Support the Guide on Patron!

Be sure to share your comments in the Class Participation section below -- that's the best part! Also, you can use the arrows on your keyboard to flip through pages quickly.

Use this link to buy the books, and a portion of the proceeds goes to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Join the conversation! There are now 4 comments on this chapter's page 9. Battery Means Bodily Harm. What are your thoughts?
  1. WJS says

    So how reckless do you have to be to count as reckless? If Al had been paying attention to what he was doing, none of this would have happened.

    • Maybe it would; that depends on just how suddenly Fred moved, and how observant Al is.

    • The most you could get out of this case would be a civil judgement for medical expenses/pain and suffering, but as a rule juries are reluctant to grant judgements to people who’ve already reacted by committing a greater injury (clean hands doctrine).

    • You have to be doing something (the jury would believe that) you should know could result in the injury of another person, performing the action in spite of that knowledge. If the prosecutor can convince the jury that any sane person would know that reaching to order without looking could break someone’s nose, then it’s reckless. If the prosecutor can’t, it’s not. Most likely couldn’t sell the jury on this one though.

Class Participation

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Support the Guide on Patron!