I'd guess it would be assault. Maybe if they could prove they knew is was a prosthetic then with a good lawyer and the right jury you could get away with destruction of property, but I doubt it.
That actually is a good question... I'd say its assault and destruction of property.
2
0 Reply
Anonymous
(30-35)
+1 y
did this make anyone else think of the one-legged prostitute that Jack had drawn in his sketchbook in the Titanic movie? :D Maybe I'm just cool like that. But yeah. if it's attached to the person at the time of the attack, it would be considered an attack on that person and bodily harm and all that. It's only destruction of property, if the limb is unattached.
Legally it depends on if they are wearing it at the time. If so it is both. If not then it is simply damage to property. However, why would someone do something so stupid and heartless?
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
67Opinion
Depending if you knew that the leg was a prosthetic would change the intent I imagine.
I'd guess it would be assault. Maybe if they could prove they knew is was a prosthetic then with a good lawyer and the right jury you could get away with destruction of property, but I doubt it.
i would think destruction of property but i think they would be considered violent or aggressive
Bahahahah!!! I laughed out loud, thanks for making my day :)
HOLY HELL AN ACTUAL INTERESTING GODDAMN QUESTION!
I would assault or attempted assault
*I would think
if you fuck a hooker against her will, is it rape or theft?
Rape
@Tstrbrainer xD i was just trying to be funny there. i know my humor is on the dark side :D
Odd question but a good one... I'd say bodily harm because it is a body part just not a flesh and blood part...
That actually is a good question... I'd say its assault and destruction of property.
did this make anyone else think of the one-legged prostitute that Jack had drawn in his sketchbook in the Titanic movie? :D Maybe I'm just cool like that. But yeah. if it's attached to the person at the time of the attack, it would be considered an attack on that person and bodily harm and all that. It's only destruction of property, if the limb is unattached.
Legally it depends on if they are wearing it at the time. If so it is both. If not then it is simply damage to property. However, why would someone do something so stupid and heartless?
Assault with a deadly weapon and grand theft if the damage to the prosthesis is costly enough to repair.
Probably both. Since a knife was involved they could assume intent and so assault with a deadly weapon
Depends on context. Was it a fight and you swung multiple times with a knife? Yes. Was it an accident? Prob just destruction of property.
Hmm technically it's being used as a body part so I don't know
It's both, I mean neither. Wait, what's the question again?
It probably depends on if you knew it was a fake leg or not
What you are charged with is not necessarily what you will be convicted of.
I would think it’s a destruction of property. It wouldn’t harm the person.
More than likely attempted murder that you could probably get lowered to assault with a deadly weapon if you have a good lawyer
Attempted assault, destruction of property, or maybe attempted murder.
Two charges my guys
Orrr two profiles...