Quote:I'll assume you just decided to not read thread, so here:

 

 

"It's a non issue in terms of disciplinary action, but that doesn't mean there weren't better alternatives for how this could have been handled."

 

"It baffles me that people can't even admit there were likely better alternatives to the way this went down. I'm not saying Fowler is guilty of any crimes or anything of the sort, but people suggesting there weren't better alternatives to how this was handled are truly delusional."

 

"If that was me with my girlfriend, I strenuously object to my girlfriend confronting my baby momma. If she somehow manages to get to the point of confrontation, I do everything possible to desacalte the situation to avoid violence. I most certainly give my baby momma the option to avoid a physical altercation by allowing an exit route. I use my size and strength to make sure my girlfriend does NOT do something stupid like attack someone cornered in an elevator. If, for some reason, she still manages to attack said person, I then use my size and strength to pull her off."

That's a very nice summary, but it doesn't answer my somewhat tongue in cheek inquiry.

 

You can be negligent and fail to act to a certain standard of care and not be criminally responsible for whatever damages arose.  You may, however, be held civilly liable due to a failure to act to a certain standard of care and the resulting damages that can be proven to have a proximate link to the failure to act to the standard of care.

 

If your silence on the matter is to be taken as he had no legal duty, either criminally or civilly, to intervene and break up a fight, then I presume your stance is he had a moral obligation to do so.

 

Is that fair?

---