Court held that claimant had not carried her burden of proving debtor's debt he owed to her was the result of a "willful and malicious injury," when the claimant produced no evidence at trial other than the existence of a default judgment from the state court.  The Court held that without at least some showing of intent, which the claimant asserted she did not need to provide because of the state court's default judgment, the Court could not find that the claimant had proven the debtor intended to cause the harm leading to the debt under Bankruptcy Code section 523(a)(6).  Of particular importance to the Court was the fact that the underlying state-court action (carnal knowledge of a minor) did not require the state court to find any intentional wrongdoing on the part of the debtor, so the default judgment alone failed to prove any intent to inflict injury, let alone a "willful and malicious" infliction of injury.