Code Duello, Troglodyte Style

The videos available at this Huffington Post site nearly defy description by rational humans. The headline for the post is: "Girls' Fight Ends With Shovel to the Head." True to the headline, an 8 second video clip is shown where a girl gets a shovel to the head.  It looks like a classic case of civil battery.  But the 8 second clip is an outtake from an 8 minute video, also shown, where these two fine examples of American youth conspire to engage in a duel of fisticuffs while their earnest "seconds" stand outside the circle videotaping the exhibition for sharing on the internet.  The longer video has been taken down from youtube but is still available on the Huffington Post site. The longer video raises questions of consent that may provide a defense to a battery claim. How far does the consent go?  Does agreement to a duel with fisticuffs include use of a weapon? (one of the "seconds" even makes a similar query on tape).   It appears that the shovel wielder was earlier surprised when she was kicked by the shovel-to-the-head victim.  Did the kicking escalate the level of consent beyond the implied agreement upon fisticuffs?

What do these videos teach about the use of videos in court?  The 8 second video and the 8 minute video tell very different stories. Does the comparison of the two videos give support to the concerns expressed by law enforcement officers when they are videotaped - that the video shown or taken may not accurately portray the context of what is shown?

Warning! There is saucy language in the longer video!  As you might imagine, the verbal discourse between these aspiring Rhodes scholars and their friends may not be suitable for a classroom.  But, the language does impact upon the issues.

 UPDATE: The 8 second video has been removed from the Huff Post site, but click here to see a re-posting at vine.

Click here or on the image below to be taken to the Huffington Post report:

Civil Battery Follows Soccer Foul

Participants in an athletic contest on the pitch, or the "field" as we Americans say should expect to endure a certain amount of physical contact. Even physical contact rising to the level of a "foul" under the rules of the game should be anticipated by the participants.  Consequently, physical contact that might otherwise be considered a civil battery in a different context will not give rise to such a claim, here; the potential plaintiff likely having impliedly consented to any foreseeable physical contact.

In the video below and a report and video that may be viewed here at Yahoo sports, a different scenario presents.  Following a seemingly innocuous tripping foul in a South Carolina high school girls' soccer game, the victim of the foul rises up and viciously physically attacks the opposing player.  The news report indicates that criminal charges have been filed. Ostensibly, a civil battery claim will also lie. It can hardly be implied that by engaging in a soccer match one may be deemed to have consented to a beating.

See also the issues and videos presented in this post.

Video of civil battery in HS girls' soccer game:

Citing Corporate Social Responsibility, Air CanadaThreatens to Pull NHL Endorsement

In a National Hockey League game, Boston Bruin player Zedeno Chara delivered a check on Montreal Canadien player Max Pacioretty.  The incident is shown in the video below.  Pacioretty was seriously injured.  Chara received a major penalty but no fine or suspension from the league.  Citing "Corporate Social Responsibility," Air Canada, a major sponsor of the NHL issued the following letter to the NHL:

We are contacting you to voice our concern over [the] incident involving Max Pacioretty and Zdeno Chara at the Bell Centre in Montreal. This is following several other incidents involving career-threatening and life-threatening headshots in the NHL recently. From a corporate social responsibility standpoint, it is becoming increasingly difficult to associate our brand with sports events which could lead to serious and irresponsible accidents; action must be taken by the NHL before we are encountered with a fatality. Unless the NHL takes immediate action with serious suspension to the players in question to curtail these life-threatening injuries, Air Canada will withdraw its sponsorship of hockey.



This incident is arguably distinguishable from the Todd Bertuzzi incident. The following video raises an issue regarding consent in a civil battery claim. How much physical contact do you consent to when you lace up the skates? Or, as in the clip further below, you step on the soccer field? At what point does the physical contact go beyond that to which consent may be presumed?