Today, we finally tackle the most pressing issue of this election season: Clown Attacks
At first, it was just single instances in South/North Carolina of folks claiming a clown tried to lure them into the woods (to what ends are not known). Then there were other attacks reported in 14 different states, including to multiple Las Vegas Valley high school students.
Are clown people permitted to scare people at will? If you have a genuine fear of clowns, does the law permit you to protect yourself without incurring civil liability?
Hopefully, now things will finally get back to normal.
Ok, maybe not.
The trend of people dressing up as scary clowns and terrifying others, especially children, has raised significant legal questions. While it may seem like harmless fun to some, there are ramifications that need to be considered.
Understanding the Legal Perspective
When someone dressed as a clown scares someone to the point of causing them emotional or physical harm, various legal terms may be applied. These include negligence, assault, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Negligence is when someone fails to act as a reasonably responsible person. Intentionally causing harm to another is clearly not reasonable. Unforeseen consequences, however, are just that, unforeseen. If a clown’s actions lead to someone getting hurt (e.g., falling while running away), it could be a case of negligence. This would require pinning down several factors, such as the quality of the road, the costume of the clown, and details about the victim. If a clown in a terrifying costume hangs out near a patch of ice near a nursing home, that is fairly clear in terms of negligence. In most cases, the elements won’t be anywhere near that clear cut.
On the other hand, if the act of scaring causes severe emotional distress, such as requiring counseling, inability to work, or physical symptoms like hair loss, it could be considered intentional infliction of emotional distress. This depends on the severity of the impact and the outrageousness of the act. This also would require some level of intent. A person dressed for a haunted house on their way to work who happens to turn a corner into a group of trick-or-treating kids didn’t necessarily exercise poor judgement or intent.
Assault in the Context of Clown Scaring
Assault involves creating a reasonable belief of imminent harm. If a clown makes a threatening gesture that makes someone think they are about to be hit, it could be classified as assault. The degree of perceived threat is critical. For instance, a clown standing far away might not constitute assault, but one making a sudden, threatening gesture could inches away, could.
For those considering dressing up as a clown for a scare, it’s important to think twice. Legal consequences aside, there’s always a risk of physical retaliation from frightened individuals.
If someone is attacked or threatened by a clown, self-defense is a valid response, provided it’s reasonable under the circumstances. However, preemptive violence against a clown, regardless of their intentions, is not justified.
Anyone who has been seriously affected by a scary clown — whether it’s through physical injury or significant emotional distress — should consider seeking legal counsel. It’s important to identify the perpetrator. Anonymous pranks and people in costumes complicate legal action.
The scary clown trend, while seemingly trivial, can have serious legal implications. Those participating in such activities need to be aware of the potential for causing real harm. Victims of such pranks, especially if they face significant distress or injury, should understand their rights and options for recourse. Like other urban trends, it’s hope this one fades away without causing significant or permanent damage to anyone.