Choking someone out

[rb]

The article about no judo deaths is here

 

http://judoinfo.com/chokes2.htm

 

I'd like to find more articles eventually but the general feeling in the judo community is that chokes can be applied safely. Judokas and BJJ practioners have a lot of experience applying choking techniques under resistant conditions. That means they can do this in a manner that is not destructive to the throat cartilage and also be aware of the condition of the person being choked.

 

I don't think you should take the comments by johnnys as being carefree. Take a look at his qualifications (BB BJJ) - to me that would signify that he has experienced choking techniques against himself as well as applied them. I would trust that he has the ability to apply these techniques in a controlled manner.

[White Warlock]

Aye, concussions cause significant damage. I'm at a stage now that my doctor recommended try hard not to get anymore concussions, or i will lose more than just a little bit of my memory.

 

Being brought unconscious, via depriving oxygen to the brain, can cause damage as well. There really is not definitive answer here. Yes, you can die by receiving a traumatic blow to the head, although that is exceedingly uncommon. The real concerns are in the area of brain damage, caused either by concussive force, or oxygen deprivation.

 

Striking arts, especially boxing... focus specifically on causing a person to undergo repeated concussions, until such time as one receives a concussion that they are incapable of recovering from quickly. On the other hand, grappling arts, such as bjj, focus on causing the person to submit, whether it be via pain... or via unconsciousness in a 'single' incident of oxygen deprivation.

 

What you need to concern yourself more with bjj, is knee, elbow and wrist injuries.

 

edit: good report there rb

[Sasori_Te]

I'm simply asking, is the risk worth the reward? You've brought up some interesting points that I need to research.

 

I'm wondering from a legal standpoint which would be looked upon in a harsher light: someone dying from a blow to the head during an altercation or someone dying from complications from a choke hold.

 

At this moment without further information I would say the choke hold because it would look like you had more control over the situation than simply striking someone coming at you. I want to try and check with a judge and/ or some cops and get back to you on that. Ideally I'd like to ask a judge. I'll let you know. Hmmm.

[White Warlock]

I would say you're screwed either way.

 

They would focus far more on intent, rather than end result or means, to determine culpability. As to degree of penalty, excessive force would be the tag posed by the DA, with both a strike to the head that causes death and a choke that causes death being considered excessive. On end result alone, i wouldn't see that there would be any difference.

 

Now, if you add into it the use of weapons (including the wearing of a ring while striking), the provocation, and the extent of injuries sustained on both sides, then things get ugly. In most instances, strikes would be considered far more aggressive, and thus would likely lean the jury towards believing you had intent to kill. I.e., a defense attorney would have a far easier time arguing that you attempted to restrain your opponent via grappling, than he would in arguing that you attempted to beat him into submission via striking.

[Sasori_Te]

I was thinking of it more from a control standpoint. To be more exact, if you strike someone to hard during an assault instigated by the other party and they die, that could be (could be) construed as accidental. Whereas if you choke them and they die you might be seen as having had more control over the situation. I know a lot of it would depend on what led up to the fatal incident but I'm isolating the incident for the sake of our discussion here. Also, to be more clear, I'm talking about 1 or 2 strikes in an incident vs. a choke.

 

I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that I'd like to get a legal opinion on this.

[White Warlock]

I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that I'd like to get a legal opinion on this.

And i don't blame you.

 

If it makes you feel any better, i wrote legal declarations (sometimes in excess of 30 pages long per) for 4 years, in assist to civil and family law attorneys for their clients, witnesses and character references. Every case was a win, and there were plenty. *knock on wood* *further inflates ego*

 

My study in criminal law is not nearly as hands-on. But, i can definitely tell you that much of this has to do with the jury, and juries vary substantially. If we were to go on averages, most jurors have no background in the martial arts, and thus would not comprehend 'control' as something related to grappling, over striking. One just 'seems' more violent than the other, and impressions are heavy in a court of law. A good attorney can ride impressions far further than they can ride facts, and the impression of someone striking is that of an aggressor, while that of a grappler is that of someone trying to subdue without injuring their attacker.

 

A good attorney can argue that a grappler attempted to subdue the attacker (aggressor), but the attacker struggled too much and an accident ensued. It is far more difficult for an attorney to present a case whereby the striker attempted to subdue the attacker, but the attacker wouldn't fall down... so the striker had to hit harder and an accident ensued.

[goshinman]

The article about no judo deaths is here

 

http://judoinfo.com/chokes2.htm

 

I'd like to find more articles eventually but the general feeling in the judo community is that chokes can be applied safely. Judokas and BJJ practioners have a lot of experience applying choking techniques under resistant conditions. That means they can do this in a manner that is not destructive to the throat cartilage and also be aware of the condition of the person being choked.

 

I don't think you should take the comments by johnnys as being carefree. Take a look at his qualifications (BB BJJ) - to me that would signify that he has experienced choking techniques against himself as well as applied them. I would trust that he has the ability to apply these techniques in a controlled manner.

 

Ahh, but the key there is that both Judo and BJJ stylists are highly trained in that regard. They have refined their technique in the dojo and in competition so they know how to properly apply and disengage from a choke. Now contrast that with people who only have a basic knowledge of chokes and not a functional/working knowledge of chokes and you end up with a recipe for disaster.

 

An example of this can be a karateka who only trains in how to apply a choke but never learns how to apply it against a resisting opponent. He gets into an altercation and attempts to apply a choke but fails to properly apply it or doesn't know when to release it and he ends up killing the guy. Another example of this the high fatality rate on men who have had chokes applied on them by cops. It is for this very reason that choking techniques have been banned by the LAPD and other law enforcement agencies. A man was choked to death in Pasadena by a police officer only 7 months ago and the department is debating on rather or not they should ban the technique.

 

When you train against resisting opponents you learn not only the proper application of chokes but you also learn the naunces of position, how to let the sqruiming of your opponent aid you into sinking in a choke more effectively instead of forcing it in and breaking his/her neck in the process.

 

These mistakes can be avoided with this type of training and I belive it is essential for people who want to use chokes in a real fight.

[goshinman]

I was thinking of it more from a control standpoint. To be more exact, if you strike someone to hard during an assault instigated by the other party and they die, that could be (could be) construed as accidental. Whereas if you choke them and they die you might be seen as having had more control over the situation. I know a lot of it would depend on what led up to the fatal incident but I'm isolating the incident for the sake of our discussion here. Also, to be more clear, I'm talking about 1 or 2 strikes in an incident vs. a choke.

 

I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that I'd like to get a legal opinion on this.

 

If I were to look at this hypothetical situation from the prospective of a juror, It seems to me that it would be much easier to persuade me that during a fight that the accused defended himself by punching another guy who accidently fell and hit his head, causing him to die as a result. That to me seems much more defensible than a guy choking someone to death. Given the fact that Choking just sounds so much more cruel, coupled with the fact that the accused had some degree of control over the situation would mean bad news for the defendent. Was he still fighting you while you were choking him? Did you feel him stop moving? If you did then why didn't you stop choking him? Those are all questions you would have to be able to answer. ESPECIALLY if you have vast experience in BJJ or JUDO because you had better belive that a D.A. will hammer that point home to jurors.

[judoguy]

Interesting topic. I'll add my 2 cents in. I'm a cop and I can tell you that you'd have a much better chance of pleading your case in court if you hit someone and they fall and die vs choking someone to death. But please be forewarned that in both circumstances you will be taken to jail on the spot and you had better pray that 2 or more witnesses can colaberate your version of the story or you are toast.

[Sasori_Te]

Thanks guys (goshinman and judoguy). That was exactly the way I was looking at the situation.

 

I would also forewarn the grapplers that since you do have a lot of experience in most average people's eyes that you will have a harder time defending your actions if someone dies while you are choking them.

 

Don't get me wrong this could cover both scenarios. If you are a striker like I am and the person that died was beaten to a bloody pulp and you didn't exhibit much damage, you would probably be looking at a nice long vacation.

 

I was referring to a one or two punch situation.