Sorting Right From Wrong
What do we do when wrong makes right? Cases in point: A Saskatchewan hockey referee
assaulted during a game gets a CAT scan showing a previously undiagnosed brain tumour .
. . and a B.C. computer hacker who illegally accessed the files of a U.S. judge helps
convict him of child-porn charges.
In both cases, the law was broken. Now, society is left to judge the perpetrators.
It’s a quandary minor hockey referee Dale Neudorf of Meadow Lake now contemplates.
During a recreational game in northern Saskatchewan, Neudorf was crosschecked into
the boards by a player angered by a decision.
Concussed and with no memory of the attack, Neudorf underwent a brain scan in
Saskatoon. While there was no sign of bleeding, doctors found a toonie-sized tumour — a
shocking development since Neudorf had exhibited no symptoms.
Neudorf, who will likely need surgery, says people have to take responsibility for their
actions, but he doesn’t bear a grudge against his attacker.
If Neudorf’s attacker is convicted, yet his action indirectly saves Neudorf’s life, how
much weight — if any — should be placed on the end result when it comes to determining
his punishment?
While the potential “good” resulting from the attack on Neudorf was accidental, what
about computer hacker Bradley Willman, who knowingly broke the law so he could bring
child-porn predators to justice?
From his Vancouver-area home, Willman illegally accessed the computers of dozens of
people involved in child porn in North America and reported them — including Orange
County, Calif., Superior Court Judge Ronald Kline. Forced to quit during a long legal
battle, Kline was this week sentenced to 27 months in jail after admitting possession of
child porn.
1. Computer hackers are rightly reviled and feared. But how do we judge someone
like Willman, whose actions may have spared innocent children from degradation?
Like life, the law is rarely a case of black and white. (Leader Post, Feb. 2007)
2. What do we do when wrong makes right?
Docsity.com
