this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
376 points (98.7% liked)

Not The Onion

12767 readers
1238 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 143 points 10 months ago (2 children)

"His defense attorney, Matt Fregi, said he harbored “no ill will toward” his client, who had already cycled through several attorneys before him. “Nothing serious,” he said of his injuries. “Everyone thought it was a lot more serious than what it was.”"

That's a cool lawyer

[–] aditya3w3733@lemmy.world 42 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] Duranie@literature.cafe 18 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The radar technician? Dude, Matt straight up sucks.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago

Matt's more of a sonar kind of guy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NounsAndWords@lemmy.world 86 points 10 months ago (1 children)

according to a source at the scene, Randle jammed the pen into Fregi’s head and again near his jaw.

Well shit. I was imagining, like, the shoulder, or something.

[–] JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

I had to go back and re-read the title, i thought it said he 'slipped and stabbed lawyer' and i was like 'how the fuck did it happen twice?'.

[–] sir_pronoun@lemmy.world 49 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I want that same lawyer so bad I'm willing to commit a crime for that

[–] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 7 points 10 months ago

He's got top class courtroom etiquette and empathy.

[–] tobogganablaze@lemmus.org 41 points 10 months ago (15 children)

assault with a deadly weapon

If a pen qualifies as a deadly weapon, what doesn't? Assault with bare hands?

[–] JohnnyCanuck@lemmy.ca 45 points 10 months ago

I guess that whole "it's mightier than the sword" thing is coming back to bite.

[–] DoctorSpocktopus@lemmy.ca 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Randle jammed the pen into Fregi’s head and again near his jaw

I suppose it’s to do with how deadly it could have been? Not sure why it isn’t attempted murder, but I am not a lawyer.

[–] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

I suppose because it's harder to prove murder. Since he failed, they'd have to prove motive, and he could argue he only wanted to harm the lawyer.

But assault is about facts, no feelings.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 18 points 10 months ago

Depends on the hands. A professional fighter can be charged with AWALW using their hands, or feet if that's part of their martial arts training, although their body parts can't legally be registered as such.

This guy clearly intended that pen to be lethal and likely had the strength for it, but was fortunately restrained.

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

You haven't been to prison I take it. Pens can definitely be a deadly weapon.

[–] TriPolarBearz@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

pen

John Wick glares menacingly

[–] Breezy@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Dude broke through restraints, clearly a pen is a deadly weapon in his hands.

[–] tobogganablaze@lemmus.org 4 points 10 months ago (5 children)

I guess. But you can also smother someone with a fluffy pillow. So that's a deadly weapon, too? Like where is the line between "deadly weapon" and "any random object".

[–] quindraco@lemm.ee 11 points 10 months ago

There is no such line. The pillow counts as a weapon and all weapons count as deadly.

[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

I think it might just be a line of how they used the random object could have reasonably resulted in death. So if you smack someone in the face with a fluffy pillow, it's not a deadly weapon. If you try to smother them with it, it is.

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'll be honest, if I roll 99 on a crit roll with a pillow I damn well expect an instant kill.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Why are you using a d100 for attack rolls?

[–] Hazmatastic@lemm.ee 7 points 10 months ago

It's a homebrew weapon from their last campaign in Pathfinder that they ported over, but the stats are legit and it's balanced trust them

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Seems quite simple to me. Things like guns, swords, daggers and the like are designed to be weapons. So they're generally going to be assumed to be a weapon any time they're used/brandished.

But literally anything can be used as a weapon. So, in normal use they're not a weapon but if used as a weapon, they become one in that instance.

[–] tobogganablaze@lemmus.org 5 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Yeah, but then the term "deadly weapon" is kind of meaningless as it basically just means "assualt with a thing".

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

I think on a legal level it means it was an object that was being wielded as a weapon, and from the attack in the specific instance it was meant to kill and the object was capable of achieving that. Hence a deadly weapon.

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 5 points 10 months ago

Yeah, I'd agree there. It should be whatever the US equivalent of aggravated assault is. But the charges you could levy bearing in mind he aimed for the head could go as far as attempted murder I guess.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

That's the thing.
Literally anything is a weapon. Banning weapons will only go so far, it'll definitely make it a lot harder for most mass killings to occur but if someone is determined enough they will make it happen.

Eventually we won't have a choice but to address the underlying mental health issues plaguing at least half the population.

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

True, although many countries in the world disagree with the US that banning firearms wouldn't make a huge difference. By virtue of, well, them having done so and it having made a huge difference.

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

I'm not saying don't ban firearms, I'm saying don't ignore the underlying problems too. The rest of the world doesn't have easy access to firearms but they also have much better access to mental health services.

[–] BugleFingers@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

That's the other thing too, even objects not typically considered weapons can be made so, some more brual for mass killing/destruction than guns. Propane tanks, pressure cookers, even bleach and ammonia, even liquor has been used (quite effectively) historically.

None of it is right, but when you start considering banning cooking supplies (pressure cookers I believe around Boston marathon bomber time) you are right, we do have to address the underlying issues

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Pretty much anything can be a deadly weapon in the right (or is it wrong) hands.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 4 points 10 months ago

"Assault with a deadly weapon or instrument other than a firearm" (CPC 245(a)(1)) can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the exact circumstances.

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

I feel like it's context-dependent, though. It's hard to argue that a pen in your head/jaw/neck does not have the potential to kill you.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 10 months ago

The intent makes it so.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] solrize@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The guy is bonkers and needs medical intervention before he is fit for trial.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 16 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You're absolutely right and it's nice to see correct medical nomenclature here on Lemmy. Unlike some places where someone would say he's wacko and belongs in the crazy hospital.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Where does "looney bin" fall on this scale?

[–] DontTreadOnBigfoot@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

"Looney bin" is for the zany crazies and sits above the crazy hospital in the hierarchy.

At the bottom is the "nuthouse", which is reserved for the sickos.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›