Georgia scientist pleads guilty to punching girl on ski slopes (41yr old man punches 14yr girl)

ajc.com ^ | 3-9-11

[rawhide]

A Decatur man accused of punching a 14-year-old girl in the face for running into his son on the slopes in Colorado has pleaded guilty to third-degree assault.

The Vail Daily reported Tuesday that the plea from 41-year-old Scott Filler, a renowned malaria expert, was for a misdemeanor stemming from the December incident at Beaver Creek Ski Resort.

Police reports say Filler thought the teen was skiing carelessly when she bumped into his 4-year-old son. Eagle County sheriff's deputies say that's when he jumped on the girl and hit her with his fist. The girl said she was swerving to avoid another skier.

District Attorney Mark Hurlbert says Filler was sentenced to anger management classes and restitution, the amount of which would be determined by the girl.

Prosecutors also sought community service, but Hurlbert says the judge fined Filler $500 instead.

Three witnesses told deputies they observed Filler punch girl between two and four times.

The ski instructor who pulled the Decatur man off the girl told deputies Filler punched her "at least four times, using a closed fist," sheriff's Lt. Mike McWilliam told the AJC. Two other witnesses said they observed Filler yell at the girl before landing two or three punches, the sheriff's office spokesman said.

Filler, charged with misdemeanor child abuse, told deputies he thought the girl was skiing carelessly and had seriously injured his son. The boy was not hurt, however, and Filler apologized. The girl was treated for minor injuries at a local medical center.

Her father requested charges be filed against Filler, who was banned for life from Vail's six ski resorts.

[curiosity]

How do you know she was skiing too fast on the bunny slope?

Because she ran into someone.

[Paytriot]

No trouble really.
And you seem to have completely missed the joke, You got nuthin’, refering to your tag line. But then self rightious people who live hysterically tend to miss alot.
Your rebuttal of my posts are like pure Zen, Completely empty.

[444Flyer]

Yep. The usual suspect. He even poses like the immature little punk that he is. Passive aggressive bully who picks on young women because he'd get his butt whipped by a man.

"Dr." of what? Creep.

[sport]

I agree. He can just thank the good Lord that it wasn’t my daughter he hit with his fist. I would be in prison. He would be in hell.

[Hot Tabasco]

Because she ran into someone.

That's the stupidist statement I've read yet........I've had people run into me in ski lift lines......obviously they were moving too fast.

[jwalsh07]

How is it I'm not concerned? I've stated repeatedly he deserved to be punished for what he did.

He deserved to have his ass kicked. I'm unfamiliar with ski slopes but where I live any man seen beating up a 14 year old girl would have gotten what he deserved.

[BykrBayb]

By definition, if you can't avoid hitting someone on a slope like that, you're skiing too fast. Go look up the skier's responsibility code if you don't believe me.

More lies. Where does it say that the only possible way to hit another skier is by going too fast? It doesn't, because that's simply not true.

If you have to lie to make your point, consider the possibility that you're wrong.

[trisham]

Still haven’t picked up that dictionary, have you?

[Paytriot]

Teaming up eh? Casual insults, false accusations of denial, and now a Union of man haters? All the hallmarks of liberalism.

[BykrBayb]

I'm unfamiliar with ski slopes but where I live any man seen beating up a 14 year old girl would have gotten what he deserved.

Look up the skier's responsibility code. Punching little girls in the face is a minor infraction of the rules. No biggie.

[org.whodat]

Parents that get called out doing reckless things with their children always have the same reaction, when kids get old enough not to step in front of a moving car they are old enought to ski. Other wise put them on a trash bag and let them side down a small hill.

[Paytriot]

It’s ok, I understand.

[DoughtyOne]

I appreciate your reasoned comments in light of my prior disagreement with you.

There are three words that have relevancy here. They are not, “He did it, because...” They are, “He was wrong.” (oops)

I agree.

And this guy got a free pass.

He paid a fine, paid her restitution, and now has a permanent criminal record that forever labels him as a child abuser. That seems fair to me.

It's pretty rare anyone with no priors would get a worse sentence for punching someone in the face and not doing any permanent damage.

We're going to have to agree to disagree here, and I'll admit this end of the equasion is open to a little more interpretation than the actual offense was. (at least IMO)  I'm still going to make my case.

There are cetain crimes where you let the guy off with a lighter sentence since there were no influencing priors, and nobody was physically harmed.  And in some instances, I wholely agree with that.

When it comes to direct physical crimes against other humans, assult, abusing children, rape, murder, I take a very dim view of giving the guy a mulligan.

You and I have no idea how being struck in this mannor will affect this girl for the rest of her life.  She may shake it off.  She may also be afraid of going out into public.  She could even develop problems as an adult, becoming a recluse because of an inordinate fear this guy instilled in her.  I look back on my youth, and some of my most lasting memories, were when I got in trouble for something, when I didn't mean to do anything wrong.  For instance, "How do I avoid this negative behavior against me, if I was trying to play by the rules now?  I guess I can't avoid extreme negative measures against me, if I go out in public."

While this does involve some speculation on my part, it's not a big stretch here.

This guy was a learned man.  He had 41 years of life experience, from which to gleen a proper response to this situation.  There was just no excuse for this.  And letting the guy off with a fine, having to register, and a few community service hours, means that the negative impact on him will certainly last less time than the psychological impact on the girl will, even if she does recover quickly.  And that recovery in and of itself is going to be relative.  She may never fully recover comfort on the ski slopes.

That just addresses this guy and his outcome.  What about all the other knuckle draggers our there that now understand that they don't have much to fear from the law if they clinch their fists and pummel a fourteen year old?

If he struck my 14 year old kid that way, and caused her lasting problems, I would be very tempted to meet out more punishment to the guy, seeing what he wound up with.  If I had taken her to the slopes to have a nice family outing, and then she got assulted by an adult on the slopes, his behavior with her would have been very tame by what I would have done in response.

Don't the victim and the parents of this young girl have the expectation of this guy getting the book thrown at him for this sort of thing?  In my book, hell yes.

I don't think you would have been very forgiving if this had been your child.

Take care...

[sport]

I agree. And you wonder why obama got elected President?

[BykrBayb]

I don’t hate men. I like real men. I have no respect for wussies who punch little girls in the face. I wouldn’t consider them men.

[John D]

Because she was probably guilty of reckless endangerment.

Because she was PROBABLY guilty? Do you mean you think a person should be allowed to hit a 14 year old girl in the face four times just because they were PROBABLY guilty of something. I can not find one thing she did that was wrong. She was skiing, she turned to avoid another skier who fell and ran into a kid who was also skiing. Don't you think the father had a responsibility to watch his own kid?

[trisham]

I don’t doubt that you think that you understand many things.

[Hot Tabasco]

It was a beginner run, not an advanced slope. By definition..."

I don't know what book you're reading from it's obvious you missed the chapter on beginner slopes.....why do I have to repeat myself?

Beginner slopes are what they are, slopes for beginners who don't know how to ski, who don't know how to turn, who don't know how to stop, slopes where they begin to develop the basics of skiing such as ski control and turning and stopping...........Nobody on these slopes has those basics under control and that is why these innocent non-injury causing collisions occur.............

If I were to use your own ignorant and twisted logic then I would propose that no-one be allowed on any ski-slope unless they had full mastery of the sport and was able to exhibit their complete control of their skis and have to pass a skills test showing that they can control their speed, turn at will and stop at will.........

So tell me, where will one be able to acquire those skills?

[Hot Tabasco]

Teaming up eh?

He's supporting my arguments, you have a problem with that? If so then address my comments too and tell me where I'm wrong...........

[trisham]

You and I have no idea how being struck in this mannor will affect this girl for the rest of her life. She may shake it off. She may also be afraid of going out into public. She could even develop problems as an adult, becoming a recluse because of an inordinate fear this guy instilled in her.

**************************************

Excellent post, DoughtyOne. I hadn't even considered that aspect of this incident.