Delmon Young's in Big Trouble...

[Outshined_One]

delmon young is a moron. he should be punished.

 

delmon young is not a guy who decided that since the umpire screwed up he was going to kill him with a bat. he should not be punished in that manner.

 

also, until the umpire takes legal action, we can just drop the legal jargon, as it's irrelevant to the suspension discussion.

 

Actually, the law is quite relevant given the fact that contracts basically allow baseball to exist. It's why labor lawyers represent the Player's Association. It's why almost all sports agents have law degrees. I'm sure there's plenty of language in the CBA and various other codes in baseball that has to do with actions like these, accidents, and intent. That's how punishments are decided upon and meted out.

 

Baseball has a legal governing structure; it's reasonable to bring this "jargon" into the equation.

 

you really think they're going to use the legal definition of intent when determining how long to suspend him? and that they'll ignore the common definition of intent?

 

I fail to see how the legal definition and common definition of intent are different. I'd like to see how you separate the two.

[stitchface]

you think a season ban is excessive for physically assaulting an umpire with a bat? I think you have to set a standard that if you throw something at the ump, you will be severely punished. Otherwise the next time he might take a swing at the ump with the bat. I don't see how any punishment is excessive - you seem to be arguing that since he didn't try to kill the umpire, he shouldn't be severely punished. I don't follow that logic at all.

[OleMissCub]

 

 

you really think they're going to use the legal definition of intent when determining how long to suspend him? and that they'll ignore the common definition of intent?

 

Ummmm...yes. This is potentially a felony. And the only reason he can't be charged with assault is because the umpire probably didn't see it coming.

 

How can you turn a blind eye to the seriousness of this?

[treebird]

delmon young is a moron. he should be punished.

 

delmon young is not a guy who decided that since the umpire screwed up he was going to kill him with a bat. he should not be punished in that manner.

 

also, until the umpire takes legal action, we can just drop the legal jargon, as it's irrelevant to the suspension discussion.

 

Actually, the law is quite relevant given the fact that contracts basically allow baseball to exist. It's why labor lawyers represent the Player's Association. It's why almost all sports agents have law degrees. I'm sure there's plenty of language in the CBA and various other codes in baseball that has to do with actions like these, accidents, and intent. That's how punishments are decided upon and meted out.

 

Baseball has a legal governing structure; it's reasonable to bring this "jargon" into the equation.

 

you really think they're going to use the legal definition of intent when determining how long to suspend him? and that they'll ignore the common definition of intent?

 

I fail to see how the legal definition and common definition of intent are different. I'd like to see how you separate the two.

 

 

 

 

Intent is different in legal circumstances than how we perceive the word in common life. Intent in a legal sense doesn't require that the actor intend to HARM the person. Intent can be quantified by the fact that the actor should have known with a "substantial certainty" that his actions could have manifested in either harm coming to the victim OR that his actions could have caused the victim to fear that harm could come about.

 

Throwing a bat at someone following an altercation with that person is certainly enough to quantify Battery, such as in this case.

 

If the ump wanted to file a criminal charge for battery against Young, he'd have the requisite circumstances for that motion.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Potential felony?

 

Seriously?

[NCCubFan]

OK, folks, the insulting of other posters WILL stop. There's been too much of that going on here lately.

 

As far as an appropriate penalty, I think a possible precedent is back in the 1960s when Giants pitcher Juan Marichal intentionally and repeatedly bashed the opposing catcher on the head with his bat. I don't know how long his suspension was, but that may be a good starting point to look at here. And I think the umpire should sue Young and be awarded a ton of money.

[XZero771679666304]

he can be defended in that some people are suggesting he be banned from baseball forever and that is laughably excessive.

.

 

He potentially committed a FELONY on the baseball diamond. A ban is hardly excessive.

 

carl everett headbutted a player. did you want him banned?

 

If I am not mistaken, Carl's headbutt was at worst simple assault. At worst, Youngs offense was ADW. Plus Young's toss wasn't a knee jerk reaction. He walked away from the ump casually, having ample time to consider his action before he took it. Everett's headbutt was in the heat of an animated, nose to nose argument, and lacked obvious intent. Plus, Carl did not use a weapon, which is exactly what a bat is when you throw it at someone.

[OleMissCub]

Potential felony?

 

Seriously?

 

Perhaps. If someone really wanted to go for Delmon's blood they could charge him with aggravated assault, which usually has a max of twenty years.

[Outshined_One]

Intent is different in legal circumstances than how we perceive the word in common life. Intent in a legal sense doesn't require that the actor intend to HARM the person. Intent can be quantified by the fact that the actor should have known with a "substantial certainty" that his actions could have manifested in either harm coming to the victim OR that his actions could have caused the victim to fear that harm could come about.

 

Throwing a bat at someone following an altercation with that person is certainly enough to quantify Battery, such as in this case.

 

If the ump wanted to file a criminal charge for battery against Young, he'd have the requisite circumstances for that motion.

 

Correct, and the same applies in the common definition. I could intend to run 20 miles tomorrow, but I know there's a really, really good chance that I will not reach that mark. However, that still won't stop me from intending to try and do it (and coming up short after about two miles). I could order an extra large pizza, intending to eat the entire thing, even though there's almost no chance I could do it in one sitting. That doesn't stop me from my intentions. I end up eating all but two slices because I'm too full.

 

Again, I'm seeing a disconnect here.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Potential felony?

 

Seriously?

 

Perhaps. If someone really wanted to go for Delmon's blood they could charge him with aggravated assault, which usually has a max of twenty years.

 

Aggravated assault? He flipped a bat at him, he didn't wield it and take a swing! Not only that, but it hit the dude square in a chest protector and he didn't even flinch. The overreaction to this is getting out of hand. There were probably plenty of people saying the same things about lawsuits and permanent bans when Alomar and Everett made their stupid decisions, and we'll probably see something similar here in terms of punishment, and that's fair.

[Outshined_One]

Potential felony?

 

Seriously?

 

Perhaps. If someone really wanted to go for Delmon's blood they could charge him with aggravated assault, which usually has a max of twenty years.

 

Aggravated assault? He flipped a bat at him! Not only that, but it hit the dude square in a chest protector and he didn't even flinch. The overreaction to this is getting out of hand. There were probably plenty of people saying the same things about lawsuits and permanent bans when Alomar and Everett made their stupid decisions, and we'll probably see something similar here in terms of punishment, and that's fair.

 

He's talking about the potential for it. The umpire would definitely have a case. The law doesn't tend to make special exceptions for sporting events with regards to these kinds of activities (although athletes tend to get preferential treatment, which is another matter altogether). If two guys on the street got into a heated argument, then one of the guys chucked a bat and hit the other guy with it, he could very well be charged with assault with a deadly weapon or aggravated assault.

 

That said, if there are criminal charges, I predict Young ends up getting probation and community service.

 

A lawsuit, however, is another matter altogether. Considering that there is video tape of the incident and that Young is on record as saying that he intended to hit the umpire with the bat, there could be interesting penalties awaiting Mr. Young for his actions.

[Chris]

Not only that, but it hit the dude square in a chest protector and he didn't even flinch.

 

I really don't think whether he was wearing a chest protector and/or flinched takes away from what Delmon did.

 

I'm not calling either way in regards to what will/should happen to him. However, things shouldn't be tolerated on a baseball field that wouldn't be tolerated anywhere else in society.

[Chris]

The quotes I read had Delmon saying that he never intended to hit the umpire. When/Where did he say he meant to hit him?

[OleMissCub]

 

Aggravated assault? He flipped a bat at him, he didn't wield it and take a swing! Not only that, but it hit the dude square in a chest protector and he didn't even flinch. The overreaction to this is getting out of hand. There were probably plenty of people saying the same things about lawsuits and permanent bans when Alomar and Everett made their stupid decisions, and we'll probably see something similar here in terms of punishment, and that's fair.

 

Eh, he flipped a bat at him, so what the hell....He didn't flip his bat. Goodness, are y'all watching the same video as I am??

 

Anyways, yes, if someone really wanted to go after him they could charge him with aggravated assault...which in the Model Penal Code reads:

 

A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he

 

(b) attempts to cause or purposely or knowingly causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon.

 

And yes, a bat is considered a deadly weapon.

Edited April 28, 2006 by OleMissCub

[XZero771679666304]

Potential felony?

 

Seriously?

 

Perhaps. If someone really wanted to go for Delmon's blood they could charge him with aggravated assault, which usually has a max of twenty years.

 

Aggravated assault? He flipped a bat at him, he didn't wield it and take a swing! Not only that, but it hit the dude square in a chest protector and he didn't even flinch. The overreaction to this is getting out of hand. There were probably plenty of people saying the same things about lawsuits and permanent bans when Alomar and Everett made their stupid decisions, and we'll probably see something similar here in terms of punishment, and that's fair.

 

He threw a bat at him and could just as easily hit the ump in the head. A flying baseball bat is not a precision instrument, and Delmon is LUCKY he hit the ump in the chest, or he might be sitting in a jail cell right now. Again, given the distance Delmon was from the ump when he thew the bat, the velocity and location the bat hit, this was not just a "flip". A flipped bat does not go 15+ feet, nearly on a straight trajectory.

 

The guys on BBTN also seemed to think a season long suspension might be coming. I think there are just as many people being overly dismissive here as overreactive.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I really don't think whether he was wearing a chest protector and/or flinched takes away from what Delmon did.

 

The point about the umpire's reaction is perspective. Sure he flipped the bat at him pretty hard, but the umpire turned into it and barely had any reaction to it.

 

I'm not calling either way in regards to what will/should happen to him. However, things shouldn't be tolerated on a baseball field that wouldn't be tolerated anywhere else in society.

 

I don't think anyone is saying Young's actions should be tolerated, but people are making a lot of inferences about the situation that are making it out to be much worse than it is. Refer back to my previous comment about the Alomar and Everett situations.

 

Delmon made a mistake in the heat of the moment, but the backlash is beyond extreme at this point.

[treebird]

 

Aggravated assault? He flipped a bat at him, he didn't wield it and take a swing! Not only that, but it hit the dude square in a chest protector and he didn't even flinch. The overreaction to this is getting out of hand. There were probably plenty of people saying the same things about lawsuits and permanent bans when Alomar and Everett made their stupid decisions, and we'll probably see something similar here in terms of punishment, and that's fair.

 

Eh, he flipped a bat at him, so what the hell....He didn't flip his bat. Goodness, are y'all watching the same video as I am??

 

Anyways, yes, if someone really wanted to go after him they could charge him with aggravated assault...which in the Model Penal Code reads:

 

A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he

 

(b) attempts to cause or purposely or knowingly causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon.

 

And yes, a bat is considered a deadly weapon.

 

if you buy a dvd and watch it with a friend who is not in your family, you've just committed copyright infringement.

 

it's almost as though courts look at these things on a case-by-case basis for a reason.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

Aggravated assault? He flipped a bat at him, he didn't wield it and take a swing! Not only that, but it hit the dude square in a chest protector and he didn't even flinch. The overreaction to this is getting out of hand. There were probably plenty of people saying the same things about lawsuits and permanent bans when Alomar and Everett made their stupid decisions, and we'll probably see something similar here in terms of punishment, and that's fair.

 

Eh, he flipped a bat at him, so what the hell....He didn't flip his bat. Goodness, are y'all watching the same video as I am??

 

Anyways, yes, if someone really wanted to go after him they could charge him with aggravated assault...which in the Model Penal Code reads:

 

A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he

 

(b) attempts to cause or purposely or knowingly causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon.

 

And yes, a bat is considered a deadly weapon.

 

A gun is a deadly weapon as well, but it's deadliness is significantly lessened if you throw it at someone rather than shooting someone with it.

[OleMissCub]

 

A gun is a deadly weapon as well, but it's deadliness is significantly lessened if you throw it at someone rather than shooting someone with it.

 

For the purposes of assaulting someone, a bat is a deadly weapon. So is your leg by the way.

[XZero771679666304]

I really don't think whether he was wearing a chest protector and/or flinched takes away from what Delmon did.

 

The point about the umpire's reaction is perspective. Sure he flipped the bat at him pretty hard, but the umpire turned into it and barely had any reaction to it.

 

I'm not calling either way in regards to what will/should happen to him. However, things shouldn't be tolerated on a baseball field that wouldn't be tolerated anywhere else in society.

 

I don't think anyone is saying Young's actions should be tolerated, but people are making a lot of inferences about the situation that are making it out to be much worse than it is. Refer back to my previous comment about the Alomar and Everett situations.

 

Delmon made a mistake in the heat of the moment, but the backlash is beyond extreme at this point.

 

Come on. Neither Everett's or Alomar's offenses are comparable. Young walked away from the ump, the chose to turn around and throw (not flip) his bat at the ump. When he walked away, he had enough time to consider what he wanted to do. I don't think Everett or Alomar gave any conscious thought to what they did more than 1/2 second before they did it.

 

Young walked away, turned around and threw his bat (which is far more dangerous than a goober or slight headbutt) at the ump, likely after considering what he was going to do. Your defense of him is as irrational as any of the condemnations in this thread.

[Outshined_One]

Anyways, yes, if someone really wanted to go after him they could charge him with aggravated assault...which in the Model Penal Code reads:

 

A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he

 

(b) attempts to cause or purposely or knowingly causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon.

 

And yes, a bat is considered a deadly weapon.

 

Although, in all fairness, different states can have different definitions of various laws. Some follow the Model Penal Code to the letter, others look to different sources. I know the Florida Criminal Code has provisions in it regarding aggravated assault and battery of sports officials/umpires/refs. Was this played in Pawtucket or Durham?

[OleMissCub]

 

if you buy a dvd and watch it with a friend who is not in your family, you've just committed copyright infringement.

 

it's almost as though courts look at these things on a case-by-case basis for a reason.

 

Look, i'm not saying he's guilty of aggravated assault or whatever. I'm saying that he can be CHARGED with this crime given the circumstances. Your "case-by-case basis" scenario arises when it goes before the fact-finder, either the judge or the jury.

[Outshined_One]

 

A gun is a deadly weapon as well, but it's deadliness is significantly lessened if you throw it at someone rather than shooting someone with it.

 

For the purposes of assaulting someone, a bat is a deadly weapon. So is your leg by the way.

 

And, as Ricky Manning taught us in California, your shoe can constitute a deadly weapon.

[OleMissCub]

Anyways, yes, if someone really wanted to go after him they could charge him with aggravated assault...which in the Model Penal Code reads:

 

A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he

 

(b) attempts to cause or purposely or knowingly causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon.

 

And yes, a bat is considered a deadly weapon.

 

Although, in all fairness, different states can have different definitions of various laws. Some follow the Model Penal Code to the letter, others look to different sources. I know the Florida Criminal Code has provisions in it regarding aggravated assault and battery of sports officials/umpires/refs. Was this played in Pawtucket or Durham?

 

I used MPC because it was just off the top of my head since I don't know the particular flordia statues. Was this game played in Florida?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

A gun is a deadly weapon as well, but it's deadliness is significantly lessened if you throw it at someone rather than shooting someone with it.

 

For the purposes of assaulting someone, a bat is a deadly weapon. So is your leg by the way.

 

You missed the point. A gun is a deadly weapon because you can shoot people with it, not because you can knock someone out throwing it. In a similar fashion, a bat is a deadly weapon because you can beat someone senseless with it, not because you can chuck it at someone.*

 

*Obviously these are not absolutes, but you get the point I'm making.