SHE DEFENDED HIM ON A BAIL HEARING. THIS MEANS THERE WAS NO BACKGROUND CHECK ON THE DEFENDANT AND IT WAS SIMPLY A VERY SHORT MATTER. She goes to duty council, gets like probably 15 clients in one day, and defends them all on bail hearings. This kid is NOT her permanent client and is not associated with her in any way. It was just an insane coincidence that she had defended him on a completely separate matter. And He never got charged for "assaulting" me so he didn't have a court date for that.
If there are any Canadians here familiar with our court system then they will surely understand what I am saying. Kicking his ass will have no negative effects with my mom or anybody. The only negative effect would be that he could charge me for assault (Which I KNOW FOR A FACT HE WOULDN'T). We aren't going to kill the kid, just beat him for the stupid choices he made.