There is a huge difference between the two. The article states snowball, but it’s not impossible it was actually ice chunks, which would constitute assault. Ice is basically a rock.
And any good lawyer will point out that when you are entering area that is clearly understood of the actions happening within (in this case, the snowball fight was publicly announced, this wasn’ta sudden “cops here, lets just start it now”), you are accepting of the assumed risks. In the case of a snowball fight, it is safe to assume that ice can sometimes get inside of a snowball, so they assumed the risk of this happening when they entered the publicly announced snowball fight.
Now, if there were rocks or other non-snow related objects, then you could make the argument you are trying here, but its not what happened.
Devil’s advocate:
Was it snowballs, or was it ice chunks?
There is a huge difference between the two. The article states snowball, but it’s not impossible it was actually ice chunks, which would constitute assault. Ice is basically a rock.
Again, devil’s advocate here!
There’s video of it. Clearly it’s snowballs.
And any good lawyer will point out that when you are entering area that is clearly understood of the actions happening within (in this case, the snowball fight was publicly announced, this wasn’ta sudden “cops here, lets just start it now”), you are accepting of the assumed risks. In the case of a snowball fight, it is safe to assume that ice can sometimes get inside of a snowball, so they assumed the risk of this happening when they entered the publicly announced snowball fight.
Now, if there were rocks or other non-snow related objects, then you could make the argument you are trying here, but its not what happened.
Oh yes absolutely, the cops are still morons regardless.
There is a difference between an icy snowball and a chunk of ice, though IANAL.
But everything states that it was snowballs that were thrown, not chunks of ice. Even the Sargent has said it was snowballs.