Full Video~Purple Heart Veteran ~ Dishonorable Charges~Quitman Texas Police Department
NEED your comments people, good or bad!! Hit the like or dislike!!
Both help the Youtube algorithms and helps our channel move up the listings and easier for more people to find.
✅ Subscribe, Share & Smash the 🔔
Feel Free to SHARE this Video Wherever You Like!
Leave a Comment!!
Please Like or Dislike this Video and comment Good or Bad.
We Support your Rights to Free Expression!
+++SHARE & MIRROR+++
Need subscribers to go Live, Please like and Subscribe! Thanks!!
Doug Murphy Law Firm, P.C.
DEFENSE OF NECESSITY
Texas law allows you to present the argument that committing a crime was necessary to protect yourself from harm. Necessity, which is defined in Texas Penal Code Sec. 9.22, can justify otherwise-illegal behavior if:
You reasonably believe your actions are immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm; and
The harm caused by your actions does not outweigh the harm you seek to avoid.
The Law Office of Matthew D. Sharp
1221 Studewood St Ste 110
Houston, TX 77008
Contact Us (281) 324-8901
Necessity Defense in a Public Urination Charge
In a necessity defense, it may be argued that the criminality involved in public urination is misplaced. The defense might argue that no harm occurred and that the act had no impact on society.
For instance, a homeless individual might have a necessity defense when charged with public urination. It may be possible to demonstrate to the court that no public bathrooms were available when he or she needed to urinate. Alternatively, he or she may have a medical condition that causes them to suffer from urinary frequency.
However, if a person has to pee so badly that his bladder is about to burst, must he also pee his pants in public? Or, if a person has a really bad case of diarrhea and just cannot get to a bathroom, must he really be forced to poop his pants in public? So, the question is asked: at what point do we say, “Hey, sometimes when nature calls, you just gotta answer the phone!”? This is sometimes called the defense of private necessity. In other words, “Hey, I didn’t want to do what I did, but I really had no other choice! In essence, I was forced to do what I did.”
One New York appellate court unanimously reversed such a conviction on the ground that “there was a reasonable doubt whether defendant’s conduct resulted from a momentary and unanticipatable lack of physical control. People v. Carter (N.Y. App. Div. 1961).
Another New York Court said this: “The court emphasizes that a defendant cannot ordinarily be found guilty of disorderly conduct merely upon proof that he urinated in a public place. A persuasive defense of urgency, necessity or incontinence, at least when coupled with the unavailability of nearby restroom facilities and with reasonable efforts by the defendant to conceal his act, would negative some or all of the elements required for conviction.” People v Cooke, Rockland County. October 18, 1991
Lone Star Contributors
Michael Neighbors-Editor-Investigative reporter
B.G. Johnson- Assistant Editor
Christina Thomason -Field correspondent, reporter
Clyde Johnson-Field correspondent
Joe Smith-Field correspondent
And a few other trusted citizens, who for the moment, remain anonymous.
2019-2022 Lone Star News
Bare in mind that the facts presented in my videos are not indicative of my personal opinion, and I do not always agree with the outcome, people, or judgements of any interaction. My videos should not be construed as legal advice, they are merely a presentation of facts as I understand them.
#Lone Star News #First Amendment #TheConstitution#journalism#journalist#newsreader#thisismedia #media#whatthemediawillnotshowyou #whatthemediawontshow#medias#mediaperson #mediaproduction#press#reporters#newschannel #news #biased #news #follow #like #media #breakingnews #youtube#youtuber#subscribe