ponyte wrote:I was wondering more in terms of a jury. Granted one cannot predict a jury’s response, but it may be difficult to convince a jury that a crime based on this statue was committed 'beyond a reasonable doubt."
You might as well try and predict the lottery numbers.
Your question about jumping jacks is probably answered by the reckless or knowing requirement. Would a DA prosecute for jumping jacks in general, probably not, because that is probably not done recklessly or knowingly (which typically in criminal law requires you mean for something bad to happen, if I recall correctly). Would he prosecute for a broken ankle resulting from drunken jumping jacks? Maybe.
