In Tennessee, as in many other states, there is a concept known as "reckless endangerment", which is punished in the same way as an intentional assault. Under the provisions of that statute, I once prosecuted a young man who shot a fellow hunter in the head with a .30-30 rifle. The defendant was a tresspasser on a government reservation, was hunting with a rifle in an area reserved for bow hunters and where hunters were not required to wear orange, was using a rifle equipped only with open sights, although only scoped rifles were allowed on the reservation, fired downwards into a brushy ravine facing into the setting sun and, after determining that his victim was a man and not a deer, threw down his rifle and fled, although the victim was still alive and moaning for help. When he later returned to retrieve his rifle, the victim had been found by other bow hunters and was in the process of being loaded into an ambulance. On being questioned by the authorities, the defendant admitted that he had fired the shot, but maintained that it was an accident.

Of course, there was not a shred of evidence to establish that the defendant had shot another hunter intentionally, but the circumstances around the shooting were enough to convince the jury that the defendant's negligence went beyond simple negligence and amounted to "willful disregard of the value of human life". The victim, I am happy to say, recovered, except for the loss of his right eye, and was able to testify at the trial. At the time of the trial, he had recovered to the point that he had resumed hunting and was teaching a hunter's safety class, with himself as the chief exhibit.