Letters to the Editor -
Dear Editor,
I have omitted names in this article for fear of involving any kids of any party.
February 2008 at a hockey tournament at the St. Barbe Arena an altercation between two hockey players occurred. The referee assessed a minor penalty for slashing to Player A.
A few months later, unbeknown to almost everybody including the arena manager and game officials, the RCMP laid a charge of 'assault with a weapon' against this player. The charge arose from a complaint from the second player in the altercation.
At the time of the altercation there were over three hundred fans present, two hockey teams and the on-ice officials. The Crown retained one witness and the accused player retained four witnesses. During the trial all witnesses, which included a clergyman and referee, swore under oath that they did not witness the 'assault with a weapon' against the accuser. The official is one of the most experienced and respected officials on the Northern Peninsula. If there is a high level or elite game or a game of high intensity, this is the person called upon to control the game. Under oath he said that the minor penalty assessed this player deserved nothing more.
During the trial, while under oath, the accuser, when questioned by the defense lawyer, repeated many times that he was certain that the side of the body questioned was the alleged injured side. A little while later the defense was presented a picture taken by the RCMP. The accuser under oath said, "without a doubt, this picture was the correct side allegedly injured." The defense then proved to the judge that the picture and the side of his body previously questioned by the defense were actually two opposite sides of the body. Some doubt for sure.
During the trial the crown approached the defense lawyer and offered the accused a deal which would bring a suspended sentence and no criminal record to the defendant if he would plead guilty. The accused said there was no way he could plead guilt to an offense he did not commit. The trial continued. At this time after both sides presented their cases the judge could not make a decision and said she would contact the people later. As far as the defense was concerned the case was over and the judge would toss this out of court.
Not so.
To the dismay and disappointment of the defense the judge sentenced the accused to one year probation, to keep the peace and to stay away from the accuser. The defense lawyer assured his client he would appeal and without doubt the appeal court would overturn this verdict. Due to stress and pain on his wife and kids, the accused said, "no." Even though he was appalled by the judge's ruling and disagreed full heartedly with it, he said he would abide by the court decision, keep the peace and move on with his life.
During this ordeal, which took several months, the accused continued to play hockey at rentals and tournaments. No problems.
In the spring of 2008 the arena manager was looking for volunteers to assist in dressing room repairs. Along with many others, the accused helped out and a few beverages at the end of the job was the reward. No problem.
As in other years, the accused and a few more older guys informed the manager that if teams became shorthanded at the four on four tournament he would fill in if needed. Early in the tournament, the manager called him to fill in. This tournament is made up of a lot of minor hockey kids and older players. No problem.
In the fall of 2008, while court action was proceeding, some parents and some minor hockey executives suggested that this same person do his training to become a certified minor hockey coach. No problem.
In Easter, he was asked to assist the Atom B team as an assistant coach. The head coach of this team was the only witness for the crown against the accused player. Side by side they guided their B team to a bronze finish. Great work and again, no problem.
Case closed?
Not so.
A while later the accuser, who is also chairman of the arena board, approached other board officials a couple of times with a message that this guy must pay more and that we must make an example of him. Well, based on court findings, many people felt the ruling was not just and the example was already set unfairly. One lady of the board told me, and I quote, "We thought the court would take care of this and they did not so we did." Going beyond the bounds of the courts could be taken as a possible vengeance becoming.
The court ruled that the player must not participate in any on ice activities for five years. This is ridiculous.
The player may be present at the arena but must not participate in on-ice birthdays, community rentals, tournaments, or any practices at the St. Barbe Arena. Outside of his arena everything is acceptable, strange.
The accused asked for an appeal but wanted to be represented by another person. The accused felt he was being railroaded and part of his probation is to stay away from the chairman of the board and not to engage in any controversy. The board refused to allow a lawyer or independent person to represent the accused at a hearing. The board has refused to publicly or privately address this serious matter.
The board, by the way, is made up of a group with approximately 80 per cent related by blood or marriage to the chairman, the accuser, and almost 40 per cent are teammates. None of these appeared as a witness on behalf of the accuser.
Conflict of interest?
Maybe?
At present the board has retained lawyers to pursue the matter. This no doubt cost a lot of money and I would suspect it is being paid for by arena funds collected door to door or funds raised by volunteers around the communities. The accused player has also retained a lawyer and this is also costing his family dearly.
The financial burdens, as far as I am concerned, ranks a distant second. The stress and pain that the accused and his family has endured is way beyond reason. This personal vendetta and attack by the board and especially the chairman on his family has brought great burden. The children are hurt, the careers and personal lives of the accused and his family have taken a major toll. Long sleepless nights, degrading gestures and slander are not deserving to this family.
I was not part of the altercation, nor did I participate in any court proceeding, but I feel as a member of the community that I have a responsibility to put an end to this unwarranted attack on this family. As you can possibly feel, this family is a friend of mine, but neither friend nor foe deserves this unjust treatment and defamation of character.
I actually feel sorry for those people who allegedly use the public funds an arena board authority for personal vendettas and gains.
I have a large number of supporters in this issue and we ask the Straits Arena Board to:
1) Withdraw this attack on this person so that the arena can continue on as our manager wishes it to in a positive manner.
2) Call an open public meeting with representatives of each community invited in order to address this matter. Or
3) Call an annual general meeting and re-elect a new board that can deal with these issues with a clear and constructive mind.
Don't forget that the arena is owned by and supported financially by each community in the Straits. As a board you are there to oversee operations but you don't have the right to make decisions which will badly hurt public interest and financial assistance because you have a personal dislike for another. Karma states, 'you reap what you sew and what goes around comes around'. Karma will visit, for sure.
In conclusion, the words of an old friend, "God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference." God Bless.
Dereck Coles,
Concerned citizen
.jpg)
.jpg)
