[News] UPD: Coyotes renounce the rights to draft pick Mitchell Miller

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Wow. 16 pages on a player that has no affiliation to the Flames and hasn't played a second in the NHL. I'm not going to comb over this thread top to bottom as I'm pretty sure it comes down to a divide between posters that think this kid should pay a steep price and walk the plank and others that think that teenagers make bad decisions and should be provided an opportunity to change. Pretty boring stuff really as it's just back and forth with no resolution seeing neither side is going to change their stance.

Pretty much modern society in a nutshell.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

How people feel emotionally about an individual case shouldn't have any bearing on the application of youth justice provisions. There's a publication ban on the identity of the girl who murdered her parents and brother in Lethbridge. You don't have to be soft on family-murder to understand and accept, however reluctantly, why those provisions are in place.

Has youth justice provisions been brought up in this thread?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Has youth justice provisions been brought up in this thread?

The purpose of publication bans is to prevent crimes that minors commit from hurting their future prospects, reputation, and employment. They’re meant to stave off exactly the sort of reaction we’re seeing here.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The purpose of publication bans is to prevent crimes that minors commit from hurting their future prospects, reputation, and employment. They’re meant to stave off exactly the sort of reaction we’re seeing here.

But we're reacting to this case... because we know about it, is anyone calling to know everything about every young offender?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

But we're reacting to this case... because we know about it, is anyone calling to know everything about every young offender?

The fact we even know about it is a breach of youth justice principles.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The fact we even know about it is a breach of youth justice principles.

...ok. And yet I am still wondering what your point is. We do know about it. We can't change that, and nobody is asking to change youth justice principles going forward, so... cool?

[ikaris]

Considering what the mother of the victim posted regarding this piece of crap:



Toss this garbage from the NHL if it’s actually serious about diversity and inclusion initiatives.

Not worth the bad press.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The fact we even know about it is a breach of youth justice principles.

Or the difference in laws between Canada and Ohio...

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The purpose of publication bans is to prevent crimes that minors commit from hurting their future prospects, reputation, and employment. They’re meant to stave off exactly the sort of reaction we’re seeing here.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

But we're reacting to this case... because we know about it, is anyone calling to know everything about every young offender?

If the purpose of youth justice principles is to prevent precisely this sort of outcome from affecting people because of what they do when they're 14, and you think those are good principles to have, then, logically, you should object to the outcome we're currently seeing play out for this person.

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Or the difference in laws between Canada and Ohio...

Right, but I don't think anyone's saying that it was illegal to make this known. He's saying it should be illegal, because he thinks the Canadian policy is correct and the Ohio policy isn't.

I asked my question earlier - i.e., "what if he apologizes now" - to see if there was any circumstance, any possible way he could have a professional hockey career according to posters here. The answers varied. But according to some, professional hockey is an avenue that should now be closed off to him forever, it seems. That is an incredibly harsh punishment, and as bad as what he did was and as damning as the mother's reaction is (which I view as essentially a victim impact statement), it doesn't fit the crime in my opinion. Internet mob justice never seems to.

[Plaedo]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

...ok. And yet I am still wondering what your point is. We do know about it. We can't change that, and nobody is asking to change youth justice principles going forward, so... cool?

Well I think his unsaid point is they are in place because society as a whole can't resist being overly harsh and judgmental without having a capacity to truly empathize and understand what got a youth to a place where they commit a crime, and more importantly, understand what exactly is required for that child to recover and be corrected. We see life through our own paradigms and it is really hard, if not impossible to really get outside of that, and that includes how one's formative years played out. And that is not necessarily for a lack of trying on our part.

But ultimately, the point is, as a society we have prescribed consequences for certain actions, which are deemed to extract justice for those crimes, while still allowing for change, recovery, and correction if the crime is not severe enough to deem the death penalty or life in prison without parole. We can't, however, force sincere change on someone, nor can we measure it. As horrible as it is, we can't force someone to feel true regret and not want to repeat something wrong that they have done.

Someone might pay the price of their crime and really not regret it or feel sorry, but we can't arbitrarily increase the punishment or add additional consequences simply because emotionally we can't accept a lack of remorse that we can't measure. While they absolutely should feel sincere remorse, they may need to be persuaded over time to change their heart.

A couple tangential thoughts - in addition to the conundrum of assessing an offending individuals sincerity and remorse, how do you assess whether the victim has truly forgiven after all reasonable measures to make amends have been taken? Is that even our place as a society to ensure happens, or to expect? I would assert that it is an individual matter. Victims, and their loved ones often hold grudges, but we can't change that. (I'm not necessarily saying that has happened in this case).

Another interesting thing to think about, is that certain youth/children have various fears that complicate matters like this, especially when required to apologize in person (i.e. see psychophobia).

[Monahammer]

IMO the mother of the bullied child has no reason to lie in these circumstances. If Mitchell had apologized truly, and the family had felt his remorse (any remorseful person would do this) then she wouldn't be motivated to continue talking about this.
The publication ban only applies specifically to the case. She mentions that Mitchell's bullying and taunting continued up to 2 years ago, which would have been 2 years following his conviction.
That is unconsionable. I still believe the "blame" should lie with the Miller family, but Mitchell subjected himself to further publicity over this incident by choosing a public career path. All of the facts seem to point to his "remorse" being extremely limited to only the effects it is having on his potential NHL career.

Why the coyotes decided to wade into this at all is anybody's guess, but I can't see it as anything but an outrageously poor decision.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I asked my question earlier - i.e., "what if he apologizes now" - to see if there was any circumstance, any possible way he could have a professional hockey career according to posters here. The answers varied. But according to some, professional hockey is an avenue that should now be closed off to him forever, it seems. That is an incredibly harsh punishment, and as bad as what he did was and as damning as the mother's reaction is (which I view as essentially a victim impact statement), it doesn't fit the crime in my opinion. Internet mob justice never seems to.

While that's not my stance, one way I can look at that is by him not making the NHL that just means some other kid, one who hopefully didn't force-feed a piss candy to some disabled minority, does make their dream. There's only a limited amount of spots on NHL rosters, if he's in the NHL some non-racist kid isn't.

But he's also an undersized 4th round pick (with maybe a 2nd round talent) so the odds of him making it anyways are going to be slim regardless of his past.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Why the coyotes decided to wade into this at all is anybody's guess, but I can't see it as anything but an outrageously poor decision.

Nah, the reason the Coyotes decided to draft him is pretty clear. They had at one point put him on their do not draft list but after the league took away their draft picks for violating combine policy, he became an option again. Someone in the club decided that the hockey upside was worth it at that point.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Funny how many people you have insulted or called liars in this thread. Are you that angry that the poor abusive racist might have to face some bad publicity for being a racist?

This is a seriously messed up response and shows your character. It also answer my questions from my previous post.

If you can’t take this discussion seriously, since it is a serious topic, maybe you should sit this one out.

[afc wimbledon]

It may surprise posters here to know that any one of us can head down to our local youth court and see a list of names of kids appearing that day along with the criminal code provision they have broken, we can all sit in court and listen in on what our neighbors kid did if we so choose, the YCJ act ensures only that details are not published, it doesnt even attempt to provide anonymity to a youth

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

This is a seriously messed up response and shows your character. It also answer my questions from my previous post.

If you can’t take this discussion seriously, since it is a serious topic, maybe you should sit this one out.

What? You came in here and have accused pretty much anyone who disagrees with you as lying, making things up, mischaracterizing or whatever else you can.

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

No one said anything close to that.

- To devo22.

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Nobody said this is "kids being kids" you're making that up.

- To Yamer

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

This really is some of the worst posting I've seen from you. Running from the issue, mischaracterizing my posts, intentionally misquoting me and misrepresenting the facts.

- To PepsiFree

You have like 10 posts and half of them are just saying people are lying.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

3/11 is half? And why do you have such a problem with the truth? Is it because it distorts your warped view?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

3/11 is half? And why do you have such a problem with the truth? Is it because it distorts your warped view?

Plus now the several you have levied against me. But you're right, everyone else is lying about...things.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

If the purpose of youth justice principles is to prevent precisely this sort of outcome from affecting people because of what they do when they're 14, and you think those are good principles to have, then, logically, you should object to the outcome we're currently seeing play out for this person.

Right, but I don't think anyone's saying that it was illegal to make this known. He's saying it should be illegal, because he thinks the Canadian policy is correct and the Ohio policy isn't.

I asked my question earlier - i.e., "what if he apologizes now" - to see if there was any circumstance, any possible way he could have a professional hockey career according to posters here. The answers varied. But according to some, professional hockey is an avenue that should now be closed off to him forever, it seems. That is an incredibly harsh punishment, and as bad as what he did was and as damning as the mother's reaction is (which I view as essentially a victim impact statement), it doesn't fit the crime in my opinion. Internet mob justice never seems to.

Outside of the issue that saw him in court, though, there is a... what... 9 year period between ages 8 and 16 where he physically abused, mentally abused or intimidated, and was outwardly racist to his victim?

If this was the only incident, a one off, and we only knew about it because of a lack of youth justice provisions... sure... I buy it. But none of that is true, so what impact would have been made if the same provisions that exist in Canada existed in Ohio? None that I can imagine. Isaiah still spoke out, his mother still spoke out, the actual bullying (which seems like a light term) extended far prior and then beyond the incident he was convicted for. I don't think there's a material change in this situation if those same provisions existed in Ohio.

As far as whether he apologizes now, I don't entirely care about it. Not because he doesn't deserve a second chance, but because my opinion rests on his ability to make amends and be forgiven by his victim, not solely on an apology. If Isaiah forgives him, why shouldn't we? And given that Isaiah forgave his other abuser, I don't see that as being a stretch. And if he doesn't, the question to me isn't "should he have an NHL career" because who am I to say so? But I know for me, circumstances being what they are, I wouldn't have drafted him, and as a person without that power, I'll simply root against him making the NHL.

And I've rooted against someone making the NHL for far less, we all have.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Nah, the reason the Coyotes decided to draft him is pretty clear. They had at one point put him on their do not draft list but after the league took away their draft picks for violating combine policy, he became an option again. Someone in the club decided that the hockey upside was worth it at that point.

Fair- I misspoke. Why they did it is known. I still think it was a terrible decision.