Blue Bombers Forum
December 11, 2018, 04:54:05 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7  All
  Print  
Author Topic: CFL voids contract of Euclid Cummings  (Read 6307 times)
gbill2004
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 15588



« Reply #75 on: March 08, 2018, 05:42:27 PM »

Requesting access to files/information of an ongoing police investigation...?
I have no idea of specifics. But I know that most NFL teams have security teams and they will liaise with local police if one of their players is under investigation.
Logged
Horseman
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1181


« Reply #76 on: March 08, 2018, 06:01:16 PM »

I have no idea of specifics. But I know that most NFL teams have security teams and they will liaise with local police if one of their players is under investigation.

Police in Canada, (can't speak about the US) will not confirm or deny that someone is under investigation. It is only once an information is sworn can the police release information on the charge. If it is high profile incident, often the police will issue a press release and send it out to the media. Once an information is sworn it becomes part of the public record, so if anyone wants to contact the BC provincial court office to enquire what the charge(s) Cummings is facing that information will be released minus the names of any victims.
Logged
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 27801


Fort Hew


« Reply #77 on: March 08, 2018, 06:20:08 PM »

I have no idea of specifics. But I know that most NFL teams have security teams and they will liaise with local police if one of their players is under investigation.

I can't see that being the case in the CFL but I'm not certain. I doubt that is a luxury teams could afford.
Logged

#forthew

#risetogether

You can't fix stupid.
the paw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3288


« Reply #78 on: March 08, 2018, 06:20:15 PM »

Ummm.. if they were advised of the incident, who were they advised by?  Law enforcement?  Or the player?

If law enforcement was the one who notified them, that opens the door to questioning.  Why are they informing us?  Are there more questions to be asked?

There is a reason Private Investigators exist.  You have a team that you need to protect, you need to qualify the threat.  If the incident has been reported but no charges have been laid, then there is some question in the local precinct about the circumstances of the incident.  If it was a cut and dried case, charges would be laid quickly.

This is why it is incumbent on the team to do some research, to see if there is a legitimate complaint that they should be worried about.

This is wrong on so many levels.  

The Bombers became aware, not because of a formal notification or liasion, but likely as part of the investigation.  It would make sense for the police to interview other people who were travelling with the suspect and may have been witnesses or in the vicinity of the incident.

At the point the Vancouver Police are starting an investigation, you don't start a parallel investigation as "research".  You take responsible actions.  You notify the league. You perhaps consult the team lawyer.  Then you wait for the investigation to conclude.  

It is also not true that whether charges are laid more quickly or slowly indicates anything about the veracity of the victim or the strength of the case.  Not all complaintants come forward right away, supporting witnesses may not be immediately available for interview, police may have other cases popping up on their caseload that get higher priority, it may have to be referred to the Crown for an opinion, there are lots of reasons a strong case may take some time before police lay charges.  

It isn't up to the Bombers to assess the validity of the complaint.  If they want to know if they should be worried, then the answer is they should be worried the minute they get a call from the police investigating one of their players.  But worrying won't influence the process at all.  
Logged

grab grass 'n growl
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5503



« Reply #79 on: March 08, 2018, 06:24:59 PM »

Police in Canada, (can't speak about the US) will not confirm or deny that someone is under investigation. It is only once an information is sworn can the police release information on the charge. If it is high profile incident, often the police will issue a press release and send it out to the media. Once an information is sworn it becomes part of the public record, so if anyone wants to contact the BC provincial court office to enquire what the charge(s) Cummings is facing that information will be released minus the names of any victims.

Is it normal procedure for the police to contact a person's employer and inform them of pending charges?  This seems bizarre to me and would seem to violate the accused's right to privacy as well as the "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" provision.
Logged
gbill2004
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 15588



« Reply #80 on: March 08, 2018, 06:31:41 PM »

Is it normal procedure for the police to contact a person's employer and inform them of pending charges?  This seems bizarre to me and would seem to violate the accused's right to privacy as well as the "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" provision.
A few years ago Tim Burke said that the Bombers have a relationship with City of Winnipeg Police, who will periodically visit establishments where Bomber players are known to frequent, and then report back to the Bombers if they see anything of interest. That?s different than the Cummings case, but does show that the Bombers do communicate with law enforcement about their employees.
Logged
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 27801


Fort Hew


« Reply #81 on: March 08, 2018, 06:41:26 PM »

If law enforcement was the one who notified them, that opens the door to questioning.

No, it doesn't.

I highly doubt the WFC just stood pat without looking into what happened. However, I am inclined to believe there's a limit to what's possible in such a situation. Furthermore, it isn't like CFL teams have countless resources on hand to hire a PI or launch its own formal investigation.

This is wrong on so many levels.

The Bombers became aware, not because of a formal notification or liasion, but likely as part of the investigation.  It would make sense for the police to interview other people who were travelling with the suspect and may have been witnesses or in the vicinity of the incident.

At the point the Vancouver Police are starting an investigation, you don't start a parallel investigation as "research".  You take responsible actions.  You notify the league. You perhaps consult the team lawyer.  Then you wait for the investigation to conclude.  

It is also not true that whether charges are laid more quickly or slowly indicates anything about the veracity of the victim or the strength of the case.  Not all complaintants come forward right away, supporting witnesses may not be immediately available for interview, police may have other cases popping up on their caseload that get higher priority, it may have to be referred to the Crown for an opinion, there are lots of reasons a strong case may take some time before police lay charges.  

It isn't up to the Bombers to assess the validity of the complaint.  If they want to know if they should be worried, then the answer is they should be worried the minute they get a call from the police investigating one of their players.  But worrying won't influence the process at all.  

Well said.

Is it normal procedure for the police to contact a person's employer and inform them of pending charges?

If the individual is a foreign national on a work permit here, it can be part of the process to notify his/her employer as an investigation unfolds, especially if there are multiple charges or if the charge is severe in nature.
Logged

#forthew

#risetogether

You can't fix stupid.
swansong
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 910



« Reply #82 on: March 08, 2018, 06:48:28 PM »

Players, like police officers, are held to a higher standard than the average citizen

Have you ever heard of a cop being fired from their job because of an accusation? Or are they normally sent home, with pay, until the charges have been disposed of one way or another?

Frankly, in the states, grand juries only indict cops about 5% of the time.
Logged
Horseman
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1181


« Reply #83 on: March 08, 2018, 06:49:07 PM »

Is it normal procedure for the police to contact a person's employer and inform them of pending charges?  This seems bizarre to me and would seem to violate the accused's right to privacy as well as the "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" provision.

No, the police will not contact anyone's employer about charges unless the charged person is another police officer. Also disclosing information on players being in establishments to the employer (like a poster has stated), in this case the Bombers would subject the police service to privacy breaches. Once an information is laid/sworn (official charges) against a person it becomes public record and anyone can contact the court house of jurisdiction to find out the charges.
Logged
Horseman
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1181


« Reply #84 on: March 08, 2018, 06:52:52 PM »

Have you ever heard of a cop being fired from their job because of an accusation? Or are they normally sent home, with pay, until the charges have been disposed of one way or another?

Frankly, in the states, grand juries only indict cops about 5% of the time.

Yes, I have, but normally they would be suspended typically with pay but depending on the severity of the crime they may be suspended without pay or for a minor infraction placed on administrative duties. Once the matter goes to trial or there is a guilty plea the officer, depending on the severity of the crime, may be asked to resign and failing to do so could result in proceedings to fire the officer. For a minor infraction the officer maybe docked some pay or leave time if the infraction is substantiated or simply given a reprimand.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2018, 07:01:15 PM by Horseman » Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 26973



« Reply #85 on: March 08, 2018, 07:10:34 PM »

Police in Canada, (can't speak about the US) will not confirm or deny that someone is under investigation. It is only once an information is sworn can the police release information on the charge. If it is high profile incident, often the police will issue a press release and send it out to the media. Once an information is sworn it becomes part of the public record, so if anyone wants to contact the BC provincial court office to enquire what the charge(s) Cummings is facing that information will be released minus the names of any victims.

So, who informed the Bombers?
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 26973



« Reply #86 on: March 08, 2018, 07:23:13 PM »

This is wrong on so many levels.  

The Bombers became aware, not because of a formal notification or liasion, but likely as part of the investigation.  It would make sense for the police to interview other people who were travelling with the suspect and may have been witnesses or in the vicinity of the incident.

At the point the Vancouver Police are starting an investigation, you don't start a parallel investigation as "research".  You take responsible actions.  You notify the league. You perhaps consult the team lawyer.  Then you wait for the investigation to conclude.  

It is also not true that whether charges are laid more quickly or slowly indicates anything about the veracity of the victim or the strength of the case.  Not all complaintants come forward right away, supporting witnesses may not be immediately available for interview, police may have other cases popping up on their caseload that get higher priority, it may have to be referred to the Crown for an opinion, there are lots of reasons a strong case may take some time before police lay charges.  

It isn't up to the Bombers to assess the validity of the complaint.  If they want to know if they should be worried, then the answer is they should be worried the minute they get a call from the police investigating one of their players.  But worrying won't influence the process at all.  

It certainly is up to the Bombers to ***** the validity of the complaint.  Anyone could walk into the police station and accuse a Bomber player of abusing them.   The police would have to investigate, and decide whether there was sufficient evidence to proceed, and eventually lay charges.  Does the accusation trigger action by the team?  Does the charge?  Or is it not until the conviction that they are required to take action?

I'm not sure what a standard players contract contains concerning morals clauses, or what constitutes "conduct detrimental to the club", but if I'm in charge, I want to make sure I know what's going on before I act, and I want to act as soon as possible.  And while erring on the side of the accuser is probably the way this should be treated, you do have to respect your player's rights as well. 

It sounds like these are very serious charges, and I don't know what has come to light that has changed since the incident, or the charges being laid, to now, but obviously something very distinct has happened. 
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Horseman
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1181


« Reply #87 on: March 08, 2018, 07:34:04 PM »

So, who informed the Bombers?

The police will not confirm or deny an investigation, however, during an investigation, the investigator will approach potential witnesses for a statement. The police service could have contacted the club for a list of players they would be interested in speaking with. If this was the case the police would simply inform the club they are investigating an incident that took place in....and would like to speak with their players requesting contact information. They would not indicate which player it was but the Bombers could do their own canvassing amongst their players to find out what happened.
Logged
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5503



« Reply #88 on: March 08, 2018, 07:49:40 PM »

No, it doesn't.

I highly doubt the WFC just stood pat without looking into what happened. However, I am inclined to believe there's a limit to what's possible in such a situation. Furthermore, it isn't like CFL teams have countless resources on hand to hire a PI or launch its own formal investigation.

Well said.

If the individual is a foreign national on a work permit here, it can be part of the process to notify his/her employer as an investigation unfolds, especially if there are multiple charges or if the charge is severe in nature.

Good point, I'm sure the CBSA will come into play at some point as well.

Logged
the paw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3288


« Reply #89 on: March 08, 2018, 08:10:19 PM »

It certainly is up to the Bombers to ***** the validity of the complaint.  Anyone could walk into the police station and accuse a Bomber player of abusing them.   The police would have to investigate, and decide whether there was sufficient evidence to proceed, and eventually lay charges.  Does the accusation trigger action by the team?  Does the charge?  Or is it not until the conviction that they are required to take action?

I'm not sure what a standard players contract contains concerning morals clauses, or what constitutes "conduct detrimental to the club", but if I'm in charge, I want to make sure I know what's going on before I act, and I want to act as soon as possible.  And while erring on the side of the accuser is probably the way this should be treated, you do have to respect your player's rights as well. 

It sounds like these are very serious charges, and I don't know what has come to light that has changed since the incident, or the charges being laid, to now, but obviously something very distinct has happened. 

The Bombers would only be responsible for assessing the veracity of a complaintant if the complaint is filed with the club.  If I walk in to Wade Miller's office and say "Player X was mean to me", they can assess that, and take no action.  If I walk in and say "Player X cussed out my granny with vile language, and its on tape", then yes, the Bombers might look into it and could take action if they chose to. If I walk in and say "Player X assaulted me", then the only reasonable response from the Bombers would be to refer the matter to police. 

In cases where the complaint is made to the police, and the investigation is ongoing, the Bombers role is to (a) cooperate with the investigation, and (b) dummy up and wait for the investigation to conclude. 

The Bombers can sack a player at any time, they don't have to wait for an accusation, they don't have to wait for charges to be laid, and they don't have to wait for a conviction.  Depending on the severity of the allegation they may choose to wait for one of these thresholds, but they aren't obligated to.  CFL players don't have standard employment rights.

 Even though they may want to act quickly, they should in no circumstances, be conducting parallel investigations.  Their role is not to assess the veracity of the victim, it is simply to assess whether they want to continue to employ the player in question. 
Logged

grab grass 'n growl
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!