This must be hell of a come down after the adrenaline rush of the fight.

It is unfortunate that the charged player is not an American citizen; however, there is clear video evidence and he should be held accountable. I just wish others like Ramirez would be held accountable, too.

the relevant portions of OH code:
"§ 2903.11. Felonious assault.

(A) No person shall knowingly do either of the following:

(1) Cause serious physical harm to another or to another's unborn;

(2) Cause or attempt to cause physical harm to another or to another's unborn by means of a deadly weapon or dangerous ordnance.

[...]

(D) Whoever violates this section is guilty of felonious assault, a felony of the second degree. If the victim of a violation of division (A) of this section is a peace officer, felonious assault is a felony of the first degree. If the victim of the offense is a peace officer, as defined in section 2935.01 of the Revised Code, and if the victim suffered serious physical harm as a result of the commission of the offense, felonious assault is a felony of the first degree, and the court, pursuant to division (F) of section 2929.13 of the Revised Code, shall impose as a mandatory prison term one of the prison terms prescribed for a felony of the first degree.

(E) As used in this section:

(1) "Deadly weapon" and "dangerous ordnance" have the same meanings as in section 2923.11 of the Revised Code."

there is no way in hell the pitcher meets the intent requirement given that he had zero intention of braining someone in the stands. if it included "knowingly or recklessly" instead of knowingly they'd likely have him. if it included "knowingly, recklessly, or negligently" they'd certainly have him. but the simple fact is this kids mens rea does not rise to the level of felonious assault. further, if I'm his lawyer I'd be checking into caselaw on thrown baseballs used as a deadly weapon, because they simply aren't. now, plain assault i think they could get him for (that has a lessened intent requirement)- and it still carries up to a year of jail time.

of course, considering how biased towards the prosecution our criminal justice system is, the kid is totally ###### regardless of how good his case is on the legal merits.

Did Dibble face felony charges when he did it? If I recall, his was intentional (i.e. as it relates to the fan; this guy was trying to hurt a player).

if I'm his lawyer I'd be checking into caselaw on thrown baseballs used as a deadly weapon, because they simply aren't.

\

Wasn't the person hit injured? That would come in under A.1, I would think.

Yeah, the possibility of a felony conviction hurts him worse with regard to his immigration status than anything else. He's jolly well ###### unless he gets this pled down to a misdemeanor.

It's been years since I practiced immigration law in any way, shape or form, but even pre-9/11, an immigrant could be excluded/deported for having committed an "aggravated felony" as defined by Federal law--even though, in some cases, that offense was classified as a misdemeanor under state law (for instance, crimes involving violence were often treated as "aggravated felonies" in the immigration context even if state law labeled it a misdemeanor). So he may be jolly well ###### anyway.

Not only is it not felonious assault, but the ticket, no doubt, warned the spectator he may get hit with a ball. At first he was knocked out and then he had a broken cheekbone, now this only says he was hit in the forehead.

The kid made a huge mistake, and should probably be cut from the team or suspended and fined. But up to eight years in jail is wrong. If you watch the youtube, most of the fans were enjoying the entertainment value of the fight.

"the ticket, no doubt, warned the spectator he may get hit with a ball."

The warning is related to normal baseball activity, at which point the fan is on notice to be aware. That phrase certainly doesn't mean that an usher can casually walk up to a fan and throw a ball at the fan while the fan isn't looking.

8 years in jail is wrong; a suspension or fine is a bit light, IMHO. Should we look at the offender's walk rate to see whether his hitting the fan was intentional or not? Is he prone to throwing the ball up in the strike zone?

Wasn't the person hit injured?

just because you go to a hospital does not mean you were physically harmed. The woman who got hit by Randall Simon's bat in Milwaukee got medical attention too.

Fortunately, they can try to claim that a baseball is not a deadly weapon since nobody in the majors has been killed by a pitch in 87+ years.

From what I understand, even if Castillo is not convicted of a crime, this incident will probably lead to the revocation of his visa, bringing his US baseball career to an end. Unless the man who was struck by the ball was seriously injured, I would think that would be punishment enough.

I will also note that responding to the reality of you hitting a fan with a baseball by noting that you were throwing at someone else is probably not a good thing to tell the police.

I would think that would be punishment enough.


Maybe if they forced him to watch "Alexander", "Pearl Harbor" and a Madonna movie as additional punishment.

"Wasn't the person hit injured? That would come in under A.1, I would think."

it says serious injury, and i'm sure serious injury either has a definition elsewhere in the code or one accepted by the top court in Ohio.

actually, the more i think about it, intent might still be satisfied if he intended to hit a particular other player and just missed instead of getting pissed off and throwing a ball into the dugout not caring where it went. still, i'd make the reckless instead of knowing argument.

actually, the more i think about it, intent might still be satisfied if he intended to hit a particular other player and just missed

And then we must ask, what is the relevant difference between this and a pitcher throwing at a batter in the batter's box? Or how about the Ben Christensen incident?

He should have asked himself what would Jesus do. Now look at the trouble he's in.

Castillo should be out of baseball not for hitting a fan, but throwing a baseball in a fight. You can't ruin a good brawl like that with out-of-bounds behavior.

"He should have asked himself what would Jesus do."

He chose crucifixion, didn't he?

He chose crucifixion, didn't he?

Why I should die
Would I be more noticed
Than I ever was before?
Would the things I've said and done
Matter any more?

This idea that he's not chargeable with felonious assault merely because he wasn't intending to harm the guy he harmed seems just silly. I understand it as a general rule, but the fact is he sure as hell was intending to harm somebody, and somebody got harmed because of it.

I mean, really, if somebody pulls a gun and shoots at you, but hits the guy standing next to you, what is that? "Attempted murder and manslaughter"? Or is it "murder"?

To be clear, I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not saying that the people who are arguing this are necessarily legally wrong. I'm just saying it's stupid, regardless of whether it's legally correct or not.

He chose crucifixion, didn't he?

"Crucifixion?"

"No, freedom"

"Really? Well, off you go then"

"Just kidding, it's crucifixion."

I mean, really, if somebody pulls a gun and shoots at you, but hits the guy standing next to you, what is that? "Attempted murder and manslaughter"? Or is it "murder"?

It likely wouldn't be manslaughter, it would be felony murder.

"To be clear, I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not saying that the people who are arguing this are necessarily legally wrong. I'm just saying it's stupid, regardless of whether it's legally correct or not."

it's an issue of oblique intent, and it depends on the jurisdiction. generally, though, events that occur from a course of action are held as knowingly done if a reasonable person should have realized at the time of the act that they could happen. so really, i was wrong in my first post.

This idea that he's not chargeable with felonious assault merely because he wasn't intending to harm the guy he harmed seems just silly. I understand it as a general rule, but the fact is he sure as hell was intending to harm somebody, and somebody got harmed because of it.

I mean, really, if somebody pulls a gun and shoots at you, but hits the guy standing next to you, what is that? "Attempted murder and manslaughter"? Or is it "murder"

It's attempted murder and murder. The legal term is "transferred intent," or (in Law & Orderese), "intent follows the bullet." If you intend to kill someone and accidentally kill someone else, you don't escape the penalty. The same applies here, although replace "murder" with assault.


If you don't possess the requisite intent, then it would merely be reckless, rather than intentional.

Thank God Larry Bowa was wearing a helmet.

Dayton Daily News: Peoria pitcher held after brawl released on bond

Julio Castillo, the Peoria Chiefs pitcher accused of throwing a baseball into the stands and hitting a fan in the head during a Dayton Dragons game at Fifth Third Field, was released from jail on bond Saturday, July 26.

Castillo, 21, made no comment to a WKEF/WRGT television crew which filmed him walking out of the Montgomery County Jail at about 1:30 p.m. Saturday. He is charged with felonious assault, and could face up to eight years behind bars if convicted.