I read that Miller was skating by his victim’s house on the regular just two years ago, despite a court order to stay away. The mom feels that this was a deliberate campaign of intimidation and harassment. She doesn’t feel Miller has the slightest bit of genuine remorse (and she’s already forgiven the other dude involved). The judge in the court case didn’t think so either.
So much for it being a thing of the past.
I’m not really going to feel sorry for people who feel entitled to make a million dollars a year after taxes, if they have to join nearly everyone else on the planet and not do so.
He could have taken a bad fall right before they signed him and lost that job because he’d never be able to play again. Say, by being pushed by a bully.
You’re a lot more sure of that than I am.
They may well have checked that he hadn’t been arrested again. That doesn’t mean he stopped being a bully.
He admitted doing what the court said he did, and he did everything the court imposed as his debt to society. Now you want more. What else does he have to do"
Where I quoted you before, you said he’d never been charged, only accused. I was pointing out that if he admitted it in court, apparently he was charged. And he since he admitted guilt, that’s not in question—saying it was “only accused” implies the possibility it wasn’t established as fact.
As for what people think of it today or whether it should hurt his employment opportunities, that’s a different thing. IMO sports teams and other groups may act like they’re deeply concerned about doing the right thing but I think it’s dollars and cents with those folks. They can’t plausibly deny knowing it if it’s been revealed.
Merits of the case? That whole bullying thing isn’t cool, especially someone who’s developmentally disabled. In these days of BLM, hmm, that racism probably won’t sit well with the fans. But it’s all court of public opinion and some stars were forgiven their past sins.
On the other hand, what has anybody heard from Kevin Spacey lately? Why does the public forgive some and not others?
Because sexual crimes are on a different level than the other things mentioned in this thread.
Just FYI, he wasn’t the 4th overall pick, he was a 4th rounder - 111th overall. He’s supposed to go to North Dakota now and wouldn’t under any normal circumstances even hope to make the Coyotes roster (had they kept him) for at least another three years, and probably closer to 5 or 6 after a stint in the AHL. He wouldn’t have been making any money while in college, and wouldn’t have been looking for a million dollar payday until his mid twenties, even if everything went right.
Does the leopard change his spots? The bullying seems to have too prolonged, carefully thought out and downright vicious to be excused. The bully got away with it in the past, the thing to do now is to do something that hurts him, such as yanking him out of any executive position until he has demonstrably shown remorse and a commitment to stopping such behavior. And that is just for starters.
The only thing I said that you dispute was “charged” and all you have is “apparently” charged, and your whole case rests on that. Please answer me: How does an apologetic and judicially acquitted teen get on with his pursuit of happiness without obstruction. Murderers have an avenue of paying their debt tio society. How does this boy do it?
You’re correct I read this cite wrong when I was trying to figure out what his contract would be I got the minimum of 3 years right but I misread maximum as minimum. I thought his minimum salary would be 925K.
Making him “give until it hurts” is totally punitive and not restorative. Restorative justice focuses on repairing harm, not punishing offenders.
North Dakota kicked him off the team
Hmm… should he be deprived of earning an income? What jobs are suitable for former bullies and are those jobs the only jobs allowed for the rest of the bullies’ life?
Tim Allen trafficking cocaine trafficking seemed like a fairly big deal. But you have a point: people may be less forgiving of sexual crimes. Then again:
Returning to your original quote:
I wondered if I missed something. ‘Since he made the admission in court, I assumed he had been charged. Was he not? And if he wasn’t charged, was this some sort of non-criminal proceeding?’ So I googled and found these.
https://cqrcengage.com/cfchildren/app/document/13312880?0
There’s a NY Times article that is paywalled (I don’t subscribe), but the preview says:
So you seem to think
A) whatever he did wasn’t a crime (but the above—calling it assault, using the term conviction) indicate it was. IMO it’s kind of beside the point, but I wanted to clear it up.
The other part of your post seems to be that
B) whatever he did, he was punished at the time and that should be the end of it (debating it status of “crime” is nullified by “whatever he did”).
You can’t be tried twice for the same crime, right? But the state court isn’t trying him again. There’s no court room, no lawyers, none of that. It’s what fans may think of him.
Take a less dramatic case: say a young girl takes a dare from her friends and unfortunately she gets caught shoplifting. Later in life maybe a store keeper won’t give her a job, thinking if she stole before, she might do it again. Would you blame him for protecting his business?
I don’t have millions of dollars invested in a franchise or stockholders to report to, but I understand where the concern is. The fans (customers) want a winner but if they don’t like what the guy stood for, maybe they watch less or find another team or whatever. They might forgive it once but if he goes off the rails again?
I really think that if advertisers thought Hitler could sell toothpaste, he’d be on our TV screens daily—other side of the coin, pick the most venerated figure and if (s)he couldn’t sell a product, (s)he would be kicked to the curb. For businesses profit motive is critcal.
As for the question, “How does he overcome that?” I really don’t know.
I read one of Tim Allen’s books years ago. IIRC he kept his past hush hush before “Home Improvement” launched. Imagine an early episode, “This week: Tim gets a visit from former boss Pablo Escobar!” And I think Marky Mark’s past didn’t come to light till he was well established. They built up a fan base before the truth came out.
If hockey guy had been the next Wayne Gretzky for a few years and then been found out, who knows? They say though that people do love a comeback story. Perhaps he’ll find a way.
He was not acquitted. He was convicted. People with criminal records normally find that is an obstruction in their future career plans.
Nor is it clear that he has ever personally apologised to his victim, other than in a letter that the court sentenced him to write, and which the family says they never recevied. The other boy apparently broke down in tears and apologised personally, in addition to the court-mandated letter.
He did apparently send out an explanatory, apologetic letter - to all of the NHL teams who might have been interested in him.
If murderers are released from prison, they generally find that a murder conviction harms their job prospects.
I’m not aware of any convicted murderers who are playing in the NHL.
Hockey teams tend to encourage their players to be youth ambassadors, role models for young people, especially young boys.
If a team has a choice between a player with a criminal record for racist bullying of a youth, and a player who has a clean record, it’s in their business interests to pick the one with a clean record.
It’s hard to send a player with a criminal record for racist bullying out to the schools as a youth ambassador.
Other people with criminal records find their career prospects limited by the conviction, and the bad choices they made. Should different rules apply to a convicted junior hockey player? Do junior hockey players get an exemption from personal responsibility for past criminal actions with a racist component because they’re good at chasing a puck?
Missed the edit window: meant to include this link in my post quoting from this news article:
How long should a prohibition on employment last post conviction?
Ain’t you a capitalist? The jobs suitable for former bullies are the jobs willingly offered to them by employers who believe they’ll, on balance, add value to the business. If a hockey team thinks the negative public response to their hiring a vicious bully will outweigh the benefits of having him on the team, that’s a free market decision.
A society always has scut work that needs to be done, miserable low-paid thankless work. That shit builds character, and I’d be happy to let him work some of those jobs for awhile. Maybe he’ll develop enough character in that time to issue a real apology.
There is no prohibition on employment. Employers are free to hire him, if they think that his criminal record does not harm their business plans and operations.
good luck with that.