to slug it out with the antagonist. Then it becomes a fight.

I would hazard a guess and say that about 90% of street fights are due to ego.

This is Section 48 as it's worded:

Self-defence and defence of another
Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he believes them to be, it is reasonable to use.

Section 48: substituted, on 1 January 1981, by section 2(1) of the Crimes Amendment Act 1980 (1980 No 63).

And Section 53:

Defence of movable property with claim of right
(1) Every one in peaceable possession of any movable thing under a claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected from criminal responsibility for defending his possession by the use of reasonable force, even against a person entitled by law to possession, if he does not strike or do bodily harm to the other person.

(2) [Repealed]

Compare: 1908 No 32 s 78

Section 53(2): repealed, on 1 January 1981, by section 2(2) of the Crimes Amendment Act 1980 (1980 No 63).

More examples of that traditional training not working when it's needed.

Re the body shot...it's a staple of most traditional styles but I personally don't spend a whole lot of time on it unless it's pre-emptive and I'm trying not to mark someone up. She may have done it out of reflex, maybe because both his hands were up in front of his face as he attempted to wrest her purse from her, or maybe not at all. (have seen many inaccuracies in stories reported in the press)

Regardless, it worked when she needed it to and she survived the encounter...good job.

Nick

She must of had a good dig on her to drop someone with a body shot though. I consider myself a good puncher and I don't know if I could do that.

Yeah Nick that's exactly what I was thinking as well we old karate men have to stick together. I was looking at the style that I thought she trained in and it seemed effective with meaty punches and good drills. I would love to look at the footage of this 'mugging'

This story must be false because she doesn't do BJJ and that is the only form of self defence that actually works.

clearly you are out of touch...the only people who can fight are trained by S. Morris, or do MMA

Jagunco wrote:I'm interested that she punched to the gut. I know we did a lot of that in my old karate school but not sure if its still popular in karate these days.

That is like saying that white is not popular for painting houses. Karate varies so much from class to class.

Nick,

You're right. MMA has only been around for about 20 years or so if that. Before MMA nobody could fight at all. MMA has been the revolution.