Man Found Guilty of Assaulting Skaters

[Skatewind]

Article from The Globe and Mail:

Man found guilty of assaulting skaters (http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040204.wutskate04/BNStory/National/)

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by Skatewind
Article from The Globe and Mail:

Man found guilty of assaulting skaters (http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040204.wutskate04/BNStory/National/)

Amazing, this is the first post on this incident. There are hundreds of posts and a over 55,000 views about another case that is pending on this forum in 4 threads (3 of which were closed by the board police). At least this case was judged in a court of law where it belongs and not on the Internet.

Thanks for the post. It reminds us that assault happens every day to skaters or non-skaters. I don't think the reference to assualts on skaters is necessary. Assault is criminal regardless of who the victim is or what they do.

Obviously, this man was adjucated guilty but a court of law and will be sentenced as the law in Canada allows. And punishment is well deserved.

Personally, I think anyone guilty of this type of crime should not get home confinement as this man's attorney is going to request but I don't have a clue what the laws are in Canada regarding potential punishment. But then, my opinion is just that, my opinion. I can only hope that anyone found guilty of assualting anyone would get substantial jail time, especially if drugs were used or if the crime involved a minor. (This case apparently involved drugs, the other on this forum involves a minor.)

[Skatewind]

The article was just printed in today's paper, so I don't think there's anything "amazing" about it at all. I also don't know that it hasn't been discussed previously, since I was simply sharing the article after I read it in today's paper. Unlike the other thread, there may not be a lot of people here who actually know any of the involved parties in this case, so I'm not sure I understand your point. Unless you know all the posters on skatingforums who are personally familiar with both cases, & know specifically in this case they have all been withholding their discussion while in the other they are not, then it's a very speculative opinion at best. These are two completely separate incidents & it is highly unlikely there are posters here who personally know parties involved in both of these cases. I'm also very sure the prosecutor's office in the other case plans on trying the case in a court of law & not on the internet too.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by Skatewind
The article was just printed in today's paper, so I don't think there's anything "amazing" about it at all. I also don't know that it hasn't been discussed previously, since I was simply sharing the article after I read it in today's paper. Unlike the other thread, there may not be a lot of people here who actually know any of the involved parties in this case, so I'm not sure I understand your point. Unless you know all the posters on skatingforums who are personally familiar with both cases, & know specifically in this case they have all been withholding their discussion while in the other they are not, then it's a very speculative opinion at best. These are two completely separate incidents & it is highly unlikely there are posters here who personally know parties involved in both of these cases. I'm also very sure the prosecutor's office in the other case plans on trying the case in a court of law & not on the internet too.

The amazing part is that the Canadian case has been going on for quite sometime and your post of today's article was the first post about it on here. I did a search and found nothing on this forum about it.

I doubt most posters or viewers on these forums know the people involved in either case personally. Some do but most don't.

My point is that the other forum is very heated yet this case has been handled more respectfully by not having all the information argued and argued here. I

And so you know, I don't intend on keeping this going, I just explained what I thought was amazing. I won't shoot you for your opinion so please don't shoot me for mine. I also won't continue this discussion so it doesn't get as out of hand as the other is.

[Schmeck]

Can we get a warning in before the link in the first post? I think the article is a bit graphic, and needs a "not for young children to read" type of warning, if possible. Just in case a parent has a child reading over his/her shoulder, like I do sometimes?

[LTM]

Put a warning on if you want to but the Globe and Mail is a newspaper
and I'm sure no warning appeared on the article. Any kid can pick it up and read it.
As to why we're only just now hearing, could be part of the reason is that unlike the US you can't discuss the evidence in impending court cases in the media. Just that a crime happened, so and so was
charged etc. So until it comes out in evidence there's nothing to discuss. And perhaps out of respect for the people involved, people
who knew about these events refrained from discussing them.

[Schmeck]

Actually, my kids cannot just pick up the paper and read it, since I only let them read our local newspaper, and that's after I've read it. They don't even have access to the paper at their schools, since neither one is in high school yet. And they don't "surf the 'net" either.

Schmeck, who will just have to be a bit more careful about links here, that's all

[vesperholly]

Picking nits here, but the title of the thread should've carried a little bit of forewarning, should it not? It did to me.

[Skatewind]

Originally posted by SkateFan123
I won't shoot you for your opinion so please don't shoot me for mine.
I haven't read anything indicating anyone is shooting you for your opinion. It's a discussion board, & logic-wise, I pointed out a couple specific elements that were effective or ineffective for making a comparison between these two cases. There is no need to resort to violence, :), or inflammatory remarks about shooting anyone.

[Little Bit]

I thought the article was to graphic! Sorry there should be a warning on it like rated X! I have read a lot about sex crimes and 90% of news papers are not as graphic. How could this be printed in a local paper is besides me...... I would seriously write to the editor of this paper and express my feelings about this writing. This should be on CBS along with Janet!

yes, pun was intended

[flippet]

Originally posted by Little Bit

yes, pun was intended

Pun? Where?

[dooobedooo]

Sorry, but I do not agree that the article was too graphic. In order to understand what the case is about, you have to understand the terminology and framework; and if you do understand the latter, then while the crime might shock you, the phrasing of the article should not. It is also important that journalism fulfils its primary function, in that those people who might be vulnerable to this sort of crime, are made aware of what kind of low-life individuals exist out there in the wider world; and also of what their legal rights are if they are taken advantage of in this way. I suspect that the defendant originally actually went out seeking a naive single girl, and that if he had found one, there would have been no witness statements to corroborate her evidence, and the crime would have gone unpunished.

In terms of reporting, there is plenty much worse on prime-time television, and in the Sunday papers, which is not only too graphic, but also sensationalised and glamourised: and that, I do object to.

[pairs_guy]

Originally posted by Schmeck
Can we get a warning in before the link in the first post? I think the article is a bit graphic, and needs a "not for young children to read" type of warning, if possible. Just in case a parent has a child reading over his/her shoulder, like I do sometimes?

ITA, if I had kids I would not want them reading this, BUT if you saw that the title of the article was "Man found guilty of assaulting skaters", wouldn't you as a parent think of not reading the article with your kids around since you know the article is gonna talk about a man assaulting skaters. Usually the title of a story pretty much gives you a picture of what the article is gonna be about. The title of the link/story pretty much is a warning.

just some food for thought