Everyone should be treated with respect — unless you’re a Republican

[mystery-ak]

Everyone should be treated with respect — unless you’re a Republican

By Karol Markowicz

December 22, 2016 | 6:37pm |

’Tis the season to spread joy and cheer — unless you’re a liberal still bitter about the election.

Thursday, Ivanka Trump and her family were accosted by Dan Goldstein, a lawyer from Brooklyn, who yelled at her that her father, who has yet to take office, was “ruining the country.” It wasn’t a spontaneous outburst. Goldstein’s husband had tweeted from the JetBlue terminal at JFK Airport that Goldstein was “chasing” Ivanka and her family to “harass” them.

“Why is she on our flight? She should be flying private,” Goldstein reportedly shouted when he saw them on the plane and allegedly engaged with her children as well. Goldstein and his husband were removed from the plane, with Goldstein complaining that he was merely “expressing his opinion.”

more
http://nypost.com/2016/12/22/everyone-should-be-treated-with-respect-unless-youre-a-republican/

[Doug Loss]

Everyone should be treated with respect — unless you’re a Republican

By Karol Markowicz

December 22, 2016 | 6:37pm |

’Tis the season to spread joy and cheer — unless you’re a liberal still bitter about the election.

Thursday, Ivanka Trump and her family were accosted by Dan Goldstein, a lawyer from Brooklyn, who yelled at her that her father, who has yet to take office, was “ruining the country.” It wasn’t a spontaneous outburst. Goldstein’s husband had tweeted from the JetBlue terminal at JFK Airport that Goldstein was “chasing” Ivanka and her family to “harass” them.

“Why is she on our flight? She should be flying private,” Goldstein reportedly shouted when he saw them on the plane and allegedly engaged with her children as well. Goldstein and his husband were removed from the plane, with Goldstein complaining that he was merely “expressing his opinion.”

more
http://nypost.com/2016/12/22/everyone-should-be-treated-with-respect-unless-youre-a-republican/

He should be prosecuted for assault.

[EasyAce]

He should be prosecuted for assault.

On what grounds? Chasing a couple of people down just to harangue them is merely a display of
ill manners, not assault. You could sooner cite the, ahem, couple for harassment than for assault,
if you want to take it there, but any assault charge levied in an instance like this would be thrown
out of court with a belly laugh.

Manners, Even in the Age of Trump

[Doug Loss]

On what grounds? Chasing a couple of people down just to harangue them is merely a display of
ill manners, not assault. You could sooner cite the, ahem, couple for harassment than for assault,
if you want to take it there, but any assault charge levied in an instance like this would be thrown
out of court with a belly laugh.

Manners, Even in the Age of Trump

"At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm."  You'll notice that no actual contact is required for assault.  Depending on just how assertive he was, a case for assault could certainly be made.

[EasyAce]

"At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm."  You'll notice that no actual contact is required for assault.

It seems that all the miscreants did was seek out their targets just to harangue them, with no known intent at
bodily harm.

Depending on just how assertive he was, a case for assault could certainly be made.

I don't think that's quite true under New York law. Elsewhere it might be different.

Still, if nothing else no matter what one does or doesn't think of Donaldus Minimus and what Kevin D. Williamson
calls his cast-of-American-Psycho-extras family, the "couple" seeking them out to harangue them are guilty
of the same kind of crass behaviour as they'd surely accuse the Trumps of being. That, alas, is an issue of manners
or the lack thereof, not law.

[Doug Loss]

It seems that all the miscreants did was seek out their targets just to harangue them, with no known intent at
bodily harm.

I don't think that's quite true under New York law. Elsewhere it might be different.

Still, if nothing else no matter what one does or doesn't think of Donaldus Minimus and what Kevin D. Williamson
calls his cast-of-American-Psycho-extras family, the "couple" seeking them out to harangue them are guilty
of the same kind of crass behaviour as they'd surely accuse the Trumps of being. That, alas, is an issue of manners
or the lack thereof, not law.

"that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact."  Whether the miscreants intended it or not isn't the deciding factor.

[EasyAce]

"that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact."  Whether the miscreants intended it or not isn't the deciding factor.

If these two idiots had approached their targets hollering actual threats that would be different.
Merely hollering their father is wrecking or could wreck the country isn't the same thing. It's rude,
it's likely unsettling or startling if it comes somewhat out of nowhere, and it's nothing else if not boorish
and immature . . . but it isn't even close to a signal of imminent harm or offensive contact.

Now, you don't really want to argue that family members of an incoming president should be given
the same kind of protection all the little campus snowflakes demanding their politically correct safe spaces
get, do you? (Rest assured, Obama's kids and the kids of other office holders probably heard very similar
things from some people, and if so I'm pretty sure nobody thought anything other than those people were
exposing themselves as jerks but not exactly levying any kind of imminent harm or offensive contact against
them.)

[Doug Loss]

If these two idiots had approached their targets hollering actual threats that would be different.
Merely hollering their father is wrecking or could wreck the country isn't the same thing. It's rude,
it's likely unsettling or startling if it comes somewhat out of nowhere, and it's nothing else if not boorish
and immature . . . but it isn't even close to a signal of imminent harm or offensive contact.

Now, you don't really want to argue that family members of an incoming president should be given
the same kind of protection all the little campus snowflakes demanding their politically correct safe spaces
get, do you? (Rest assured, Obama's kids and the kids of other office holders probably heard very similar
things from some people, and if so I'm pretty sure nobody thought anything other than those people were
exposing themselves as jerks but not exactly levying any kind of imminent harm or offensive contact against
them.)

I'm explaining the legal meaning of the term "assault" and how this could arguably fit that meaning.  And contact isn't necessary for assault, as I've explained.  Only the reasonable perception that offensive contact is possible.

[goatprairie]

If these two idiots had approached their targets hollering actual threats that would be different.
Merely hollering their father is wrecking or could wreck the country isn't the same thing. It's rude,
it's likely unsettling or startling if it comes somewhat out of nowhere, and it's nothing else if not boorish
and immature . . . but it isn't even close to a signal of imminent harm or offensive contact.

Now, you don't really want to argue that family members of an incoming president should be given
the same kind of protection all the little campus snowflakes demanding their politically correct safe spaces
get, do you? (Rest assured, Obama's kids and the kids of other office holders probably heard very similar
things from some people, and if so I'm pretty sure nobody thought anything other than those people were
exposing themselves as jerks but not exactly levying any kind of imminent harm or offensive contact against
them.)

Doesn't matter if they intended to physically harm Ivanka or not....they were harassing her. Airlines are not considered public places and do not tolerate passengers harassing other passengers no matter who they are. These two jerks should be permanently banned from flying that airline.

[EasyAce]

Doesn't matter if they intended to physically harm Ivanka or not....they were harassing her. Airlines are not considered public places and do not tolerate passengers harassing other passengers no matter who they are. These two jerks should be permanently banned from flying that airline.

That's different, and well within the airline's purview. (I did allude to harassment in an earlier comment.)
I'm familiar with JetBlue and would not be shocked to learn they did just as you suggested.