Former Gophers QB Phillip Nelson arrested in his hometown of Mankato for assault

Status
Not open for further replies.
Donate To GopherHole
BarnBoy said:
Ding! Ding! Ding!

I believe this is a symptom of current culture in America. Blame is not something that can be shared. Blame must be placed on one side of an argument or decision. Arguments (e.g. politics, business, sports) are crafted so that the solutions are made to appear as diametrically opposed choices. Compromise is not something that is sought or rewarded.

It's a bit sad. And it comes to life brilliantly on message boards.
Click to expand...

If compromise was made, there would be no pissing contests and my refereeing crew and I would be unemployed.
 

I willing to wait for the trial. There are two versions of what Kolstad did, whether Nelson had disengaged, only to come back and kick Kolstad in the head or if it was continuous. One thing I'm sure of is that, once Kolstad was down, Nelson kicking him in the causing great bodily harm fits all the elements of first degree assault. Don't even start with self defense, once Nelson got into Kolstads face that defense is dead, you can't piss some one off and then claim it.
 

nsmike said:
Don't even start with self defense, once Nelson got into Kolstads face that defense is dead, you can't piss some one off and then claim it.
Click to expand...

Uh, you can, actually. Pissing someone off is not a crime.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Uh, you can, actually. Pissing someone off is not a crime.
Click to expand...
No but if it leads to a fight you can't claim self defense. It may be a mutual afray, but self defense doesn't apply 99% of the time, and never when the opponents are nearly equal size.
 

nsmike said:
No but if it leads to a fight you can't claim self defense. It may be a mutual afray, but self defense doesn't apply 99% of the time, and never when the opponents are nearly equal size.
Click to expand...

You should be a lawyer. You really seem to know the law well.
 


nsmike said:
I willing to wait for the trial. There are two versions of what Kolstad did, whether Nelson had disengaged, only to come back and kick Kolstad in the head or if it was continuous. One thing I'm sure of is that, once Kolstad was down, Nelson kicking him in the causing great bodily harm fits all the elements of first degree assault. Don't even start with self defense, once Nelson got into Kolstads face that defense is dead, you can't piss some one off and then claim it.
Click to expand...

The police & the only eyewitnesses that I've read about said Nelson was walking away from the incident, with Kolstad's friend talking to him/grabbing him when they were both knocked to the ground from behind by Kolstad's blow. Where are you getting the other version where Nelson came back after being disengaged to attack Kolstad?

I'm no lawyer, so maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but I've read about several mob/gang attacks where the prosecution has a difficult time convicting anyone on serious charges because they're unable to prove who delivered the blows that caused the real damage. You say Nelson caused him great bodily harm, but how can that be proven? Surely Nelson's lawyer will argue Kolstad was injured not by Nelson, but by Shelley's blow and/or hitting his head on the concrete. It sounds like several witnesses will testify to Kolstad going limp from Shelley's punch, not getting his hands out to break the fall, going over backwards & "splatting" his head on the pavement. This was a real point of emphasis for several witnesses, the "disgusting" "splat" of Kolstad's head hitting the pavement & then being lifeless. They say it was really loud, really disgusting, that people up & down the street heard it. In my opinion it's going to be hard to convince a jury that Kolstad wasn't already injured at this point. It's also going to be hard to convince a jury that Nelson understood how badly Kolstad was hurt since he was face down on the ground with Kolstad's buddy draped all over him when it happened. I'm not saying it was ok for Nelson to kick Kolstad. I'm just saying that it sounds like there's reasonable doubt that damage was done before Nelson's kick.

You can absolutely piss someone off & then claim self defense if they attack you. Pissing someone off doesn't void your legal rights to self defense.
 


GopherJake said:
You should be a lawyer. You really seem to know the law well.
Click to expand...
Before I retired, I had a permit to carry, because I handled a fair amount of cash. I wasn't satisfied with the answers I was getting regarding self defense so I did a lot of reading of case law. I had two quarters of Business Law so that while I'm not a lawyer I know enough of the case law and legal argument to know when I'm on thin ice. Outside of your home a Self Defense claim is highly restricted in Minnesota.
 

CR Gopher, Nelson's Lawyer can argue that black is white, but the initial Neurology report was that there was bleeding on the left side of Kolstad's brain. The officer that reviewed the tape reported that Nelson kicked Kolstad in the left side of the head. Neson only needs to have substantially of contributed to the injury. The simple fact that he caused a brain bleed meets the elements of 'Great Bodily Harm'
I'm done arguing about this I'll wait for the trial which I expect to start in the Spring.
 



As far as who "started it," I think the evidence is pretty clear. Phillip Nelson got mad because he thought a bouncer was hitting on his girl friend. Nelson went outside, saw Kolstad, and thought he was the bouncer. Nelson was wrong - Kolstad was not the bouncer. Nelson and Kolstad exchanged words. That is what started the whole sequence of events. By most accounts, Kolstad did shove or punch Nelson, causing Nelson to stumble. Then Kolstad got punched, fell down, and Nelson kicked him in the head.

If Nelson had not approached Kolstad outside the bar, chances are that Kolstad would be home with his wife and children, and Nelson would be getting ready for the FB season. If I was the prosecutor, I would be emphasizing that point to the jury.

All of this happened because Nelson got jealous/mad, and confronted the wrong person. He started the sequence of events in motion. He (or his supporters) can't go back now and try to present him as the victim.

Nelson got punched or shoved - he's fine. Kolstad got punched and kicked - and sustained a serious brain injury. Not the same.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
As far as who "started it," I think the evidence is pretty clear. Phillip Nelson got mad because he thought a bouncer was hitting on his girl friend. Nelson went outside, saw Kolstad, and thought he was the bouncer. Nelson was wrong - Kolstad was not the bouncer. Nelson and Kolstad exchanged words. That is what started the whole sequence of events. By most accounts, Kolstad did shove or punch Nelson, causing Nelson to stumble. Then Kolstad got punched, fell down, and Nelson kicked him in the head.

If Nelson had not approached Kolstad outside the bar, chances are that Kolstad would be home with his wife and children, and Nelson would be getting ready for the FB season. If I was the prosecutor, I would be emphasizing that point to the jury.

All of this happened because Nelson got jealous/mad, and confronted the wrong person. He started the sequence of events in motion. He (or his supporters) can't go back now and try to present him as the victim.

Nelson got punched or shoved - he's fine. Kolstad got punched and kicked - and sustained a serious brain injury. Not the same.
Click to expand...

They don't have to be "the same" to both be wrongful or illegal. Being jealous/mad and confronting the wrong person is not a crime. Punching (or even shoving) someone in the back is.
 

There is a sad and solemn story about the elusiveness of fame here. In one year going from contemplating a future NFL contract to paying hundreds of thousands to defend oneself from several years of prison, with even a college football career gone forever.
 

nsmike said:
Before I retired, I had a permit to carry, because I handled a fair amount of cash. I wasn't satisfied with the answers I was getting regarding self defense so I did a lot of reading of case law. I had two quarters of Business Law so that while I'm not a lawyer I know enough of the case law and legal argument to know when I'm on thin ice. Outside of your home a Self Defense claim is highly restricted in Minnesota.
Click to expand...

No you don't. You're not on thin ice. You're drowning.
 



bleedsmaroonandgold said:
They don't have to be "the same" to both be wrongful or illegal. Being jealous/mad and confronting the wrong person is not a crime. Punching (or even shoving) someone in the back is.
Click to expand...

OK, so Kolstad gets a misdemeanor and Nelson gets a felony? I, however, do not understand the self defense claims in this instance. How can anyone claim Nelson needed to defend himself against a previously incapacitated assailant?
 

Kolstad won't be charged. He has been portrayed as an innocent victim from the get-go. He was simply a father of a daughter (and another on the way) who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was dressed nicely and had not been drinking (according to a bartender who knows him). He did absolutely nothing wrong.
 

cjcarter8 said:
OK, so Kolstad gets a misdemeanor and Nelson gets a felony? I, however, do not understand the self defense claims in this instance. How can anyone claim Nelson needed to defend himself against a previously incapacitated assailant?
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, this entire fight/incident took less than 15 seconds to go down. How in the hell does Nelson know that Kolstad is incapacitated? Mixing alcohol on top of this makes me think it was all reaction and for all we know Nelson didn't mean to kick Kolstad in the head...it just happened.
 

lakesgopher said:
If I remember correctly, this entire fight/incident took less than 15 seconds to go down. How in the hell does Nelson know that Kolstad is incapacitated? Mixing alcohol on top of this makes me think it was all reaction and for all we know Nelson didn't mean to kick Kolstad in the head...it just happened.
Click to expand...

"This was an accident" is not a strong defense.
 

lakesgopher said:
If I remember correctly, this entire fight/incident took less than 15 seconds to go down. How in the hell does Nelson know that Kolstad is incapacitated? Mixing alcohol on top of this makes me think it was all reaction and for all we know Nelson didn't mean to kick Kolstad in the head...it just happened.
Click to expand...

BECAUSE HE'S LAYING ON THE GROUND NOT MOVING! So you're ok with him kicking a human laying on the ground as long as he didnt know it was in the head?
 

Breakin' The Plane said:
Kolstad won't be charged. He has been portrayed as an innocent victim from the get-go. He was simply a father of a daughter (and another on the way) who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was dressed nicely and had not been drinking (according to a bartender who knows him). He did absolutely nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

My statement was based off people saying Kolstad hit Nelson in the back first. If that's not the case, I take back my statement.
 

cjcarter8 said:
My statement was based off people saying Kolstad hit Nelson in the back first. If that's not the case, I take back my statement.
Click to expand...

You don't need to take anything back. Kolstad escalated a verbal altercation into a physical one. The media initially painted the picture that Kolstad was some sort of angel.
 

cjcarter8 said:
BECAUSE HE'S LAYING ON THE GROUND NOT MOVING! So you're ok with him kicking a human laying on the ground as long as he didnt know it was in the head?
Click to expand...

Lol I'm not saying it was right, but I have been in fights before. Things happen so fast, sometimes hind sight makes it easy to sit on a high horse. It's obvious you have never been in a fight before. A person doesn't think clearly and terrible things happen. This stuff happens all the time. I wasn't there, I don't know what happened other than what was in the papers. I'm just saying 15 seconds isn't that much time to think clearly, add alcohol and it's worse. Continue to pretend you were there...
 

nsmike said:
CR Gopher, Nelson's Lawyer can argue that black is white, but the initial Neurology report was that there was bleeding on the left side of Kolstad's brain. The officer that reviewed the tape reported that Nelson kicked Kolstad in the left side of the head. Neson only needs to have substantially of contributed to the injury. The simple fact that he caused a brain bleed meets the elements of 'Great Bodily Harm'
I'm done arguing about this I'll wait for the trial which I expect to start in the Spring.
Click to expand...

Right, now where did this other version you mention where Nelson was disengaged & later returned to attack Kolstad come from?
 

lakesgopher said:
Lol I'm not saying it was right, but I have been in fights before. Things happen so fast, sometimes hind sight makes it easy to sit on a high horse. It's obvious you have never been in a fight before. A person doesn't think clearly and terrible things happen. This stuff happens all the time. I wasn't there, I don't know what happened other than what was in the papers. I'm just saying 15 seconds isn't that much time to think clearly, add alcohol and it's worse. Continue to pretend you were there...
Click to expand...

Continue to pretend inflicting serious bodily harm on a defenseless individual isn't an offense punishable by jail time.

It doesn't matter how long it took to commit the crime, it's still a crime.

Pulling a trigger takes a tenth of a second, does that make the person any less guilty of murder?
 

lakesgopher said:
Lol I'm not saying it was right, but I have been in fights before. Things happen so fast, sometimes hind sight makes it easy to sit on a high horse. It's obvious you have never been in a fight before. A person doesn't think clearly and terrible things happen. This stuff happens all the time. I wasn't there, I don't know what happened other than what was in the papers. I'm just saying 15 seconds isn't that much time to think clearly, add alcohol and it's worse. Continue to pretend you were there...
Click to expand...

And that's why you don't get in fights. Being drunk is not a defense to doing something idiotic.
 




cjcarter8 said:
Continue to pretend inflicting serious bodily harm on a defenseless individual isn't an offense punishable by jail time.

It doesn't matter how long it took to commit the crime, it's still a crime.

Pulling a trigger takes a tenth of a second, does that make the person any less guilty of murder?
Click to expand...

What exactly are we arguing here? Lakes seems to be saying that fight's happen quickly & people react, rather than think. I'd certainly agree with that & I think you do too? You're not suggesting Nelson knew Kolstad was already injured & kicked him anyway, or that Nelson's kick was premeditated right? You're just saying that you don't get a free pass, just because someone hit you first or you didn't mean to hurt them that bad?
 


short ornery norwegian said:
As far as who "started it," I think the evidence is pretty clear. Phillip Nelson got mad because he thought a bouncer was hitting on his girl friend. Nelson went outside, saw Kolstad, and thought he was the bouncer. Nelson was wrong - Kolstad was not the bouncer. Nelson and Kolstad exchanged words. That is what started the whole sequence of events. By most accounts, Kolstad did shove or punch Nelson, causing Nelson to stumble. Then Kolstad got punched, fell down, and Nelson kicked him in the head. If Nelson had not approached Kolstad outside the bar, chances are that Kolstad would be home with his wife and children, and Nelson would be getting ready for the FB season. If I was the prosecutor, I would be emphasizing that point to the jury. All of this happened because Nelson got jealous/mad, and confronted the wrong person. He started the sequence of events in motion. He (or his supporters) can't go back now and try to present him as the victim. Nelson got punched or shoved - he's fine. Kolstad got punched and kicked - and sustained a serious brain injury. Not the same.
Click to expand...

Maybe Kolstad should have been HOME with his pregnant wife and kid and not out at the bar past 2 a.m. Let's not act like that's ok either if you're going to the "wife and kid" statement.

My father, who is a retired cop, always said, "Nothing good happens after midnight". Just giving you another side of the argument.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.



Top Bottom