Minor hockey coach investigated for tripping player

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Hevishot

Yes but since when is it ok to lay a hand on a kid? My dad might of kicked my @ss when I was younger but he never tripped or hit any of my friends or kids that I played sports with. There has to be something wrong with you if you did not think that tripping somebodys child was not going to lead to charges or some sort of "investigation"

I hate to go all cap'n crunch but are you serious? Did you seriously just compare child abuse to tripping a kid in full hockey equipment?

Criminal charges for tripping someone?

Was it unwarranted? Yes. Classless? Yes. Dbag move? Yes. Child abuse? Hardly. Dangerous? Maybe. It sounds like one of the kids was hurt but that look to be a result of the pile up. Will he get barged with something? Probably and he might even deserve it but he's not going to jail. He'll get a fine or community service or simply be banned from coaching sports.

Saying this guy is mentally ill is, well, pretty crazy.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

he broke a kid's wrist. if there were no injuries i'd agree with just a coaching ban, but once you injure someone with an intentional action that's assault. the guy deserves criminal charges

I think there is a difference between a violent action with intent to injure and the injury being a coincidence.

There is no way he had intent to injure. I'm sure it'll be investigated and he'll get in trouble but lets not call him the second coming of hitler just yet.

I've seen more violent actions in minor hockey from coaches towards their own players.

Edit: I feel the inevitable pile on coming with comments saying in defending this guy or that I'm a terrible person who condones beating up kids so I'll say that the guy is a classless jerk but if no one was hurt the video probably would have ended up in the funny pics and vids thread.

I feel bad for the kid who got hurt but this wasn't intent to injure. It was a moronic coach who did something stupid. The fact that he's gonna be ostracized and forever remembered for this stupid action is gonna be a pretty harsh punishment on its own.

In fact would it even be news of the kid wasn't hurt?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

It sounds like one of the kids was hurt but that look to be a result of the pile up.

The good ol' Bertuzzi defense.

I'm fine if the coach is charged, he's a grown ass man trying to start something with a 13 year old. Doubt he meant to break a wrist, but he did.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

In fact would it even be news of the kid wasn't hurt?

I would hope it would be news.

When we put our kids in sport we trust that the coaches assigned to the teams will teach them the skills of the sport, but also sportsmanship skills, and hell, even life skills.

None of the above were displayed by this coach.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

The guy is a dick but let's not go crazy here. He tripped a kid, he didn't beat the #### out of him. Little early to say he's got mental issues.

He deserves to be banned from coaching or anything to do with minor hockey but I don't think criminal charges should be laid.

Sure they should. He's an adult and assaulted a child for God's sake. No different than if he shoved the kid to the ice.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I would hope it would be news.

When we put our kids in sport we trust that the coaches assigned to the teams will teach them the skills of the sport, but also sportsmanship skills, and hell, even life skills.

None of the above were displayed by this coach.

What does that have to do with anything? Did I claim that he's not setting a bad example?

Before I knew a kid broke his wrist I said that criminal charges aren't warranted. I also responded to someone who compared it to beating up a kid and said this guy must have a mental illness.

One of the very first responses on this thread was "that's hilarious".

Would anyone say that if this coach beat up this kid or two handed him with a hockey stick? When I hear assaulted a child I think an actual assault. Tripping someone doesn't sound like dangerous violent crime to me and thats what I think when I hear assault.

How would the responses go if the kid wasn't hurt? Would people still be saying this guy should be charged? The injury was not intentional and therefore the injury shouldn't be the primary cause of judgement. Judge the action of the coach. He stuck out his foot. Any suggestion that he intentionally broke this kids wrist is just wrong. However since there was an injury as the result of his stupid action I imagine he's gonna find himself in more trouble than if no one was hurt.

[Rerun]

Definition of assault under the criminal code of Canada

According to their website under section 265 of the CCC:



265. (1) A person commits an assault when


(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;



(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or


(c) while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.


The section of the CCC website regarding assault can be found here.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/a...126.html#s-265.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Definition of assault under the criminal code of Canada

According to their website under section 265 of the CCC:



265. (1) A person commits an assault when


(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;



(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or


(c) while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.


The section of the CCC website regarding assault can be found here.

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc...III-gb:s_264_1

What does that have to do with what I posted? Did I claim that this doesn't qualify as assault under the criminal code? No, I said that I don't think he deserves to go to jail for this. Last time I checked giving my opinion is not akin to challenging the definition of assault under our criminal code.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I hate to go all cap'n crunch but are you serious? Did you seriously just compare child abuse to tripping a kid in full hockey equipment?

I don't think he used said that; but I will.

When an adult who takes advantage of or deliberately causes injury to a child (intended or not); yes, that is child abuse.

Saying this guy is mentally ill is, well, pretty crazy.

I could be wrong, but I read that comment to be referring to 'you' and your comment; not the fellow in the video.

[Senator Clay Davis]

He deserves a really solid public shaming. Maybe tie him to a net and let all the minor hockey kids throw eggs or tomatos at him?

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

What does that have to do with what I posted? Did I claim that this doesn't qualify as assault under the criminal code? No, I said that I don't think he deserves to go to jail for this. Last time I checked giving my opinion is not akin to challenging the definition of assault under our criminal code.

Actually your exact words were:

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I don't think criminal charges should be laid.

I think Rerun was just demonstrating why the should be.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by First Lady

I don't think he used said that; but I will.

When an adult who takes advantage of or deliberately causes injury to a child (intended or not); yes, that is child abuse.



I could be wrong, but I read that comment to be referring to 'you' and your comment; not the fellow in the video.

I'm pretty sure deliberate means intended, no? So if it wasn't intended how could it be deliberate?


And no he said that the coach must have problems to try that. As o yet there haven't been any personal attacks but don't worry there is still time.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Actually your exact words were:



I think Rerun was just demonstrating why the should be.

And my exact words make it pretty clear that it was my opinion not an interpretation of our criminal code so I'm not sure what the criminal code has to do with my opinion. Is there some importance to the fact that my opinion may differ from what can be charged? Just because it can be doesn't mean it should and I don't think it should.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

What does that have to do with anything? Did I claim that he's not setting a bad example?

Before I knew a kid broke his wrist I said that criminal charges aren't warranted. I also responded to someone who compared it to beating up a kid and said this guy must have a mental illness.

One of the very first responses on this thread was "that's hilarious".

Would anyone say that if this coach beat up this kid or two handed him with a hockey stick? When I hear assaulted a child I think an actual assault. Tripping someone doesn't sound like dangerous violent crime to me and thats what I think when I hear assault.

How would the responses go if the kid wasn't hurt? Would people still be saying this guy should be charged? The injury was not intentional and therefore the injury shouldn't be the primary cause of judgement. Judge the action of the coach. He stuck out his foot. Any suggestion that he intentionally broke this kids wrist is just wrong. However since there was an injury as the result of his stupid action I imagine he's gonna find himself in more trouble than if no one was hurt.

Hey big boy read my post. I think it should be news even if there was no injury. I never said he broke the wrist. He meant to trip the kid, a 13 yr old kid, while being watched by other 13 yr old kids, that view him as a power figure.

FYI, but those kids look to the coach for the culture of the team.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I'm pretty sure deliberate means intended, no? So if it wasn't intended how could it be deliberate?

The tripping was deliberate; the injury may or may not have been intended.

Not sure what he hoped to accomplish by tripping him. Perhaps he only wanted to embarrass him, which really is an injury too.

And no he said that the coach must have problems to try that. As o yet there haven't been any personal attacks but don't worry there is still time.

Guess it was just the way I read it.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I think there is a difference between a violent action with intent to injure and the injury being a coincidence.

There is no way he had intent to injure. I'm sure it'll be investigated and he'll get in trouble but lets not call him the second coming of hitler just yet.

I've seen more violent actions in minor hockey from coaches towards their own players.

Edit: I feel the inevitable pile on coming with comments saying in defending this guy or that I'm a terrible person who condones beating up kids so I'll say that the guy is a classless jerk but if no one was hurt the video probably would have ended up in the funny pics and vids thread.

I feel bad for the kid who got hurt but this wasn't intent to injure. It was a moronic coach who did something stupid. The fact that he's gonna be ostracized and forever remembered for this stupid action is gonna be a pretty harsh punishment on its own.

In fact would it even be news of the kid wasn't hurt?

Criminal charges are completely warranted here. Even without the injury the legal grounds are there, but with the injury, it's pretty much necessary.

The game isn't on anymore. There is no 'players in padding' or 'intent to injure' argument. It's assault pure and simple.

Shoot assault can even count verbal threats, you don't think it counts here? With an injury?



EDIT: And for the emotional side, how much of a jerk do you have to be to take the most sportsmanlike part of sport and do that in front of a bunch of kids!

[Rerun]

So let me get this straight Cecil...

You are saying that, in your opinion, had no injury occured to either child, criminal charges against the coach are not warranted?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Rerun

So let me get this straight Cecil...

You are saying that, in your opinion, had no injury occured to either child, criminal charges against the coach are not warranted?

Yes. It's a jerk move but are we now going to make convicted criminals out of child trippers? Ones who are in full padding with a helmet on no less.

Jesus you'd think I was defending graham James here. I'm just saying I don't think we should send this guy to jail for tripping a kid.

And it depends on what you mean by warranted. I'm not making any legal judgements, just my opinion based on the severity f his action and the intended result.

[Keselke]

You guys should probably argue more

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Criminal charges are completely warranted here. Even without the injury the legal grounds are there, but with the injury, it's pretty much necessary.

The game isn't on anymore. There is no 'players in padding' or 'intent to injure' argument. It's assault pure and simple.

Shoot assault can even count verbal threats, you don't think it counts here? With an injury?



EDIT: And for the emotional side, how much of a jerk do you have to be to take the most sportsmanlike part of sport and do that in front of a bunch of kids!

I feel like I'm really repeating myself here. I wasn't making any legal judgements. Im not sure why you guys keep bringing up what he can be charged with. I never debated whether he could be charged under our criminal code.

Nor did I defend the douchiness so I'm not sure how that's relevant.