Vicki wrote:
> Is "intent to harm" the ultimate determining factor of illegal or injurious
> behavior when it comes to punishing through the legal system?  If in the heat
> of the moment,  a player pushes his skate into another players neck while in
> a skirmish to push the puck over the goal line, how would you ascertain
> intent? If death resulted, would that determine the punishment?
 
Yes, intent and motive does have a lot to do with determining
punishment and accountability through the legal system. The
consequences of first degree murder are very different from negligent
homicide. If you hit someone with your car a lot will depend on
whether, for example, you intended to do it, whether you could have
prevented it by being more careful or if it was simply an unfortunate
accident. In the example you give of a player injured in a goal mouth
scramble, the authorities would have to determine whether the "attacker"
had intent to harm. If not, then there shouldn't be any punishment.
 
I'm not trying to say that hockey players are above the law when they
are on the ice or that we should just accept injuries and violence
out of hand. But innocent until proven guilty should apply when legal
action is involved and motivation is generally part of the proof (though
not necessarily the "ultimate" factor).
 
Keith Kannenberg
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: http://mae.cornell.edu/kannenb/
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.