HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

OT: Lafleur suing police and prosecuter

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-02-2008, 02:18 PM
  #26
Russeltown
Registered User
 
Russeltown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Audi Alteram Partem


Russeltown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 02:32 PM
  #27
Fido22
Registered User
 
Fido22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
yes he is entitled to a special treatment. The justice system has a list of names of "celebrities" or "known in the public people", so that whenever someone of that list is involved their case has to be treated differently so that this person is not inflicted further harms by the press or whoever.
I will know that I have trully made it when my name appears on that coveted list. I hear that at least 1 000 people who are not related to you must recognize you in a picture in order to make that list. Federal officers are responsible for maintaining and updating the list. There is also another similar list, but that one prevents you from entering an airplane if you are on it. No wait, I think that's another list I heard of on the news. I always get these things mixed up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russeltown View Post
Audi Alteram Partem

Overated and not reliable. I greatly prefer Lexus in the class.


Last edited by Beakermania*: 04-02-2008 at 04:17 PM.
Fido22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 03:06 PM
  #28
habfan4
Registered User
 
habfan4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Deus Amat Pretzel
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSU Seminoles View Post
I don't know the exact bill but judges have to take into consideration what a "celebrity" will go through before accusing the person of anything. The same goes for a trucker who has to go to the US for example. He will get some sort of arrangement to allow him to keep his job.
You don't know it because it doesn't exist, any piece of legislation that would direct the judiciary to provide a public figure with preferential treatment would violate the Charter.

I'm not sure what your trucker analogy has to do with anything? A trucker who travels to the US and who was charged with a crime might have to post a bond to ensure his/her presence at trial, but again that would be at the discretion of the Court.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
If that's the case why wasn't a warrant issued on Bill Clinton for his PROVEN Perjury???..Furthermore, why wasn't he impeached?

Lafleur wasn't even proven guilty.

In both cases, its completely stupid. One lied about a BJ and an affair to protect his marriage and reputation, the other to protect his son.
What does the Clinton/Lewinsky incident have to do with the administration of justice in Canada?

As I stated earlier, Lafleur's guilt/innocence is incidental to the issuance of an arrest warrant. A trial determines his guilt/innocence, having charges laid against him by the Crown is not tantamount to being guilty of a crime.


Last edited by Beakermania*: 04-02-2008 at 04:20 PM.
habfan4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 03:15 PM
  #29
Chfan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Chfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 3,779
vCash: 500
Fourth liner

Chfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 03:40 PM
  #30
Fido22
Registered User
 
Fido22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habfan4 View Post
You don't know it because it doesn't exist, any piece of legislation that would direct the judiciary to provide a public figure with preferential treatment would violate the Charter.

I'm not sure what your trucker analogy has to do with anything? A trucker who travels to the US and who was charged with a crime might have to post a bond to ensure his/her presence at trial, but again that would be at the discretion of the Court.
I think he might have been referring to sentencing guidelines. Some judges have taken the "additional harm" (public image / ruined career) into consideration when imposing sentence. (ie. it can have an impact on your sentence -although that's controversial-, not on how/when/where you are arrested or charged). That might be what FSU Seminoles had in mind.

Anywho, criminal law. Yucky!

Fido22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 03:42 PM
  #31
CastroLeRobot
Hab-a-bouille
 
CastroLeRobot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judge Sauer View Post
I'm not sure where your picking up this whole bit about me condoning special treatment for Cloutier, guys like him deserve the worst the law can throw at him.

Lying under oath is still to protect someone else or yourself, and yes, judges will convict the person of perjury. Guy's son isn't young and stupid, the guy's 22, he know right from wrong. He's facing more than 20 charges ranging from sexually assaulting a minor to armed assault and forcible confinement. Guy knew he was taking his son to see a minor, *** people? Do you condone this if it's your daugher that Guy's son is assaulting and confining?
The only crime Guy may have committed was lying to protect his son. I know parents who would do much much more. Anything related to driving, knowing about or being an accomplice is just interpretation, and is totally unprovable. As such, issuing an arrest warrant for this kind of crime is over kill and irrational. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew Lafleurs son was wacko, everyone knew Guy Lafleur had to deal with his son's stupid actions, but somehow, the police made it ABOUT GUY LAFLEUR. Not his son. THAT IS NOT FAIR.

If I was the father of the 16 year old girl, I might (depending on the circumstances), again, I MIGHT, pursue a lawsuit on the son. But not on the father. One second you say the son is 22 and is totally responsible for his actions, and then you say Guy is responsible for driving him. Doesn't make sens.

Again, I'm not condoning the way he deals with his son. IT JUST AIN'T CRIMINAL. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING

CastroLeRobot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 04:02 PM
  #32
Judge Sauer*
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nunavut
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CastroLeRobot View Post
The only crime Guy may have committed was lying to protect his son. I know parents who would do much much more. Anything related to driving, knowing about or being an accomplice is just interpretation, and is totally unprovable. As such, issuing an arrest warrant for this kind of crime is over kill and irrational. That's all I'm saying. Everyone knew Lafleurs son was wacko, everyone knew Guy Lafleur had to deal with his son's stupid actions, but somehow, the police made it ABOUT GUY LAFLEUR. Not his son. THAT IS NOT FAIR.

If I was the father of the 16 year old girl, I might (depending on the circumstances), again, I MIGHT, pursue a lawsuit on the son. But not on the father. One second you say the son is 22 and is totally responsible for his actions, and then you say Guy is responsible for driving him. Doesn't make sens.

Again, I'm not condoning the way he deals with his son. IT JUST AIN'T CRIMINAL. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING
The media made it about Guy, not the police. The police aren't the ones posting the news online or in papers. They didn't go out of their way to make it public knowledge or take him in and do a perp walk.
Guy's son is responsible for his actions. Guy brought his son to go see a minor, I never said that Guy made his son do what he did, but Guy knew what was going to happen. You have to stop putting words in my mouth.
If you steal an apple from the grocery store and hide the apple in my pocket when we get outside 'til we got a block away, I broke the law as well. If your driving while I'm the passenger and drive into a parked car causing damage to the other vehicle and we drive off, I could be an accessory to a hit and run.

Judge Sauer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 04:41 PM
  #33
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fido22 View Post
I think he might have been referring to sentencing guidelines. Some judges have taken the "additional harm" (public image / ruined career) into consideration when imposing sentence. (ie. it can have an impact on your sentence -although that's controversial-, not on how/when/where you are arrested or charged). That might be what FSU Seminoles had in mind.

Anywho, criminal law. Yucky!
yeah well I'm not entirely sure of what the law states about that but it goes along those lines

Mathletic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 04:44 PM
  #34
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CastroLeRobot View Post
The Prosecutor and Police went on a total power trip when they issued an arrest warrant against him. You see, I'm not defending Lafleur, but the guy was not a fugitive, he wasn't dangerous and there was no chance he would re-comit his crime (i.e. parjury in the court). Arrest Warrants are issued for the authorities to pursue and arrest on sight a dangerous criminal. You can clearly see the opportunistic police officers trying to have a name by issuing a warrant against a hockey Legend. Anyway, they could have called the guy, his lawyer, anything. But they didn't. There can only be 1 purpose and it is to damage Lafleur's reputation and "punish him" for his crime.

I'm under the impression that the 2 ladies that issued the warrant (the prosecutor and officer) were pissed when they learned Guy drove his son to have sex with a girl at a Hotel when the son was on parole for having assaulted a minor girl. They knew Guy wouldn't be legally punished for lying about that (no judge will punish someone for lying under oath to save their child), so they decided to take justice into their own hand. THIS IS WHERE THEY WENT WRONG. You can't have the police "deciding" what is and what isn't punishment enough. You can't be judge, jury and executioner. This is what separates democracy from fascist states.

I don't like Lafleur...he has this attitude like he is above everyone else, and he criticized my team and that I can't forgive

But that doesn't give me the right to ruin his reputation, his name and treat him like a criminal.

eveyone siding with the police here is just a hater.

the police
Justice system for releasing the son in the first place
I agree. The arrogance of this is just too typical. I hope Guy wins his case.

tinyzombies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 04:47 PM
  #35
CastroLeRobot
Hab-a-bouille
 
CastroLeRobot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judge Sauer View Post
The media made it about Guy, not the police. The police aren't the ones posting the news online or in papers. They didn't go out of their way to make it public knowledge or take him in and do a perp walk.
Guy's son is responsible for his actions. Guy brought his son to go see a minor, I never said that Guy made his son do what he did, but Guy knew what was going to happen. You have to stop putting words in my mouth.
If you steal an apple from the grocery store and hide the apple in my pocket when we get outside 'til we got a block away, I broke the law as well. If your driving while I'm the passenger and drive into a parked car causing damage to the other vehicle and we drive off, I could be an accessory to a hit and run.
First, I wanna say that I appreciate the discussion. You seem like an intelligent guy/gal and you have very good arguments. I never meant to put any words in your mouth, I was only answering what I felt you were implying. To come back to our main subject, the fact the he spent the night with a (consenting, for all we know) 16 year old girl is not illegal in itself. It is the fact the he lied about breaking the curfew. For all we know, the girl might really like Guy's son and maybe her parents too. Maybe everyone knew what was going on and they agreed. See, this is what I was saying in the first place. The whole thing SEEMS wrong, but isn't, legally speaking. So the cops decided to "Punish" what seemed wrong to them with an arrest warrant on a charge that will never stick, i.e. perjury.

As such, I think they stepped out of line trying to be judge and executioner. No the cops didn't print the papers or make the news report. But they knew EXACTLY what they were doing.

The same can be said about Guy driving his son to the hotel. He KNEW it was somewhat wrong. But, you know, the fact that Guy may or may not be a bad person is not important here. It is about the cops taking the initiative to "Punish" someone that haven't been proven guilty of anything by unleashing the media dogs on him. This concerns me much more as the cops are figures of authority in this society and I take any possibility of over zealousness very seriously. I don't think they did it to "Protect and Serve". This is my whole point

CastroLeRobot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 04:53 PM
  #36
Judge Sauer*
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nunavut
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,989
vCash: 500
Sorry if I wasn't clear on what I was saying, happens to us all on a message board you know
I don't think Guy had any bad intentions or is not a good person himself, a little on the jaded side regarding his son maybe.
I'm sure he'll walk from all charges, there isn't much of anything to gain or really enforce from what happened. His son on the other hand might actually see some time now and get some counselling while behind bars.

Judge Sauer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 05:20 PM
  #37
Russeltown
Registered User
 
Russeltown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fido22 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russeltown
Audi Alteram Partem
Overated and not reliable. I greatly prefer Lexus in the class.
Overated? WTH are you talking about? LOL

Russeltown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2008, 05:47 PM
  #38
Fido22
Registered User
 
Fido22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russeltown View Post
Overated? WTH are you talking about? LOL
I stopped reading at "Audi".


Fido22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.