http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadi ... ueXSwsGROgRoughriders GM Eric Tillman resigns after pleading guilty to sexual assault
(CP) – 6 hours ago
REGINA — The general manager of the Saskatchewan Roughriders has stepped down from the team after admitting that he sexually grabbed his children's teenage babysitter.
Team president and CEO Jim Hopson said Friday that Tillman offered his resignation to the club's board of directors and that it was accepted.
Hopson told a news conference that everyone involved felt it was the best way to move forward after Tillman, 52, pleaded guilty Monday to sexual assaulting the girl in the summer of 2008.
Court heard Tillman was supposed to be at a team board meeting Aug. 6, 2008, but he was encouraged to go home by staff who thought he was acting strangely.
The girl, who was 16 at the time, was watching Tillman's two children at the family's Regina home when he arrived.
Crown prosecutor Bill Burge said she bent over as she fed one of the kids. When she stood up, Tillman put his hands on her hips with his fingers in her belt loops and "pulled the rear end of the complainant into himself."
Burge said the contact was "clearly of a sexual nature."
Defence lawyer Aaron Fox said Tillman wasn't thinking clearly because he had taken a double dose of sleep aids and pain medication for a sore back. Employees at the Riders office described him as being "loopy" that day and Tillman doesn't remember what happened, Fox told court.
Judge Murray Hinds said he believed Tillman was sorry for his behaviour and granted him an absolute discharge. That means he doesn't have a criminal record despite pleading guilty.
Tillman has been on paid administrative leave from the CFL club since he was charged last February. However, he continued to work behind the scenes from his home throughout the season.
Originally from Mississippi, Tillman has enjoyed great success in the CFL as a general manager. He helped lead the Riders to the Grey Cup championship in 2007 and led the B.C. Lions and Toronto Argonauts to Grey Cup titles in 1994 and 1997, respectively.
He has also worked as a television analyst with TSN and Sportsnet.
Tillman also served as the general manager of the expansion Ottawa Renegades for three seasons before returning to broadcasting and ultimately landing the post with the Riders. In July 2008, the team rewarded him with a contract extension through 2010.
When Tillman was hired by the Riders in 2006, he took over a team that had a tarnished reputation in the community because several players ran into trouble with the law.
He preached a message of respect and promised to clean up the team's image. The Riders adopted a code of conduct requiring players to obey the law, act with honesty and integrity, respect others and take responsibility for their actions.
Three sources with extensive CFL knowledge told The Canadian Press earlier in the week that they'd be surprised if the Riders kept Tillman on board. One explained that it would be hard to have him as the face of the team given that he publicly backed the Riders code of conduct.
Tillman said outside the courthouse Tuesday that he hoped the mistake would not cost him his job.
"I love this franchise dearly. We've moved here, our family is here and I would love to stay," he said.
Eric Tillman’s CFL resurrection - Cam Cole
Moderator: Team Captains
-
WestCoastJoe
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 17721
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm
-
WestCoastJoe
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 17721
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm
A couple of examples of why some people would be sceptical when Tillman speaks to the media ...
The moralizing Eric Tillman, judging and criticizing the standards of Wally Buono. The CFL fined Tillman for his comments."Being Sir Wally doesn’t mean the rules don’t apply to you or your team,” Tillman told the Regina Leader-Post. “Either the head coach encourages this excessive violence, or he condones it, via turning a blind eye, and neither is acceptable.”
Tillman going ballistic over Rob Murphy holding Chick down with one arm, while holding his other arm poised above as if to strike a blow at the defenseless, poor little John Chick, who happens to be diabetic, by the way. Just thought I would work that fact (diabetic) into the discussion.Tillman's complexion matched the colour of his trademark red hair last Saturday in the press box at Mosaic Stadium as he witnessed a brawl between the Lions and Saskatchewan Roughriders just before half-time. He was incensed that B.C. tackle Rob Murphy was holding down Roughrider defensive end John Chick with one hand, near his throat, while the other was cocked menacingly, as if he could deliver a blow.
"It's outrageous, the man [Chick] is a diabetic!" Tillman screamed. [Chick, a CFL rookie, plays with the aid of an insulin pump].
Four days after the incident -- in which a stream of intemperate language directed by Tillman against the Lions ended up getting him fined -- Murphy was still making light of the prairie dust-up.
"Hey, I wear contacts," Murphy said. "Maybe they should take it easy on me because of my eyesight."
... from a column by Mike Beamish at the time of the incidents ...
At this point we have no idea whether Tillman resigned, based upon a reflection of the circumstances or whether he had knowledge that he would be fired (which we don't know if he would have or not) or whether a deal was worked out to have the end arrive with less controversy.
However, Tillman's previous comments regarding Wally and Rob Murphy/Chick are really not significant to the recent story of Tillman. The situation, from all evidence, appears to have been a medical situation and that puts it into a different context.
The resignation is the best scenario for all concerned. It moves Tillman out of the heat of the situation as well as his family. It also removes Tillman from the community and it's a better situation for the female babysitter and her family/friends, than had he remained.
Best for all involved. However, I don''t connect the dots to Tillman's previous comments regarding our Leos and the present circumstances.
However, Tillman's previous comments regarding Wally and Rob Murphy/Chick are really not significant to the recent story of Tillman. The situation, from all evidence, appears to have been a medical situation and that puts it into a different context.
The resignation is the best scenario for all concerned. It moves Tillman out of the heat of the situation as well as his family. It also removes Tillman from the community and it's a better situation for the female babysitter and her family/friends, than had he remained.
Best for all involved. However, I don''t connect the dots to Tillman's previous comments regarding our Leos and the present circumstances.
"When I went to Catholic high school in Philadelphia, we just had one coach for football and basketball. He took all of us who turned out and had us run through a forest. The ones who ran into the trees were on the football team". (George Raveling)
-
WestCoastJoe
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 17721
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm
About his previous comments ...
Some observers, myself included, have expressed the opinion that we are somewhat sceptical about his comments to the media, for the content, for his style, and for his intent. Once again he is in the eye of the media, and his veracity is very much at the heart of his present situation.
About the medication ...
Some of us are of the opinion that his use of the medication is irrelevant to any lessening of his guilt for his actions. As well, there is scant evidence of his "memory lapse" of his behaviour, only his statement that he forgets everything about it. This raises a question once again of his veracity. If this had gone to trial his veracity would be central to the prosecution's case and to whatever punishment he received.
There would also be much debate about medication, actions, memory of those actions, guilt for the actions, using "memory lapse" as an excuse, et cetera.
It is obviously better for the girl and her family, and for Tillman himself that no trial will take place.
Some observers, myself included, have expressed the opinion that we are somewhat sceptical about his comments to the media, for the content, for his style, and for his intent. Once again he is in the eye of the media, and his veracity is very much at the heart of his present situation.
About the medication ...
Some of us are of the opinion that his use of the medication is irrelevant to any lessening of his guilt for his actions. As well, there is scant evidence of his "memory lapse" of his behaviour, only his statement that he forgets everything about it. This raises a question once again of his veracity. If this had gone to trial his veracity would be central to the prosecution's case and to whatever punishment he received.
There would also be much debate about medication, actions, memory of those actions, guilt for the actions, using "memory lapse" as an excuse, et cetera.
It is obviously better for the girl and her family, and for Tillman himself that no trial will take place.
Have to agree, when there is a stage, Tillman has been very good at using its podium.WestCoastJoe wrote:About his previous comments ...
Some observers, myself included, have expressed the opinion that we are somewhat sceptical about his comments to the media, for the content, for his style, and for his intent. Once again he is in the eye of the media, and his veracity is very much at the heart of his present situation.
About the medication ...
Some of us are of the opinion that his use of the medication is irrelevant to any lessening of his guilt for his actions. As well, there is scant evidence of his "memory lapse" of his behaviour, only his statement that he forgets everything about it. This raises a question once again of his veracity. If this had gone to trial his veracity would be central to the prosecution's case and to whatever punishment he received.
There would also be much debate about medication, actions, memory of those actions, guilt for the actions, using "memory lapse" as an excuse, et cetera.
It is obviously better for the girl and her family, and for Tillman himself that no trial will take place.
From Tillman's interview tonight on sportsnet....
http://www.sportsnet.ca/video/366250030 ... omes-clean
It amazes me how clear he is on the actual "medication" he took that day vs the recollection of the said incident.
Entertainment value = an all time low
Of course, he would be clear about the medication he took. It would only be after taking the medication and its side effects that would have resulted in the memory loss.
There is no question that his behavior prior to the incident was very different. You don't get sent home from a Board of Directors meeting as a General Manager, unless something is seriously wrong with one's behavior.
Tillman could have just denied the incident. It would have been her word against his, with no other corroborating evidence. He didn't do that but stated, to the babysitter that he had no memory of it, based upon the evidence of the three phone calls made by her, following the incident, in which the police listened in. With no previous criminal record or any background of any other inappropriate behavior, a guilty verdict would have been difficult. There was also no other previous incidents between Tillman and the babysitter, according to the evidence.
Tillman's approach appears to have been honest. He couldn't remember. He wouldn't know what he did or even whether the incident actually occurred. He took the babysitters word for it, based upon his lack of memory. A defence lawyer would know the best defence would be denial rather than memory loss, which would not involve the denial of guilt but instead would only result in an explanation of extenuating circumstances.
Whether Tillman used the podium to express his views in the past doesn't factor into my thoughts of Tillman with regard to this specific incident. I wouldn't like Rob Murhpy, when playing for Toronto, holding down Angus Reid by the throat either. Wally's stature in the CFL does provide advantages at times. I know that doesn't sound like I'm bleeding orange and black but i'm trying to be fair in my own mind.
Tillman is 52 years old. He has an excellent record, both in his professional and personal life, from all accounts. Yes, he spouted off a few times, but who hasn't. Certainly Cal Murphy spouted off in his career more often than Tillman ever did. I hate what happened here, but I'm not going to condem a man's entire life completely based upon an isolated incident, in which there is plenty of evidence that Tillman was not behaving normally on the day prior to the incident.
He's taken responsibility in a world in which few in athletics do these days, he's apologized to the babysitter, her family, the Riders, the province of Saskatchewan, and resigned. He's paid a heavy price as has his family. I don''t think he got off lightly, in the big picture of things.
There is no question that his behavior prior to the incident was very different. You don't get sent home from a Board of Directors meeting as a General Manager, unless something is seriously wrong with one's behavior.
Tillman could have just denied the incident. It would have been her word against his, with no other corroborating evidence. He didn't do that but stated, to the babysitter that he had no memory of it, based upon the evidence of the three phone calls made by her, following the incident, in which the police listened in. With no previous criminal record or any background of any other inappropriate behavior, a guilty verdict would have been difficult. There was also no other previous incidents between Tillman and the babysitter, according to the evidence.
Tillman's approach appears to have been honest. He couldn't remember. He wouldn't know what he did or even whether the incident actually occurred. He took the babysitters word for it, based upon his lack of memory. A defence lawyer would know the best defence would be denial rather than memory loss, which would not involve the denial of guilt but instead would only result in an explanation of extenuating circumstances.
Whether Tillman used the podium to express his views in the past doesn't factor into my thoughts of Tillman with regard to this specific incident. I wouldn't like Rob Murhpy, when playing for Toronto, holding down Angus Reid by the throat either. Wally's stature in the CFL does provide advantages at times. I know that doesn't sound like I'm bleeding orange and black but i'm trying to be fair in my own mind.
Tillman is 52 years old. He has an excellent record, both in his professional and personal life, from all accounts. Yes, he spouted off a few times, but who hasn't. Certainly Cal Murphy spouted off in his career more often than Tillman ever did. I hate what happened here, but I'm not going to condem a man's entire life completely based upon an isolated incident, in which there is plenty of evidence that Tillman was not behaving normally on the day prior to the incident.
He's taken responsibility in a world in which few in athletics do these days, he's apologized to the babysitter, her family, the Riders, the province of Saskatchewan, and resigned. He's paid a heavy price as has his family. I don''t think he got off lightly, in the big picture of things.
"When I went to Catholic high school in Philadelphia, we just had one coach for football and basketball. He took all of us who turned out and had us run through a forest. The ones who ran into the trees were on the football team". (George Raveling)
I don't get some of the dogpiling either, which has been a little extreme IMO but not totally unexpected. If you didn't like Eric Tillman prior to this incident, you're certainly not going to sympathize. Personally, I found some of his bellyaching to the media a little off-putting in the past, but can understand how a media savvy GM (and journalism major) is going to try use the press to his advantage to stick up for his guys and possibly get a fine or suspension against a division foe.
This was completely different.
He's trying to save his name, a tarnished reputation, and his livelihood. Addressing the media outside the courthouse was essentially a 'no win' situation for the guy. Answer their questions thoughtfully and carefully and it's "there he goes again, self-serving Tillman, trying to draw sympathy, deflect blame etc." Had he pulled a Tiger Woods and avoided the media (which I guarantee most in his position would have), choosing instead to release a carefully crafted statement through his lawyer or agent and it's "look at that. The guy's never seen a camera or microphone that he didn't like...until now!"
I'd like to think if some of us had made such a terrible mistake that we wouldn't be judged so harshly.
DH
This was completely different.
He's trying to save his name, a tarnished reputation, and his livelihood. Addressing the media outside the courthouse was essentially a 'no win' situation for the guy. Answer their questions thoughtfully and carefully and it's "there he goes again, self-serving Tillman, trying to draw sympathy, deflect blame etc." Had he pulled a Tiger Woods and avoided the media (which I guarantee most in his position would have), choosing instead to release a carefully crafted statement through his lawyer or agent and it's "look at that. The guy's never seen a camera or microphone that he didn't like...until now!"
I'd like to think if some of us had made such a terrible mistake that we wouldn't be judged so harshly.
DH
Roar, You Lions, Roar
You are correct, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. However, I applaud him for answering the questions put forth to him via the media, however I do reserve the right to analyze what was put before us. How convenient that ambien was used as a drug, it is almost too good to be true for his cause IMO. While it may all be true, given his penchant for reaching for the sympathy card for your players (diabetic), don't you think that with his livelyhood on the line, that he wouldn't delve into the bottom of the bag? This is a matter of crying wolf, eventually it catches up with you.David wrote:I don't get some of the dogpiling either, which has been a little extreme IMO but not totally unexpected. If you didn't like Eric Tillman prior to this incident, you're certainly not going to sympathize. Personally, I found some of his bellyaching to the media a little off-putting in the past, but can understand how a media savvy GM (and journalism major) is going to try use the press to his advantage to stick up for his guys and possibly get a fine or suspension against a division foe.
This was completely different.
He's trying to save his name, a tarnished reputation, and his livelihood. Addressing the media outside the courthouse was essentially a 'no win' situation for the guy. Answer their questions thoughtfully and carefully and it's "there he goes again, self-serving Tillman, trying to draw sympathy, deflect blame etc." Had he pulled a Tiger Woods and avoided the media (which I guarantee most in his position would have), choosing instead to release a carefully crafted statement through his lawyer or agent and it's "look at that. The guy's never seen a camera or microphone that he didn't like...until now!"
I'd like to think if some of us had made such a terrible mistake that we wouldn't be judged so harshly.
DH
Entertainment value = an all time low
-
WestCoastJoe
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 17721
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm
When he admits guilt, we take him at his word. It seems credible that he did what the babysitter said he did. She does not seem to have been trying to get him into trouble when she told a friend.
Some of us did not like his style, content and intent with the media long before this incident. And some of us who did not like that style did think he was a very capable football executive, nevertheless.
Some of us criticized him when he made controversial statements to the press before. We reserve the right to do so now, in a situation that is, indeed, different. This one involves the police, the courts, damage to families, damage to the CFL, and critical damage to a man's career. Why would we stop criticizing his dealings with the media, when he is involved in a far more serious situation than ever before? This situation is not offbounds for discussion.
To those that are offering support to him now, good for you. He is entitled to defence and support. And you are to be credited for doing so, especially as this is a very controversial case, with a hugely upsetting content, with many Tillman-haters out there. If some of us criticize him now, I guess I will have to plead guilty to "dogpiling" ... Don't hit a guy when he is down, with relatively few willing to stand beside him. Should I have included those quotes of controversial comments of his? Possibly not, except his approach with the media is involved here IMO.
If you believe in someone, if you sympathize with someone, is it possible to be too willing to accept what others think are excuses, or reasons to lessen guilt (medication, memory lapse)? Is it possible that a person could make up the "excuse" of "memory lapse" to absolve guilt? Yes. Did Tillman do so in this case? If you ask me, many people, possibly even a jury, would think so.
Has he been "judged harshly?" ... It seems the courts let him off lightly. Very lightly in view of the charges to which he admitted guilt. Do I judge him harshly if I take him at his word of the admission? I don't think so. Do I judge him harshly if I speak critically of his dealings with the media? I don't think so. If someone has been critical of him in the past, does that mean they are prejudiced against him now because of this incident, and would not ever believe him innocent, even if found so in court? I don't think so.
Of course he will speak to the media now. And answer their questions. And to some of us, his style, and what he says at times, will still be off-putting.
Is the medication a valid issue here? Debateable. It could affect behaviour, I think. There is lots of evidence of drugs affecting behaviour. Loosening inhibitions, making one more aggressive, affecting memory, et cetera. Do drugs lessen guilt for behaviour? I don't think so. (Example: If you hit someone when you are half asleep, or under the influence of medication or drugs, you are still guilty of hitting someone. IMO) IMO the involvement of medication as a possible contributing factor to his aberrant behaviour could evoke sympathy for him. And yes, some people think he is certainly willing to play the sympathy cards (medication, "memory lapse").
Could a person fairly have doubts about the "memory lapse"? I think so. It would have been a key part of the case, both for the prosecution and the defence, if it came to that. Did he speak rationally on the phone during the day? Did he communicate clearly on the way home? Did he speak rationally to the babysitter prior to and after the incident? Did he not fall asleep shortly after getting home? Did he not fall asleep shortly after the incident with the babysitter? Did he seem cognizant when he got home? After the incident did he at once seem repentant? Did he have a rational discussion with the baby sitter about what had happened? When his wife arrived home, did they discuss the situation? And sad to say, it would no doubt be asked if there were any incidents with anyone else previously that were untoward? (The great trial lawyer Louis Nizer discussed how you determine truth from lies. He said there are some physical signs that can be learned by those that need that skill. And he said the most important thing was to look at all the facts and then to determine in your mind what seemed most plausible. Then to focus on that in cross-examination.)
Would it even matter if he has no memory of the event? IMO it does not lessen guilt. IMO it could evoke sympathy for him.
If this was not a GM position for a CFL team, and if it was a less prominent position, I can see letting him keep his job (and with the presumed forgiveness of the girl and her family, I would support that). If at some point, a CFL team gives him a job, I would support that too.
Do I reserve the right to continue to find his style with the media off-putting? Yes. And do I reserve the right to question his veracity at times in his comments to the media? Yes.
Tillman has paid a huge price for his actions. His career is, at the very least, in grave jeopardy, if not finished. I do sympathize with him. All of us have made mistakes in our lives. I hope he gets through this.
Some of us did not like his style, content and intent with the media long before this incident. And some of us who did not like that style did think he was a very capable football executive, nevertheless.
Some of us criticized him when he made controversial statements to the press before. We reserve the right to do so now, in a situation that is, indeed, different. This one involves the police, the courts, damage to families, damage to the CFL, and critical damage to a man's career. Why would we stop criticizing his dealings with the media, when he is involved in a far more serious situation than ever before? This situation is not offbounds for discussion.
To those that are offering support to him now, good for you. He is entitled to defence and support. And you are to be credited for doing so, especially as this is a very controversial case, with a hugely upsetting content, with many Tillman-haters out there. If some of us criticize him now, I guess I will have to plead guilty to "dogpiling" ... Don't hit a guy when he is down, with relatively few willing to stand beside him. Should I have included those quotes of controversial comments of his? Possibly not, except his approach with the media is involved here IMO.
If you believe in someone, if you sympathize with someone, is it possible to be too willing to accept what others think are excuses, or reasons to lessen guilt (medication, memory lapse)? Is it possible that a person could make up the "excuse" of "memory lapse" to absolve guilt? Yes. Did Tillman do so in this case? If you ask me, many people, possibly even a jury, would think so.
Has he been "judged harshly?" ... It seems the courts let him off lightly. Very lightly in view of the charges to which he admitted guilt. Do I judge him harshly if I take him at his word of the admission? I don't think so. Do I judge him harshly if I speak critically of his dealings with the media? I don't think so. If someone has been critical of him in the past, does that mean they are prejudiced against him now because of this incident, and would not ever believe him innocent, even if found so in court? I don't think so.
Of course he will speak to the media now. And answer their questions. And to some of us, his style, and what he says at times, will still be off-putting.
Is the medication a valid issue here? Debateable. It could affect behaviour, I think. There is lots of evidence of drugs affecting behaviour. Loosening inhibitions, making one more aggressive, affecting memory, et cetera. Do drugs lessen guilt for behaviour? I don't think so. (Example: If you hit someone when you are half asleep, or under the influence of medication or drugs, you are still guilty of hitting someone. IMO) IMO the involvement of medication as a possible contributing factor to his aberrant behaviour could evoke sympathy for him. And yes, some people think he is certainly willing to play the sympathy cards (medication, "memory lapse").
Could a person fairly have doubts about the "memory lapse"? I think so. It would have been a key part of the case, both for the prosecution and the defence, if it came to that. Did he speak rationally on the phone during the day? Did he communicate clearly on the way home? Did he speak rationally to the babysitter prior to and after the incident? Did he not fall asleep shortly after getting home? Did he not fall asleep shortly after the incident with the babysitter? Did he seem cognizant when he got home? After the incident did he at once seem repentant? Did he have a rational discussion with the baby sitter about what had happened? When his wife arrived home, did they discuss the situation? And sad to say, it would no doubt be asked if there were any incidents with anyone else previously that were untoward? (The great trial lawyer Louis Nizer discussed how you determine truth from lies. He said there are some physical signs that can be learned by those that need that skill. And he said the most important thing was to look at all the facts and then to determine in your mind what seemed most plausible. Then to focus on that in cross-examination.)
Would it even matter if he has no memory of the event? IMO it does not lessen guilt. IMO it could evoke sympathy for him.
If this was not a GM position for a CFL team, and if it was a less prominent position, I can see letting him keep his job (and with the presumed forgiveness of the girl and her family, I would support that). If at some point, a CFL team gives him a job, I would support that too.
Do I reserve the right to continue to find his style with the media off-putting? Yes. And do I reserve the right to question his veracity at times in his comments to the media? Yes.
Tillman has paid a huge price for his actions. His career is, at the very least, in grave jeopardy, if not finished. I do sympathize with him. All of us have made mistakes in our lives. I hope he gets through this.
Assorted and related issues on the resignation of Eric Tillman.
Physical Health
It is said that physical health is the most important for a human being, because without good health, one will not be able to do anything else. While the incident certainly brought up a lot of emotional health issues, it didn’t (hopefully) affect his physical health. A lot of people may have forgotten that just over two years ago in November 2007, Eric Tillman was hospitalized with chest pains. I’m sure to him and to anyone else who has been hospitalized, recovering from such an ordeal allows one to have a better perspective of life. So this latest incident might be considered small potatoes compared to that previous incident. At least with this incident, he can move on with his life, be it in football or another career. But the incident with the chest pains could have left him physically handicapped, or worse he could have died.
Firings and Contract Extensions
Eric Tillman had one year left on his contract. First, if one's contract is over and the management does not offer him a contract extension, is that just the same as firing someone? Second, when one is fired, do you think one takes into consideration on the reasons behind the firing or do you think a firing is a firing is a firing. Even it's the latter, then being fired is so common in the professional sports area that it shouldn't be a huge deal as it's fairly easy for one to bound back, especially if one has already built a good history of success. With a long career as a coach, it's almost like being fired is part of being a successful coach. Just look at good coaches who won the Annis Stukus trophy but who have fired at one point or another in their long careers: Don Matthews, Bob O'Billovich, Tom Higgins, Dave Ritchie, and Charlie Taaffe.
Medicine and Legal Defense
Whether one agrees with it or not, Canada has a history of being lenient in terms of using medical side effects as a legal defense. As a good example close to home, on May 30, 1998 a 28-year old American woman, Julia Campagna, with her Pontiac Grand Am sped through the Peach Arch crossing, hitting the victims’ car from behind, causing an explosion and killing two young Canadian women, Monique Ishikawa and Kimberly Brooks. Campagna’s defense was that she was taking medicine Xenadrine and was suffering delusional symptoms as a result of complications from the drug and on the radio, she was told to speed up to conceive her baby from Joe Nieuwendyk. The judge found her not criminally responsible because of mental illness and Xenadrine caused her to suffer temporary psychosis.
Scandals and Resignations
Some of said that if one is a high public official, the right thing to do is resign when they are involved with scandals. I guess the best example of a high public officials are politicians, and examples of such are when three former BC premiers, Vander Zalm, Harcourt, and Clark all resigned amid scandals. However, there are still some notable exceptions. The best notable exception would be that of former U.S. President Bill Clinton and his Lewinsky scandal. Despite being charged with sexual harassment, cheating on his wife, lying under oath, and finally being impeached, Clinton refused to resign and his Democratic senators protected him from being removed from office. And closer to home, former Port Coquitlam mayor Scott Young was charged for assaulting his wife, and then arrested for harassing his ex-girlfriend and his boyfriend. But still, Young didn’t resign and only took time off for alcoholism and was eventually removed out of office not because of the scandal, but because he missed 4 meetings.
[youtube][/youtube]
Direct and Indirect Misbehavior
This scandal reminds me of Pete Rose and his MLB scandal. Overall, Rose has been into a lot more trouble for betting on baseball as he received a lifetime ban. On this page that talks about FAQ on Pete Rose, http://www.baseball1.com/bb-data/rose/rose-faq.html, one set of question and answer attempts to compares direct and indirect misbehavior with regards to a sports league's response.
Q: Why is betting on baseball a bad thing? Guys who take drugs or beat their wives don't get such harsh punishment. Lots of them are in the Hall of Fame.
A: Gambling is the worst thing a ballplayer can do, because it undermines the integrity of the game. Since the goals of the gambler are different than the normal goals of a baseball team, fan's trust in the game is shaken. The use of drugs or other offenses are sometimes punished by baseball. While these may be crimes against society, they are not necessarily crimes against baseball. Consider a student who passes a final exam under the influence of illegal drugs. The professor might be inclined to call the police, but there's no reason why the student shouldn't get the grade he earned. Then consider another student who cheats on the same exam. No crime has been committed, but as a student that's the worst possible behavior, and deserves the harshest penalty.
Hall of Fame Eligibility
Unlike Pete Rose, there's nothing that states that Eric Tillman will not be eligible for being inducted into the Canadian Football Hall of Fame. With his accomplishments, Tillman has a very good chance of being inducted as a builder. However, the voters may be biased against voting him in because of the scandal.
Physical Health
It is said that physical health is the most important for a human being, because without good health, one will not be able to do anything else. While the incident certainly brought up a lot of emotional health issues, it didn’t (hopefully) affect his physical health. A lot of people may have forgotten that just over two years ago in November 2007, Eric Tillman was hospitalized with chest pains. I’m sure to him and to anyone else who has been hospitalized, recovering from such an ordeal allows one to have a better perspective of life. So this latest incident might be considered small potatoes compared to that previous incident. At least with this incident, he can move on with his life, be it in football or another career. But the incident with the chest pains could have left him physically handicapped, or worse he could have died.
Firings and Contract Extensions
Eric Tillman had one year left on his contract. First, if one's contract is over and the management does not offer him a contract extension, is that just the same as firing someone? Second, when one is fired, do you think one takes into consideration on the reasons behind the firing or do you think a firing is a firing is a firing. Even it's the latter, then being fired is so common in the professional sports area that it shouldn't be a huge deal as it's fairly easy for one to bound back, especially if one has already built a good history of success. With a long career as a coach, it's almost like being fired is part of being a successful coach. Just look at good coaches who won the Annis Stukus trophy but who have fired at one point or another in their long careers: Don Matthews, Bob O'Billovich, Tom Higgins, Dave Ritchie, and Charlie Taaffe.
Medicine and Legal Defense
Whether one agrees with it or not, Canada has a history of being lenient in terms of using medical side effects as a legal defense. As a good example close to home, on May 30, 1998 a 28-year old American woman, Julia Campagna, with her Pontiac Grand Am sped through the Peach Arch crossing, hitting the victims’ car from behind, causing an explosion and killing two young Canadian women, Monique Ishikawa and Kimberly Brooks. Campagna’s defense was that she was taking medicine Xenadrine and was suffering delusional symptoms as a result of complications from the drug and on the radio, she was told to speed up to conceive her baby from Joe Nieuwendyk. The judge found her not criminally responsible because of mental illness and Xenadrine caused her to suffer temporary psychosis.
Scandals and Resignations
Some of said that if one is a high public official, the right thing to do is resign when they are involved with scandals. I guess the best example of a high public officials are politicians, and examples of such are when three former BC premiers, Vander Zalm, Harcourt, and Clark all resigned amid scandals. However, there are still some notable exceptions. The best notable exception would be that of former U.S. President Bill Clinton and his Lewinsky scandal. Despite being charged with sexual harassment, cheating on his wife, lying under oath, and finally being impeached, Clinton refused to resign and his Democratic senators protected him from being removed from office. And closer to home, former Port Coquitlam mayor Scott Young was charged for assaulting his wife, and then arrested for harassing his ex-girlfriend and his boyfriend. But still, Young didn’t resign and only took time off for alcoholism and was eventually removed out of office not because of the scandal, but because he missed 4 meetings.
[youtube][/youtube]
Direct and Indirect Misbehavior
This scandal reminds me of Pete Rose and his MLB scandal. Overall, Rose has been into a lot more trouble for betting on baseball as he received a lifetime ban. On this page that talks about FAQ on Pete Rose, http://www.baseball1.com/bb-data/rose/rose-faq.html, one set of question and answer attempts to compares direct and indirect misbehavior with regards to a sports league's response.
Q: Why is betting on baseball a bad thing? Guys who take drugs or beat their wives don't get such harsh punishment. Lots of them are in the Hall of Fame.
A: Gambling is the worst thing a ballplayer can do, because it undermines the integrity of the game. Since the goals of the gambler are different than the normal goals of a baseball team, fan's trust in the game is shaken. The use of drugs or other offenses are sometimes punished by baseball. While these may be crimes against society, they are not necessarily crimes against baseball. Consider a student who passes a final exam under the influence of illegal drugs. The professor might be inclined to call the police, but there's no reason why the student shouldn't get the grade he earned. Then consider another student who cheats on the same exam. No crime has been committed, but as a student that's the worst possible behavior, and deserves the harshest penalty.
Hall of Fame Eligibility
Unlike Pete Rose, there's nothing that states that Eric Tillman will not be eligible for being inducted into the Canadian Football Hall of Fame. With his accomplishments, Tillman has a very good chance of being inducted as a builder. However, the voters may be biased against voting him in because of the scandal.
Last edited by Robbie on Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
祝加拿大加式足球聯賽不列颠哥伦比亚卑詩雄獅隊今年贏格雷杯冠軍。此外祝溫哥華加人隊贏總統獎座·卡雲斯·甘保杯·史丹利盃。還每年祝溫哥華白頭浪隊贏美國足球大联盟杯。不要忘記每年祝溫哥華巨人贏西部冰球聯盟冠軍。
改建後的卑詩體育館於二十十一年九月三十日重新對外開放，首場體育活動為同日舉行的加拿大足球聯賽賽事，由主場的卑詩雄獅隊以三十三比二十四擊敗愛民頓愛斯基摩人隊。
祝你龍年行大運。
恭喜西雅图海鹰直到第四十八屆超級盃最終四十三比八大勝曾拿下兩次超級盃冠軍的丹佛野馬拿下隊史第一個超級盃冠軍。
改建後的卑詩體育館於二十十一年九月三十日重新對外開放，首場體育活動為同日舉行的加拿大足球聯賽賽事，由主場的卑詩雄獅隊以三十三比二十四擊敗愛民頓愛斯基摩人隊。
祝你龍年行大運。
恭喜西雅图海鹰直到第四十八屆超級盃最終四十三比八大勝曾拿下兩次超級盃冠軍的丹佛野馬拿下隊史第一個超級盃冠軍。
-
Sir Purrcival
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 4621
- Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Comox Valley
Interesting post.
A couple of thoughts
Non renewal of a contract is decidedly different than a firing.
Non renewal can occur for a variety of reasons - job is finished, either party may not be interest in continuing for a variety of reasons, the requirements of the job have changed and so on, maybe one party just doesn't want to spend the money. However it goes, it represents a completion of contractual obligation.
Firing on the other hand is a breaking of a contract (at least if it is done with cause). You can bet that the reasons for firing are very carefully considered in a contract situation because the reasons for firing can have huge financial implications. Some contracts are for lots of money and most companies would rather not have to pay that out if they don't need to. If there is anyway that a company can fire for cause, they will do it because generally it means one or another terms of the contract have been violated. It can also work the same way with with the employee. Remember Mike Keenan when he wanted out of his contract with the Rangers. He used some flimsy excuse that some payment of his was a day late and thus the contract was broken. Firing without cause is more an acceleration of the terms of the contract with the payee receiving the value of the contract in advance of the completed term or some negotiated adjustment of the terms (payoff) to make the matter go away quickly. It isn't really a firing at all, it is a negotiated negating of the continued services of the individual.
A couple of thoughts
Non renewal of a contract is decidedly different than a firing.
Non renewal can occur for a variety of reasons - job is finished, either party may not be interest in continuing for a variety of reasons, the requirements of the job have changed and so on, maybe one party just doesn't want to spend the money. However it goes, it represents a completion of contractual obligation.
Firing on the other hand is a breaking of a contract (at least if it is done with cause). You can bet that the reasons for firing are very carefully considered in a contract situation because the reasons for firing can have huge financial implications. Some contracts are for lots of money and most companies would rather not have to pay that out if they don't need to. If there is anyway that a company can fire for cause, they will do it because generally it means one or another terms of the contract have been violated. It can also work the same way with with the employee. Remember Mike Keenan when he wanted out of his contract with the Rangers. He used some flimsy excuse that some payment of his was a day late and thus the contract was broken. Firing without cause is more an acceleration of the terms of the contract with the payee receiving the value of the contract in advance of the completed term or some negotiated adjustment of the terms (payoff) to make the matter go away quickly. It isn't really a firing at all, it is a negotiated negating of the continued services of the individual.
Tell me how long must a fan be strong? Ans. Always.
I agree with you that it's a normal reaction to doubt the memory loss, especially based upon the medications he took. However, being sent home that day, by the entire Riders Board of Directors for his bizzare behavior provides a lot of credibility to the Tillman story.WestCoastJoe wrote:
Is the medication a valid issue here? Debateable. It could affect behaviour, I think. There is lots of evidence of drugs affecting behaviour. Loosening inhibitions, making one more aggressive, affecting memory, et cetera. Do drugs lessen guilt for behaviour? I don't think so. (Example: If you hit someone when you are half asleep, or under the influence of medication or drugs, you are still guilty of hitting someone. IMO) IMO the involvement of medication as a possible contributing factor to his aberrant behaviour could evoke sympathy for him. And yes, some people think he is certainly willing to play the sympathy cards (medication, "memory lapse").
Could a person fairly have doubts about the "memory lapse"? I think so. It would have been a key part of the case, both for the prosecution and the defence, if it came to that. Did he speak rationally on the phone during the day? Did he communicate clearly on the way home? Did he speak rationally to the babysitter prior to and after the incident? Did he not fall asleep shortly after getting home? Did he not fall asleep shortly after the incident with the babysitter? Did he seem cognizant when he got home? After the incident did he at once seem repentant? Did he have a rational discussion with the baby sitter about what had happened? When his wife arrived home, did they discuss the situation? And sad to say, it would no doubt be asked if there were any incidents with anyone else previously that were untoward? (The great trial lawyer Louis Nizer discussed how you determine truth from lies. He said there are some physical signs that can be learned by those that need that skill. And he said the most important thing was to look at all the facts and then to determine in your mind what seemed most plausible. Then to focus on that in cross-examination.)
Would it even matter if he has no memory of the event? IMO it does not lessen guilt. IMO it could evoke sympathy for him.
If this was not a GM position for a CFL team, and if it was a less prominent position, I can see letting him keep his job (and with the presumed forgiveness of the girl and her family, I would support that). If at some point, a CFL team gives him a job, I would support that too.
Do I reserve the right to continue to find his style with the media off-putting? Yes. And do I reserve the right to question his veracity at times in his comments to the media? Yes.
Tillman has paid a huge price for his actions. His career is, at the very least, in grave jeopardy, if not finished. I do sympathize with him. All of us have made mistakes in our lives. I hope he gets through this.
Secondly, the law doesn't always deal with incidents in a black and white way. We have defenses from insane automatism (a very rare defense in which a crime is committed while someone is sleep walking to not guilty based upon temporary insanity. Mitigating circumstances can be a factor, in terms of gulit or innocence, and are almost always a factor in sentencing.
Finally, memory loss and other side effects from taking muscle relaxants are well documented in the medical literature. Other side effects include behavioral changes, confusion, changes in sexual desire, and a delusional sense of well-being amongst many others. Too many people take medications these days without paying much attention to possible side effects. Therefore, it's not surprising that there are so many doubters, with regard to Tillman's story. I also remember well, a player I was coaching, a long number of years ago, when given triazolam, became so bizzare, we took him to emergency.
Whether Tillman's defense is true or not, (I tend to believe him, based upon the statements of the Riders Board regarding his prior behavior that day) the story of Tillman should be a reminder to all of us, when taking any medications, to be very conscious of potential side effects. Also, with the increased vareity and usage of prescription medications, drug complications from combining two different medications are becoming more and more prevalent. We all realize the potential side effects of drinking too much alchohol but recent research is proving that today's marijuana,with its THC content more than 20-30 times what it was in the 2960's is creating psychosis in some people.
Always gotta be careful what we put into our bodies...arrrrrrrgh.....and I was just going to have a donut with my after dinnner coffee!!
"When I went to Catholic high school in Philadelphia, we just had one coach for football and basketball. He took all of us who turned out and had us run through a forest. The ones who ran into the trees were on the football team". (George Raveling)
-
WestCoastJoe
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 17721
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm
Blitz wrote:WestCoastJoe wrote:
Is the medication a valid issue here? Debateable. It could affect behaviour, I think. There is lots of evidence of drugs affecting behaviour. ...
Could a person fairly have doubts about the "memory lapse"? I think so. It would have been a key part of the case, both for the prosecution and the defence, if it came to that. ...
Do I reserve the right to continue to find his style with the media off-putting? Yes. And do I reserve the right to question his veracity at times in his comments to the media? Yes. ...
Tillman has paid a huge price for his actions. His career is, at the very least, in grave jeopardy, if not finished. I do sympathize with him. All of us have made mistakes in our lives. I hope he gets through this.
Bizarre behaviour from Tillman? No surprise there. Ha ha. Sure anyone can believe that part of it. With any co -worker. But some people, myself included, have for a long time taken Tillman's statements with a grain of salt. This is another situation where some people won't immediately take the words he offers and invest in them.Blitz wrote:However, being sent home that day, by the entire Riders Board of Directors for his bizzare behavior provides a lot of credibility to the Tillman story.
Agreed. Up to the judge and jury to make their judgments if it went to trial. For guilt or innocence, and for sentencing. Up to the public in terms of sympathy and credibility. A judge or jury could find someone not guilty based on "temporary insanity" or "loss of memory," et cetera, but IMO those defences do not absolve guilt, if indeed the person performed the acts. I think we need to be responsible for our actions, no matter what. I can see leeway with the sentencing.Blitz wrote:Secondly, the law doesn't always deal with incidents in a black and white way. We have defenses from insane automatism (a very rare defense in which a crime is committed while someone is sleep walking to not guilty based upon temporary insanity. Mitigating circumstances can be a factor, in terms of gulit or innocence, and are almost always a factor in sentencing.
I think we all agree that drugs can affect behaviour and memory. IMO they don't absolve guilt. As a mitigating factor they can certainly affect sentencing, and a jury could be swayed, all the way to a finding of innocence. And mitigating factors can certainly affect public opinion of the accused.Blitz wrote:Finally, memory loss and other side effects from taking muscle relaxants are well documented in the medical literature. Other side effects include behavioral changes, confusion, changes in sexual desire, and a delusional sense of well-being amongst many others. Too many people take medications these days without paying much attention to possible side effects. Therefore, it's not surprising that there are so many doubters, with regard to Tillman's story. I also remember well, a player I was coaching, a long number of years ago, when given triazolam, became so bizzare, we took him to emergency.
Many are the lessons to be learned from this tragedy. Agreed.... the story of Tillman should be a reminder to all of us, when taking any medications, to be very conscious of potential side effects. Also, with the increased vareity and usage of prescription medications, drug complications from combining two different medications are becoming more and more prevalent.
Based on what we have heard, I can believe that what he has been accused of happened. For myself, since it did not go to trial, I did not have a chance to hear testimony and evidence that would lend credence to Tillman's statements about the "memory loss." Mitigating factors can certainly affect sentencing, public opinion, sympathy, even a determination of guilt or innocence by a jury.
Unless a civil suit is launched the legal side is finished. The damage repair will be much slower. Sympathy for the girl and her family is the number one concern. Tillman's supporters will continue to have sympathy for him and belief in his statements, and might even doubt that the event happened. Those that are more sceptical about Tillman's public statements will continue to doubt some of what he says.
As I said, I would not be opposed to him being employed again in the CFL, at some time, if that is in line with the wishes of the girl and her family.
I think we agree on many things here, Blitz.
Some differences might be: Tillman's credibility, how much mitigating factors might affect sentencing (and guilt or innocence), and perhaps my bringing up examples of some previous public statements of his in regard to the credibility issue.
Blitz ,I think you may be wrong in regards to mitigating circumstances being factored into the verdict of guilty or not guilty, at least as it pretains to drugs or alcohol. The finding is pretty black and white as opposed to sentencing where mitigation is, or can be considered. Face it we're all speculating because no evidence was ever given so all we have is one side of a story . Who really knows for sure what he took and therefore what the affects might be? The guilty plea ensured no evidence was called, no expert witnesses testified, and no cross examination. I think its quite likely in the abscence of information people will continue to speculate.