person of the other or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and [b] a harmful contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results. Waters v. Blackshear, 412 Mass. 589, 590, 591 N.E.2d 184, 185 (1992) citing Restatement 2d of Torts, § 13 (1965) (emphasis supplied). In addition, Blackshear held that “[a] result is intended if the act is done for the purpose of accomplishing the result or with knowledge that to a substantial certainty such a result will ensue.” Id. at 590-91, 591 N.E.2d 184 citing W.L. Prosser & W.P. Keeton, Torts, § 9, at 41 (5th ed.1984). This definition parallels the § 523(a)(6) scienter requirements for “wilful” under Geiger. Geiger, 523 U.S. at 61, 118 S.Ct. 974; see also Pettey v. Belanger, 232 B.R. 543, 546^7 (D.Mass.1999) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, it is a bedrock principle of
holding that a sexual assault on a youth homes resident was excluded from an insurance policys coverage by an assault and battery exclusion notwithstanding that the claim was couched in negligence holding that under maryland common law an assault is an attempted battery an actual battery or a combination of the two holding that the defendant could be convicted of sexual battery a lesser crime not included in the offense for which he was indicted where the defendant requested that sexual battery be submitted to the jury holding that the debtors liability for sexual assault and battery in massachusetts falls squarely within the exception contained in  523a6 holding that allegations of sexual assault by an employee of the church fell within coverage for sexual misconduct