Now this would make for a terrific case for teaching consent in battery for Torts. Israeli reporter Eitam Lachover donned a special vest made by a body armor company that is designed to protect against the increasing knife attacks of Israelis. Lachover was assured by Yaniv Montakyo, vice president of the manufacturing company, that “You have nothing to worry about, we are very confident in our product.” He then stabbed Lachover and said “I missed.”
When Montakyo pulled out the large commando knife, Lachover looked worried and asked “You’re going to stab me with this?”
After assuring him, Montakyo added “This product can protect from knives that are stronger than this one. Don’t be afraid – if something happens, I’m here.”
He proceeded to stab Lachover three times and the third time penetrated the vest. It was clearly not a serious injury but Lachover required some stitches.
Montakyo later said that he stabbed Lachover in an area with less protective material. Putting aside that customers may want to direct attackers where they will be stabbed to guarantee their protection, the stabbing would seem to be a clear case of negligence. Moreover, consent can be vitiated by mistake, fraud, or coercion. Here the reporter consented under express assurances that there was no risk. Of course, the company could argue that allowing someone to stab you comes with obvious risks like missing and hitting an arm or unprotected area.
There does not appear to be a lawsuit in the works but, while their vest leaves something to be desired, the company could have produced a top notch battery case for Torts textbooks.