Ohio prosecutor wants teen tried as adult for referee assault | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

Ohio prosecutor wants teen tried as adult for referee assault

Associated Press
1762873_web1_web-footballhelmet

DAYTON, Ohio — An Ohio county prosecutor wants a 17-year-old boy charged as an adult for head-butting a football referee and causing a concussion.

The Dayton Daily News reports Montgomery County Prosecutor Mat Heck Jr. filed a motion Wednesday to have the Dayton Dunbar High School student’s juvenile felonious assault charge transferred to adult court.

Authorities say the helmeted teen head-butted referee Scott Bistrek during the second quarter of Dunbar’s game against Cincinnati Roger Bacon on Aug. 31.

Bistrek recently testified before the Ohio Senate, which is considering a bill to make an assault on a sports official a felony. Bistrek said he was assaulted after calling a penalty on the teen for pushing an opponent after the whistle had blown.

Heck called the assault “sickening.”

USA Today reports the game was called after the incident occurred in the first half, giving the opposing team Roger Bacon High School (Cincinnati) the win.

“The penalty that made the kid mad was their 12th penalty already,” Roger Bacon coach Mike Blaut told the Cincinnati Enquirer. “They were marking off the ball, half the distance to the goal line, and that’s when he went right after the referee and head-butted him. He hit him on the right side of his head.”

Categories: World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.