Thorbjorn Olsen Arrested on Flight

[BlackDiamondPar5]

26 minutes ago, golfandfishing said:

I guess, I mean OJ was found not guilty too but he cut two people’s throats open. Not guilty and did not do it are different. I hope he realizes how lucky he is legally and how polluted of a human he is personally. 

OMG so now he's in the same category as OJ? Even mentioning the two situations together is beyond ridiculous. 

 

  

[jholz]

46 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

GaF, I’m all for treating abusers of women and children with Old Testament justice.

 

In this case, based on how bizarrre his behavior was, I think that the law may have recognized that he could not have anticipated his reaction to the combination of the pills and booze and was not able to form intent to commit them. They were reportedly not his pills, he was looking to sleep, his “partner” gave them to him so he took them. 

 

Had it just been alcohol, things would probably have gone differently. 
 

If you look at his behavior, and perhaps combined with character references (assuming he had some) and any lack of history of similar crimes/actions, the “involuntary intoxication” defense may have been the case.

 

 

https://apnews.com/article/sports-europe-london-golf-sexual-assault-24147c8ca9315029ee87e8f2d1d159c2

 

 

 

 

Now that's a plane flight. You've got to be working pretty hard to accomplish that in the 10 or so hours from Memphis to London.

 

There's so many nuances to this event. 

 

First, this whole thing is complicated by the fact that he was tried in the British court system. It's not perfect or "better" or anything, but it is a bit different than the U.S. system - so tough to make some of the blanket comparisons that people are making in this thread. 

 

Second, what the hell is up with the "Ambien Defense?" We see this time and time again. If Ambien is an acceptable defense, why not cocaine? Why not alcohol? I mean the dude that killed all those people in that car crash was really, really drunk. Should we cut him some slack too?

 

Finally, when it comes to celebrities, it seems like criminal prosecution is going to be an all or nothing proposition. If the AP account of the incident that @bscinstnct posted is indeed true, I think we are dealing with a guy that needs to face some punishment, but perhaps shouldn't be crucified. 

 

I can't say what the "right" punishment might be, but I'm reasonably sure it lies somewhere in between "getting off scot free" and "spending the rest of his life in jail."

 

Edited December 10, 2021 by jholz

[BlackDiamondPar5]

1 hour ago, golfandfishing said:

Pills or not - it was still him, right?

The human brain operates entirely by complex series of chemical reactions.  Taking a combination of chemicals can result in unforeseen and horrific consequences that completely alter a persons normal behavior into something that they don't remotely resemble. Sure physically it was him but mentally not.  It's pretty obvious that he did not seek to get high nor behave horrifically, he simply wanted to sleep.  This obviously weighed on the jury's decision.  Further, it's also entirely likely that the victims testified and that they made statements that included compassion which helped the jury reach their decision.

 

Obviously such compassion or sense doesn't' satisfy the pitchfork mob. 

 

    

[Krt22]

2 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

The human brain operates entirely by complex series of chemical reactions.  Taking a combination of chemicals can result in unforeseen and horrific consequences that completely alter a persons normal behavior into something that they don't remotely resemble. Sure physically it was him but mentally not.  It's pretty obvious that he did not seek to get high nor behave horrifically, he simply wanted to sleep.  This obviously weighed on the jury's decision.  Further, it's also entirely likely that the victims testified and that they made statements that included compassion which helped the jury reach their decision.

 

Obviously such compassion or sense doesn't' satisfy the pitchfork mob. 

 

    

How is wanting some justice be served constitute a "pitfork mob"?

 

Do you honestly think the victims of his assault feel better about it since he "simply wanted to sleep" and went so far to ask the jury not to find him guilty because he was loaded? Give me a break lol. Any grown adult who takes Rx drugs that are not their own know very well their can be major side effects. The notion a world traveling golf pro would have no idea that mixing ambien with a bunch of alcohol might get you super tilted is absurd. 

 

Luckily the "I was under the influence" defense doesn't work out well here in the US. Had he did the same exact act and landed in US versus the other way around, I think the trial outcome would have been very different. He very well may have have avoided jail time, but he at the very least would have been convicted of a crime and be subject to other penalties. 

 

 

[BlackDiamondPar5]

3 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

How is wanting some justice be served constitute a "pitfork mob"?

 

Do you honestly think the victims of his assault feel better about it since he "simply wanted to sleep" and went so far to ask the jury not to find him guilty because he was loaded? Give me a break lol. Any grown adult who takes Rx drugs that are not their own know very well their can be major side effects. The notion a world traveling golf pro would have no idea that mixing ambien with a bunch of alcohol might get you super tilted is absurd. 

 

Luckily the "I was under the influence" defense doesn't work out well here in the US. Had he did the same exact act and landed in US versus the other way around, I think the trial outcome would have been very different. He very well may have have avoided jail time, but he at the very least would have been convicted of a crime and be subject to other penalties. 

 

 

Justice was served you just don't like that answer. 

 

 

[bscinstnct]

42 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Now that's a plane flight. You've got to be working pretty hard to accomplish that in the 10 or so hours from Memphis to London.

 

There's so many nuances to this event. 

 

First, this whole thing is complicated by the fact that he was tried in the British court system. It's not perfect or "better" or anything, but it is a bit different than the U.S. system - so tough to make some of the blanket comparisons that people are making in this thread. 

 

Second, what the hell is up with the "Ambien Defense?" We see this time and time again. If Ambien is an acceptable defense, why not cocaine? Why not alcohol? I mean the dude that killed all those people in that car crash was really, really drunk. Should we cut him some slack too?

 

Finally, when it comes to celebrities, it seems like criminal prosecution is going to be an all or nothing proposition. If the AP account of the incident that @bscinstnct posted is indeed true, I think we are dealing with a guy that needs to face some punishment, but perhaps shouldn't be crucified. 

 

I can't say what the "right" punishment might be, but I'm reasonably sure it lies somewhere in between "getting off scot free" and "spending the rest of his life in jail."

 

 

If a doctor prescribed you a medication for anything. And you took it and blacked out and went to your neighbors house and started crowing like a rooster 

 

I think, given your exemplary record as a fine member of society, the jury would let you off the hook ; )

 

I believe that’s the essence of the Ambien defense.

 

You have no experience, could not be expected to understand this could happen, and the jury would see that you couldn’t form the intent to commit the crime. 

 

Its not cut and dry. A person could take it and the jury could still say they had intent to commit the crime.

 

With alcohol, you’re expected to know you could become intoxicated, you got yourself intoxicated, and even drunk people can have intent to commit a crime. 

 

 

Edited December 10, 2021 by bscinstnct

[Krt22]

4 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

Justice was served you just don't like that answer. 

 

 

 

 

Just because you think his defense was valid and are seemingly complicit with people getting away sexual assault while under the influence of Ambien, doesn't mean justice was served. 

 

The system isn't perfect and justice is not always served, despite the outcomes of criminal trials. If you truly think this was not a crime and therefore there was no victim, well it tells a lot about you as a person. 

[BlackDiamondPar5]

4 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

 

 

Just because you think his defense was valid and are seemingly complicit with people getting away sexual assault while under the influence of Ambien, doesn't mean justice was served. 

 

The system isn't perfect and justice is not always served, despite the outcomes of criminal trials. If you truly think this was not a crime and therefore there was no victim, well it tells a lot about you as a person. 

^^^^ virtue signaling troll incapable of advanced thinking. 

We're done. 

Edited December 10, 2021 by BlackDiamondPar5

[Krt22]

8 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

If a doctor prescribed you a medication for anything. And you took it and blacked out and went to your neighbors house and started crowing like a rooster 

 

I think, given your exemplary record as a fine member of society, the jury would let you off the hook ; )

 

I believe that’s the essence of the Ambien defense.

 

You have no experience, could not be expected to understand this could happen, and the jury would see that you couldn’t form the intent to commit the crime. 

 

Its not cut and dry. A person could take it and the jury could still say they had intent to commit the crime.

 

With alcohol, you’re expected to know you could become intoxicated, you got yourself intoxicated, and even drunk people can have intent to commit a crime. 

 

 

I think the difference is here in the US, most jurisdictions have multiple degrees of a crime, largely depending on intent.  If you pull the ambien defense you very well may be acquitted of a more serious offense or receive a much less severe punishment, but very rarely will it result in no criminal charges at all, especially if your actions resulted in assault and sexual assault. Even if you were "out of your mind", there is still clearly a victim, thus a crime occured.

[Krt22]

3 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

^^^^ virtue signaling troll incapable of advanced thinking. 

We're done. 

Yes we are, when you pull the tired and miss-placed virtue signaling/troll card, it's obvious you don't have anything of substance to stand on. If you think outcomes of trials are absolute, well you are not only very naïve, you are also quite dense

 

If you think a scenario where one person physically assaults another is some how not a criminal act and therefore no victim exists, I am really not sure what to tell you. 

[BlackDiamondPar5]

4 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

Yes we are, when you pull the tired and miss-placed virtue signaling/troll card, it's obvious you don't have anything of substance to stand on. If you think outcomes of trials are absolute, well you are not only very naïve, you are also quite dense

 

If you think a scenario where one person physically assaults another is some how not a criminal act and therefore no victim exists, I am really not sure what to tell you. 

That's the second time you've put words into my mouth. You're now being reported. 

[Krt22]

12 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

That's the second time you've put words into my mouth. You're now being reported. 

How did I put any words in your mouth? You clearly stated "justice was served" due to the outcome of the trial where he was found not guilty of any crime.

 

If there is no crime, you are also essentially saying there is no victim, correct? If you think their was a victim in this case, then how can there be no crime committed? 

Edited December 10, 2021 by Krt22

[jholz]

Yikes y'all. Let's remember that we are all friends here...

 

[Krt22]

1 minute ago, jholz said:

Yikes y'all. Let's remember that we are all friends here...

 

No, no we are not. We have a similar interest in golf, that doesn't mean we are friends or share the same views on the seriousness of sexual assault. 

[bscinstnct]

1 minute ago, jholz said:

Yikes y'all. Let's remember that we are all friends here...

 

Yes yes, golfwrx is my friends! 😃

 

Happy Frrrriday and drinks (but no Ambien!) for all my friennnnnnds ; )

 

 

 

[jholz]

At the end of the day, I have to think that some kind of criminal charge was probably warranted in the Thorbjorn Olsen case. 

 

It reminds me of the Chad Kelly incident in Denver from a few years back:

 

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/chad-kelly-enters-plea-agreement-after-first-degree-trespassing-charge-will-not-face-jail-time

 

In that case, I didn't get the sense that Kelly actually touched anyone, just showed up in some random person's house, sat down on the couch, and started making noise. He plead guilty to 2nd Degree Trespassing. 

 

For Olsen, the fact that he laid his hands on folks takes it into another realm. 

 

So yeah, Olsen deserved a criminal charge. I don't know what, but something. 

 

Just for the record, and to give everyone a bit of perspective, I've plead nolo contendere to 3rd degree criminal trespassing charges on more than one occasion - in the same jurisdiction as Chad Kelly's charge. The reason... skateboarding in parking garages - particularly in the Denver Tech Center. 

[miamistomp]

[jholz]

6 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

No, no we are not. We have a similar interest in golf, that doesn't mean we are friends or share the same views on the seriousness of sexual assault. 

 

I just can't say I've seen anyone saying that we should excuse sexual assault. Honestly. 

 

If someone did come on here and say that, I'd be the first to join you in denouncing them and their opinion.

 

Overall, the folks involved in this discussion - all of you, regardless of opinion - have shown themselves to be pretty thoughtful and reasonable people in the past. So, I'm always taking that into account. 

 

Do we all agree? Of course not...but that's ok. 

 

[Go Cougs]

49 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

If a doctor prescribed you a medication for anything. And you took it and blacked out and went to your neighbors house and started crowing like a rooster 

 

I think, given your exemplary record as a fine member of society, the jury would let you off the hook ; )

 

I believe that’s the essence of the Ambien defense.

 

You have no experience, could not be expected to understand this could happen, and the jury would see that you couldn’t form the intent to commit the crime. 

 

Its not cut and dry. A person could take it and the jury could still say they had intent to commit the crime.

 

With alcohol, you’re expected to know you could become intoxicated, you got yourself intoxicated, and even drunk people can have intent to commit a crime. 

 

 

Agree.  As I understand it he took a medication he wasn't familiar with or hadn't taken before, which is fine.

 

But then he also chose to  #1 drink, #2 on a plane, after taking said medication.  In my opinion he no longer gets to claim the "not my fault" defense for his actions.

 

 

[miamistomp]

 Personally I think they should have opened the cargo door in the floor and made him ride the flight out down there ( it is still pressurized but not very comfortable)

[Krt22]

22 minutes ago, jholz said:

At the end of the day, I have to think that some kind of criminal charge was probably warranted in the Thorbjorn Olsen case. 

 

It reminds me of the Chad Kelly incident in Denver from a few years back:

 

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/chad-kelly-enters-plea-agreement-after-first-degree-trespassing-charge-will-not-face-jail-time

 

In that case, I didn't get the sense that Kelly actually touched anyone, just showed up in some random person's house, sat down on the couch, and started making noise. He plead guilty to 2nd Degree Trespassing. 

 

For Olsen, the fact that he laid his hands on folks takes it into another realm. 

 

So yeah, Olsen deserved a criminal charge. I don't know what, but something. 

 

Just for the record, and to give everyone a bit of perspective, I've plead nolo contendere to 3rd degree criminal trespassing charges on more than one occasion - in the same jurisdiction as Chad Kelly's charge. The reason... skateboarding in parking garages - particularly in the Denver Tech Center. 

Agree with you there. In this case there were clearly multiple victims, one person was physically assaulted and another sexually assaulted, and the court seemingly said that was OK due to his compromised mental state.  IMHO this was a miss, but the UK is different and such a scenario is likely not to happen here in the US. 

 

Another similar case was the Brock Turner case, where he was caught red handed raping someone, but ultimately was only sentenced to 6 months (despite being convicted of 3 felonies) and only served 3. In this case local voters did not at all agree with the outcome, they said it was far too lenient given the severity of the crimes, and went so far to recall that Judge. 

 

11 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

I just can't say I've seen anyone saying that we should excuse sexual assault. Honestly. 

 

If someone did come on here and say that, I'd be the first to join you in denouncing them and their opinion.

 

Overall, the folks involved in this discussion - all of you, regardless of opinion - have shown themselves to be pretty thoughtful and reasonable people in the past. So, I'm always taking that into account. 

 

Do we all agree? Of course not...but that's ok. 

 

 If someone says "Justice was served" in this case, and even go so far as to explain the defense and the effects of the drug on the brain, how are they not are essentially condoning the event? Is that not basically saying its excusable to assault someone else, as long as were in an altered state of mind?

 

 

Edited December 10, 2021 by Krt22

[jgonz69]

Sweet, so any time I am intoxicated or hopped up on ambien and something “happens”, I’ll just claim automatism and be free of any consequences.

[GwrxMod]

Calling it a day on this topic since it's not really about golf. 🔒

Edited December 10, 2021 by GwrxMod