DBMA Martial Arts Forum > Martial Arts Topics

"Kali" player on trial for killing bouncer

(1/10) > >>

Tiny:
Here's the link:

http://tinyurl.com/4vu54


--- Quote ---
Isaias Umali, 32, of Jamaica, is charged with murder in the death of Dana Blake, who was stabbed in the upper thigh with a six-inch knife.

Blake's femoral artery was severed in the April 13, 2003, attack at the trendy club, Guernica. The incident allegedly began after an argument over smoking just two weeks after the city ban went into affect.

Umali is trained in kali, a Filipino martial art that includes knife-fighting techniques -- "including specific areas of the body where you can stab someone in order to cause his death," Assistant Manhattan District Attorney David Lauscher said in his opening statement in State Supreme Court yesterday. The prosecutor said Umali even demonstrated to his friends the move he used to kill Blake.
--- End quote ---


It seems to me the overriding question is:  should one eschew affiliation to a specific martial art for legal protection?  It seems that "the martial arts" still invoke a great deal of mystery in the courtroom and in the media -- especially if the art is not readily identifiable (such as karate, tae kwon do, etc.), like "kali" or "silat."

The other question is:  If your friend is being choked out, do you really knife the guy with a six-inch blade?  I suppose this would be a good time to remember the proportion of reaction?

SB_Mig:
Where to start?

Having work as a bouncer/doorman/floorman in many clubs/bars/lounges AND being a martial arts practicioner I have more than a few comments on the story:

THE FACTS - Unfortunately, we don't know exactly what happened. It SOUNDS like the bouncer overreacted to the situation. It also SEEMS as if the knife-wielder overreacted. So, let's break it down...

1) Bouncer's Approach - The way I was trained (and by default, the way I work) is that EXCESSIVE physical contact (choking, punching, clotheslining) someone is the sign of a confrontation gone bad. As a professional, if the situation has escalated to the point of violence there has been a failure on your part as a bouncer. Remember, in 95% of these instances, the patron is inebriated which allows you as the sober individual to assess the situation with a (hopefully) clear head and attempted to de-escalate it as quickly and non-violently as possible.

That being said, depending on the type of club/bar/lounge you work in, the owners/locale can often dictate the reaction to a particular type of patron. Some places are fine with you cracking someone over the head and dragging them into the alley. Others will fire you for even touching a patron.

The behaviour of the patron can also dictate your response. In as much as you are (again, hopefully) the sober one, drunks can be unpredictable. Sweet little PTA moms can become raging maniacs, and the 300 lb. tattooed guy can turn weepy on you. In terms of response, a guy swinging a chair over his head and a guy falling down drunk on the dancefloor are two different things.

I know nothing about the club in question, so I can't criticize their approach to "troublemakers". But from what I read in the story, it seems like the bouncer overrreacted. Again, this response is based solely on the words written in the article.

Some would say, "But the bouncer outweighed the guy by 200 lbs. and was a foot taller!" And? I have seen my fair share of mismatches that don't end with the big guy as the victor. As a bouncer you should treat every individual who is raising a ruckus as a potential threat regardless of size. Every situation will call for a different approach. Are you working alone? How big is the crowd? Can you tell if the patron alone, or is he with 5 other equally drunk customers? College kid? Biker? Sorority Girls?

2) THE MARTIAL ARTIST - Based on what I read, the reaction of the knife holder was extreme. I personally cannot imagine a situation in a bar that would cause me to pull my blade and slice through someone's femoral. Not to say it couldn't happen, but I put it at about 1,000 to 1. If the individual is question was a truly experienced and well-trained practitioner, I cannot believe that he would go straight to  the femoral. But again, I have  to go by the words printed on the page.

We should know as informed, educated martial artists that the burden of proof will lay on us in the courtroom. Especially if we practice those arts that are considered out of the "mainstream". Just a side kick to the head can land you in the big house, so pulling a knife and killing someone you better have a damn good reason.

I have been fortunate enough to train under individuals who have been explicit in their explanation of "degrees of response" and responsible application of your martial arts. The mature martial artist will know to spot/walk away from trouble before it occurs in a majority of cases. Unfortunately, not enough teachers are willing/able/understanding enough to drill into their students heads the importance of use of force and the law. And many people just beginning in the martial arts aren't aware of the kind of trouble they can get into if they use their arts.

This incident just seems like a tragic combination of lapse of judgement and poor decision making on the part of both parties. And sadly, it ended in the death of one individual and the strong probability of extended jail time for the other.

Just my two cents...

Miguel

Tiny:
Hmm...that seemed more like 4 cents to me.

At any rate, I  couldn't have said it better.  However, I do believe that, most times, it is better to be silently affiliated with a system.  I don't advertise which system(s) I study, and for good reason.  

This topic brings up another issue that we've discussed, SBMig -- as a teacher is it not one's responsibility to choose students who honor the power of technique(s)?  That a student's character will ultimately reflect the level of responsibility they impose upon themselves when out in the world?  After all when teaching the arts, you are exposing an individual to a craft prized for its effectiveness, if not lethality.  "The prosecutor said Umali even demonstrated to his friends the move he used to kill Blake."  Sounds to me like the problem was internal and simply awaiting an external catalyst.  But hey, I don't know much anyhow!  ;)

SB_Mig:
Tiny,

2 cents...4 cents...you are such a stickler when it comes to counting change!

In a perfect world, yes, the teacher should be able to choose students who will be able to act admirably/respectfully/carefully in any number of situations. Unfortunately, it can often take time to find the true depth of one's character. Most people who are into the martial arts to "kick ass and take names" will show themselves as that from the get go and are easily weeded out.

However, there is always the "nice boy" from next door who has a collection of dead kittens in his closet that holds down a normal job and by all outward appearances is a swell guy...until stressed or put under pressure of some kind. These are often a little harder to spot.

I do believe that a teacher is responsible to some degree for the martial arts behaviour of his students. But, we no longer live in a time when the majority of students are dedicating their lives to their respective teachers and would do anything to preserve the honor of their systems lineage, techniques, etc. So to that extent there is only so much you can do to make sure that your students are not acting like complete jackholes.

It sounds like the individual in question was of the "check out this sweet killing technique" mentality to begin with, something which the instructor may not know unless they spent quality time with said individual outside of class.

I believe it is also a question of maturity on the part of the practitioner. everyone who has studied martial arts has at some point wanted to demonstrate a technique or two. It is when you start braggin' about killing people that the trouble begins.

I think I'm up to around 6 cents now...

Miguel

Tiny:
Well, I always do like to get my Nickelback.

"Most people who are into the martial arts to 'kick a$$ and take names' will show themselves as that from the get go and are easily weeded out. "

Right.  But does it happen, and if not, shouldn't it?  I've certainly seen that attitude considered acceptable by some instructors.  I'm not placing the burden of the impossible on the instructor for every character flaw -- Ted Bundy was considered an all-around charmer.  I'm talking (well, typing) about this "kick a$$ and take names" individual who isn't checked.  If a martial arts instructor isn't at least, on some vague level, evaluating the constitution of his student(s), isn't that, well, not good?  And doesn't the "check out this sweet, killer technique" mentality point to a basic misunderstanding of cause and effect when it comes to force?  And, at the very least, shouldn't proper use of force be revisited?  I've only ever had one instructor who mentioned the topic.

I'm not necessarily saying that the situation in the article above is one such case, but it certainly begs the question(s).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page