Feminist idiot assaults man on camera at domestic violence discussion

harrietharmman

Watch this video of feminist Lisalyn Jacobs assaulting a campaigner for men's rights at a Violence against Women hearing of all places!:eek: She's a National Organisation of Women attorney, a domestic violence "expert", and former Chief Counsel for the Office of Violence Against Women. See how she even admits to assault during the video see how all her "anti-violence" feminists colleagues refuse to even identify her, therefore stopping the victim from getting justice.

Action starts after 17 seconds:

Here's a longer video documenting the guy's 3 month quest for justice:

This all occurred in the US Senate building, a public place, so he clearly has the right to film. What do people think about hypocrites like this, I don't see how someone acting like that can seriously go around campaigning against violence , surely a man in the same position would have lost his job?

Scofflaw

Probably belongs in US Politics. Seriously, though, this is a nausea-inducing attempt to stretch the definition of "assault" - so much so that I find it hard to believe that anyone could possibly think this stands in any sense to the credit of "Daddy Justice".

This is pathetic and bathetic in equal measures. Will wait to see the first few responses, but the likelihood is that this thread will be closed under the weight of its own sheer sadness.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Amerika

Not politics in my opinion. Rather a sad commentary on our judicial system that this could be considered an assault.

Unfortunately here how the system sometimes works. You bring a civil charge of assault and wait to see who the judge assigned is. See how the judge has ruled in similar circumstances. If you get a judge that might by sympathetic to your case, then see if the judge is up for reelection or in need of election funds for future purposes. Get yourself a high priced connected lawyer who is good at funneling political donations to argue your case. The opposing party must then decide if they wish to fight the charges on merit, which would be risky, or they get themselves another well connected high priced lawyer who also is good at funneling donations. The greater the donations to the judges reelection coffers often wins.*

(*This opinion comes from someone with experience in the civil court system)

Mjollnir

I'm sorry, but as someone who deals frequently w/assault, on a criminal basis, file this under "Don't waste the court's time. Oh, and grow the hell up"

harrietharmman

I'm guessing the actual strike occurs just off camera, that's what it looks like to me. And the reason this is important is because of the sheer hypocrisy, you can't claim to be against violence and then go around attacking innocent people for no reason at the drop of a hat.

Scofflaw

harrietharmman wrote: »

I'm guessing the actual strike occurs just off camera, that's what it looks like to me. And the reason this is important is because of the sheer hypocrisy, you can't claim to be against violence and then go around attacking innocent people for no reason at the drop of a hat.

The only reason the video and claim has political relevance is that it's a very good illustration of how far from reality people get in the services of causes. Someone who has been assaulted in any meaningful sense doesn't keep filming right through the supposed assault (without even so much as a gasp) and then immediately chase their "assaulter" around afterwards saying "hey young lady that was assault!" - the only way that happens is if you interpret any uninvited physical contact however undamaging to you as "assault" in order to play the victim.

As for your "guess", all I can say is that it's another fine example of the first point - you don't see this as some pr*ck with a camera getting right up in a private individual's face with a camera and then whining about "assault" when the person whose face he's in tries to stop him doing so. And you can't see why that's what everyone else is seeing.

Genuinely nausea-inducing, and what political points can be made out of this pathetic episode have been made.

regards,
Scofflaw