'“Although my client was initially struck by the female victim, he whole heartedly regrets his use of excessive self defense in a drunken setting under substantial provocation,” he said.'
He has admitted using excessive force and admitted being excessively drunk. Pleaded guilty based on these.
How could the judge possibly use the fact that he was drunk as an excuse for the assault and not convicted him?
If he had of used provocation as his defence and pleaded not guilty based on this, played down the force and alcohol, and the judge agreed that there was, then maybe some of your 'she deserved it' comments may have some substance.. And I would have to agree.
But as it stands, the final penalty was disgracefully too light and being too intoxicated is never an excuse.
