 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Siddiq6/27/2005
9 (1992). This is the principle that guided the trial court's ruling in the present case.
The aggressor instruction is inappropriate when the only incident that could be seen as a provocation is the defendant's own claimed act of self-defense. State v. Wasson, 54 Wn. App. 156, 159, 772 P.2d 1039 (1989); accord State v. Brower, 43 Wn. App. 893, 902, 721 P.2d 12 (1986). Siddiq, citing Brower, notes that the instruction is not warranted where the State's evidence merely shows that the defendant appeared on the scene and assaulted someone. He characterizes the State's evidence as showing only that 'Mr. Siddiq wanted to leave the scene after he found his shoes but eventually was drawn into an altercation with the decedent.'
The trial court's view of the evidence as conflicting is more true to the record than Siddiq's assertion that Jimicum clearly started the fight. The scene was chaotic and dark. Many of the witnesses were inebriated at the time, or were unable to see every moment of the fight. At more than one point the combatants were separated by others who were present, only to return and renew their blows. Andre Barker said the first contact he saw between Jimicum and Siddiq was Jimicum hitting Siddiq. Misty Smith said the first physical contact she observed was Siddiq hitting Jimicum.
Sonja Gogo testified that after the fight had been broken up several times, both Jimicum and Siddiq resumed when either could have called it quits and walked away:
{Prosecutor:} Now, when you stepped in to break up the fight, had there been any punches thrown?
{Witness:} Yeah. First time it was such a big scuffle and they would go at it and we'd try to get in between them and then they'd go at it again. There was punches thrown, and then we'd try to break it up, spread it apart again, and they just kept going at it.
{Prosecutor:} How many times, Sonja, would you estimate at this juncture that George and Abdul were separated and then went back at the fight?
{Witness:} At least four times. Four or five times, at least.
{Prosecutor:} These four or five times that George and Abdul were separated and went back at each other, did it appear to you that this was a mutual fight between the two of them or was one of them was chasing the other?
{Witness:} Oh, yeah, it was mutual. I was trying to tell Abdul to just leave. Just go. Just quit. George was pretty upset. It was his property. He just wanted everybody out, and he just - he didn't want to leave.
{Prosecutor:} What was Abdul's response to you when he said to leave?
{Witness}: He was so angry he probably wasn't even like listening to me. His focus I think was on George.
{Prosecutor:} When you say
{Witness:} He just - you know, not listening. He didn't want to.
{Prosecutor:} Did you say that it appeared that Abdul was angry to you?
{Witness:} Yes.
{Prosecutor:} What about what you saw Abdul say or do make you think that? {Witness}: Just because he's still looking at George trying to push through us to get to him, and instead of - I was trying to push him, showing him to run up that hill, and he didn't want to leave.
On redirect, Gogo said it appeared to her that as between the two of them, it was Siddiq who kept the fight going.
'Each side is entitled to have the jury instructed on its theory of the case if there is evidence to support that theory.' State v. Williams, 132 Wn.2d 248, 259, 937 P.2d 1052 (1997). Unlike Brower, where there was no evidence of the defendant acting violently until he pulled out the gun and made the threat for whi
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|