Crosswords0 min ago
section 18 wounding with intent in a game of rugby
14 Answers
My parther has been charged for a section 18 wounding with intent when he was playing a game of rugby in the summer last year. he was is a scrum and got punched in the nether regions as this was done he threw out his leg in and accidentally caught a bald guy on the top of his head causing the guy to receive two stud mark gashes to his head. This resulted in him receiving stiches after the game. The ball was in play whilst this happened and this injury did not cause the game to stop at this time although it was near to the end of the game. The victim has said that it was a deliberate kick to his head although my partner said that he was not even aware of anyone underneath him in the scrum at this time. We are still unaware of any witness statements and medical evidence at this time however his is awating plea and directions on the 19 March. Although my partner obviously caused these injuries to this person he categorically states that there was definitely no intention to cause these injuries to this person or to any other person during a game of rugby. The rugby club have heard nothing of this impending case and following the mentioned game both clubs including my parther did the usual after match antics in the bar with no animosity from the other team. Any advice on this would be greatlyfully received as i am not sure if the barristers/solicitors are fully conversant with other cases of this nature. thank you
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by donnagregory1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Are the police actually charging? It's virtually impossible to get a conviction in these cases even if he was red carded so just dig in deny it and plead not guilty. Contact the local RFU authorities and get them to confirm no action was taken at the time by the referee, stick with the "it was an accident" explanation. Christ I've been to hospital with loads of injuries in my playing career but never any thought's of a prosecution, sounds like some sort of compo attempt to me!
The police did charge this and it will be his second appearance at crown court relating to this charge with plea and directions being his third appearance at court on the 19 march. The guy did not report it until at least 3 weeks after the event we are assuming that the extent of his injuries (currently unknown to us other than the stitches) warranted in getting such a serious charge. We have been told that the CPS are very confident in securing a conviction and my partner being sent to prison. Thank you very much for your time and responses. My partner too has suffered lots of injuries but expects them as part of playing rugby.
-- answer removed --
hi donnagregory1, I agree with the comments from R1 and Eddie and on the facts you have disclosed I am surprised that your partner has been charged with criminal assault let alone the serious offence of Sec 18 GBH w/i. But he obviously has and the case must have passed the evidential and public interest test for case to proceed to the charging stage. (this does not mean your partner is considered guilty).
Firstly, can I ask whether your partner used the services of a legal rep during the process at the police station (interviews etc) and if so what advice was given?
I have only ever experienced one similar case which was reported by a solicitor on behalf of her boyfriend who received minor injuries during a local footy match. Basically, she demanded police treated the matter as a criminal assault and prosecuted etc etc but was given two words of advice !
Firstly, can I ask whether your partner used the services of a legal rep during the process at the police station (interviews etc) and if so what advice was given?
I have only ever experienced one similar case which was reported by a solicitor on behalf of her boyfriend who received minor injuries during a local footy match. Basically, she demanded police treated the matter as a criminal assault and prosecuted etc etc but was given two words of advice !
I've played rugby for 8 years.
To be fair, to play rugby you are putting our body on the line anyway. People die, very rarely, in the scrums if the scrum collapses. There is an obvious risk of injury. It is hard to prove this kick was deliberate as rugby is a rough game with limbs flying everywhere.
What position was your partner playing? If he was in the front row, maybe he thought the ball was still in the scrum and tried to hook it back. Always lot of confusion in the scrum.
To be fair, to play rugby you are putting our body on the line anyway. People die, very rarely, in the scrums if the scrum collapses. There is an obvious risk of injury. It is hard to prove this kick was deliberate as rugby is a rough game with limbs flying everywhere.
What position was your partner playing? If he was in the front row, maybe he thought the ball was still in the scrum and tried to hook it back. Always lot of confusion in the scrum.
My partner had a legal rep at police station (wasnt particularly great) and we have had a solicitor since day one (although he appears to be struggling with finding relative examples for this instance). The good thing is that the Barrister is a very avid and keen rugby player and has also not heard of such a serious charge from playing a game of rugby. We are still waiting to have a conference with barrister and solictor before the 19 march which we have been told will be before the plea and directions.
I think he went from playing front row to second row and changed and inbetween was subbed and changed his boots which the ref did not check when he went back on to play. This was all pre incident. The victim maintains that the kick to his head was deliberate however the stud marks are across the top of his head indicating that my parnter boots skimmed across his head rather than a straightforward kick.
thank you all so much for your responses. I have spent endless amounts of time trawling the internet in order to find legal examples/other examples of sporting injuries etc that may help this case.
I think he went from playing front row to second row and changed and inbetween was subbed and changed his boots which the ref did not check when he went back on to play. This was all pre incident. The victim maintains that the kick to his head was deliberate however the stud marks are across the top of his head indicating that my parnter boots skimmed across his head rather than a straightforward kick.
thank you all so much for your responses. I have spent endless amounts of time trawling the internet in order to find legal examples/other examples of sporting injuries etc that may help this case.
Hi,
Ok, Can we assume your partner answered all questions during police interview (as opposed to being advised to replying 'no-comment').
The investigator would have disclosed the evidence during interviews etc, therefore can your partner expand on why the police argee this should be treated as a criminal assault as opposed to acceptable injury due to the nature 'a rough' game?
Surely the investigator has spoken to the Ref.
If you are searching for legal exampes etc, search using the words 'stated cases assaults sports games'. There will be numerous examples but I would imagine they would concentrate more on the prosecution side due to the grey areas of what 'consent' means.
Ok, Can we assume your partner answered all questions during police interview (as opposed to being advised to replying 'no-comment').
The investigator would have disclosed the evidence during interviews etc, therefore can your partner expand on why the police argee this should be treated as a criminal assault as opposed to acceptable injury due to the nature 'a rough' game?
Surely the investigator has spoken to the Ref.
If you are searching for legal exampes etc, search using the words 'stated cases assaults sports games'. There will be numerous examples but I would imagine they would concentrate more on the prosecution side due to the grey areas of what 'consent' means.
Here is one example of a 'stated case':-
R v Billinghurst [1978] Crim LR 553.
During a rugby match and in an off-the-ball incident B punched an opposing player, in the face fracturing the jaw. B was charged with inflicting grievous bodily harm contrary to s20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The only issue in the case was consent. Evidence was given by the victim that on previous occasions he had been punched and had himself punched opponents on the rugby field, and by a defence witness, a former International rugby player, that in the modern game of rugby punching is the rule rather than the exception.
· It was argued by the defence that in the modern game of rugby players consented to the risk of some injury and that the prosecution would have to prove that the blow struck by B was one which was outside the normal expectation of a player so that he could not be said to have consented to it by participating in the game. · The prosecution argued that public policy imposes limits on violence to which a rugby player can consent and that whereas he is deemed to consent to vigorous and even over-vigorous physical contact on the ball, he is not deemed to consent to any deliberate physical contact off the ball.
cont:-
R v Billinghurst [1978] Crim LR 553.
During a rugby match and in an off-the-ball incident B punched an opposing player, in the face fracturing the jaw. B was charged with inflicting grievous bodily harm contrary to s20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The only issue in the case was consent. Evidence was given by the victim that on previous occasions he had been punched and had himself punched opponents on the rugby field, and by a defence witness, a former International rugby player, that in the modern game of rugby punching is the rule rather than the exception.
· It was argued by the defence that in the modern game of rugby players consented to the risk of some injury and that the prosecution would have to prove that the blow struck by B was one which was outside the normal expectation of a player so that he could not be said to have consented to it by participating in the game. · The prosecution argued that public policy imposes limits on violence to which a rugby player can consent and that whereas he is deemed to consent to vigorous and even over-vigorous physical contact on the ball, he is not deemed to consent to any deliberate physical contact off the ball.
cont:-
Continued:
The judge directed the jury that rugby was a game of physical contact necessarily involving the use of force and that players are deemed to consent to force "of a kind which could reasonably be expected to happen during a game." He went on to direct them that a rugby player has no unlimited licence to use force and that "there must obviously be cases which cross the line of that to which a player is deemed to consent." A distinction which the jury might regard as decisive was that between force used in the course of play and force used outside the course of play. The judge told the jury that by their verdict they could set a standard for the future. The jury, by a majority verdict of 11 to 1, convicted B.
The judge directed the jury that rugby was a game of physical contact necessarily involving the use of force and that players are deemed to consent to force "of a kind which could reasonably be expected to happen during a game." He went on to direct them that a rugby player has no unlimited licence to use force and that "there must obviously be cases which cross the line of that to which a player is deemed to consent." A distinction which the jury might regard as decisive was that between force used in the course of play and force used outside the course of play. The judge told the jury that by their verdict they could set a standard for the future. The jury, by a majority verdict of 11 to 1, convicted B.
1 to 14 of 14
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.