united-states assault harassment
Is being harassed or provoked a valid defense for assault?
<p>Earlier this year, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/05/10/1097968803/mike-tyson-no-charges-punching-passenger" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Mike Tyson was recorded assaulting another airplane passenger</a> after the victim &quot;harassed&quot; and threw a water bottle at Tyson. The victim apparently needed medical attention; however, no charges were filed:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Authorities will not file criminal charges against former heavyweight champ Mike Tyson after he was recorded on video punching a fellow first-class passenger aboard a plane at San Francisco International Airport last month, prosecutors announced Tuesday.</p>
<p>The San Mateo County District Attorney's Office said it has closed the case and <strong>decided against pursuing charges</strong> based on &quot;the circumstances surrounding the confrontation.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Does this mean that if someone is harassing me, if I retaliate and assault him, the law will side in my favor because I was provoked? And if so, to what extent do I need to be &quot;harassed&quot; for assault be considered justified defense?</p>

<p>The general rule is that force may be legally used in defense of self. I will draw on <a href="https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.020" rel="nofollow noreferrer">RCW 9A.16.020</a>, other jurisdictions say essentially the same thing. The relevant parts are:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another
lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an
offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other
malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his
or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Curated internet videos don't tell the whole story, but for the sake of argument I will assume that Mr X chucked a bottle at Tyson, and Tyson proceeded to punish him with his fists. Both parties thus committed a crime.</p>
<p>The new report indicates that there will be no prosecutions &quot;based on 'the circumstances surrounding the confrontation'&quot;, which I take to include all of the available evidence. Prosecution for a crime is discretionary. There is no requirement at a prosecutor file charges in every instance where (in the prosecutor's professional opinion) a conviction can be secured.</p>
<p>The abstract law is clear: both parties committed a crime. The abstract law is also clear that a prosecutor has discretion to decide whether to prosecute.</p>
