[News] Flames prospect Ferland charged with assault

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by flameswin

To those saying it's a "boys will be boys" situation or no big deal. Do you guys know how serious an aggravated assault charge is, if it sticks? You guys are making it sound like he got a fighting in public ticket or something. Aggravated assault is pretty damn serious, and it was likely much more than a drunken bar scuffle with another patron for those charges.

I'm not comparing these circumstances at all, but for reference, those guys that beat that guy in the beltline to within an inch of his life (he will likely never recover) were charged with aggravated assault.

To underline the seriousness of the charge: I believe that, if convicted, the United States could, and possibly would, deny him entry. If that were to happen, his NHL dream is dead.

(although, since drug use doesn't seem to be involved, their authorities may not care)

[Pierre "Monster" McGuire]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

What the #### is going on here

To summarize:

We've got a few people saying they're not surprised Ferland fought someone because Natives fighting is prevelant in their community. Pretty arbitrary point if you ask me since alcohol doesn't discriminate.

Then you've got a few people who are acting like Ferland just caught a murder charge like Heatley or Burtuzzi. These people seem to want the Flames to abandon Ferland if he's guilty as if no other NHL player has got a charge against him and went on to have a good career.

Then you've got the "no big deal" group who figure legal trouble is no big deal when it really is a big deal whether it's a vandalism charge or a murder charge. All legal cases are a big deal because no one should be involved in them.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

As I've mentioned, people who would never ever say a racist thing have a few drinks its on for the racial slurs. So you're suggesting that these thoughts of racisms only manifest themselves when these people are drunk? I simply don't believe that. The thoughts are already there, the alcohol essentially acts as an agent to bring out these thoughts. But its not like they don't have these feelings already, they are simply supressing them. So while you can argue they'd never do these things sober, I simply think there's a barrier of fear (being labeled a racist is a tough one to overcome) that seems to disappear with alcohol. Similarily, if there was no fear of being outed as a racist, I think you'd see those people acting more racist.

Ultimately we'll never agree on this, so arguing back and forth seems pointless.



Right...so if you're cool bashing other teams without merit or validity, you should then also be cool taking it, no?

This is 100% correct even with out the alcohol. It reminds me of a study I read where all of the top e-dating sites were polled and 50% of Caucasian women claimed to be okay with contacting men from another race and 80% of Caucasian men said the same. Of those people 90% of men sent their emails to white women and 97% of women sent them to white men only.

The same study talked about the senate race in Louisiana in 1990 where a high ranking member of the KKK ran for the position and garnered over 20% more votes than had been recorded in pre-election polls. So really, what they found is that people give the guise of not being racists or being discriminatory but underneath when not scrutinized by the public there is alot more of them out there than people realize.

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I adressed it in my previous post, I'm cool with being totaly irrational, just don't get upset when it comes back the other way from other teams fans. Being irrational towards other teams and then getting all pissed when someone does it towards your team is just a bit hypocritical. Thats all, if you're going to dish it out don't complain when someone else is ready to give it back.

That's what "irrational" means.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

It's called stereo-typing and whether you're aware of it or not, you lumped Ferland in the 'drunk Indian' stereotype with no ACTUAL evidence that alcohol was a factor in the incident.

You wouldn't want to be stereo-typed as a stupid redneck would you?

almost every person in here has assumed alcohol was a factor, and I am the one stereotyping?

It was a bar fight, to think alcohol was not a factor is pretty naive, it's not like this incident happened at a lemonade stand.

There is no denying that the rate of alcoholism amongst the Aboriginal Peoples is significantly higher than Caucasians, it is a well known fact.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

almost every person in here has assumed alcohol was a factor, and I am the one stereotyping?

It was a bar fight, to think alcohol was not a factor is pretty naive, it's not like this incident happened at a lemonade stand.

There is no denying that the rate of alcoholism amongst the Aboriginal Peoples is significantly higher than Caucasians, it is a well known fact.

What is your point? I'm still trying to figure out your aboriginal spin on all of this.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

almost every person in here has assumed alcohol was a factor, and I am the one stereotyping?

It was a bar fight, to think alcohol was not a factor is pretty naive, it's not like this incident happened at a lemonade stand.

There is no denying that the rate of alcoholism amongst the Aboriginal Peoples is significantly higher than Caucasians, it is a well known fact.

That doesn't make it any less racist.

[jar_e]

With all this speculation, the one thing of interest (that's actually objective and not subjective) is that the RCMP decided to charge Ferland with aggravated assault compared to simply assault causing bodily harm.

The threshold with what Crown's will run with in regards to the aggravated is usually level of injury, more so them focusing on the "maims, disfigures, or endangers" than necessarily just a "wound". Wound is defined in the same section (268) of the criminal code as:

(3) For greater certainty, in this section, “wounds” or “maims” includes to excise, infibulate or mutilate, in whole or in part, the labia majora, labia minora or clitoris of a person,

Just a little clarification on the whole spectrum of assault/assault causing/aggravated assault.

edit: So my speculation would be he obviously falls into the disfigures or endangers categories, and I would have to guess with the broken orbital bone he probably has some serious eye injury that would require some sort of surgery or is not recoverable.

[StAlbertFlame]

If history is any indication,The Flames will not look positively on a player getting in trouble outside of rink and Ferland will be shipped off to the Hurricanes or some other NHL team. remember Brett Sutter was traded shortly after his assault charge by his father

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by StAlbertFlame

If history is any indication,The Flames will not look positively on a player getting in trouble outside of rink and Ferland will be shipped off to the Hurricanes or some other NHL team. remember Brett Sutter was traded shortly after his assault charge by his father

Yeah, that could happen but he's about the only physical prospect we have so I'd like to keep him. What happens depends on how valuable he is, Brett wasn't very valuable, MacInnis was.

One other thing, I'd like to see how this unfolds before jumping to conclusions.

[chockfullofgoodness]

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

To summarize:

We've got a few people saying they're not surprised Ferland fought someone because Natives fighting is prevelant in their community. Pretty arbitrary point if you ask me since alcohol doesn't discriminate.

Then you've got a few people who are acting like Ferland just caught a murder charge like Heatley or Burtuzzi. These people seem to want the Flames to abandon Ferland if he's guilty as if no other NHL player has got a charge against him and went on to have a good career.

Then you've got the "no big deal" group who figure legal trouble is no big deal when it really is a big deal whether it's a vandalism charge or a murder charge. All legal cases are a big deal because no one should be involved in them.

Looking back at this thread, I think you summed it up pretty well. Nicely done, Sir.

[Hells Bells]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

These threads certainly weed out the idiots on this board.

Seriously, some people should really think before hitting the reply button, some pathetic stuff in here.

These types of comments also help to identify the "idiots".

[David Struch]

Originally Posted by Rasalghul

Unfortunately die to the treatment of various groups on the past they get a free ride now.

I'm curious as to who you are speaking of?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by calumniate

Days like this make me wish it was still the 80's

You obviously don't remember the media firestorm over the Al MacInnis bar incident.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

This has nothing to do with the Ferland incident persay but it pi### me off when i hear people condeming any bar fight.

They happen, add too much drink, a hot chick and guys natural ego's and its going to happen.
Honestly it should be the way it was in the 80- early 90's if a bar fight happens, 2 guys say you want to go they go and if 1 guy gets busted up its on his own bravado. But now its jump in's, head stomping, knives, someone always calls the police even in a regular fight.
I can't count how many times I scrapped and afterwords someone in the crowd would say thats enough he has had enough or you give the person the chance to quit. Hug it out and the guy would buy me a drink or vise-versa.
Some of my very best friends became guys I fought.

As for Ferland sounds like 2 guys wanted to go and 1 punch its over. Also from the reports dude got messed up . You don't want to get hurt be nice, but if you don't want to follow that simple rule you take the risk of getting the worse end of it.
It used to be if it was a honest fight and if the police were called they would sort it out and situation would be resolved without charges.
Now, any "normal" fight results in charges if there are witnesses.
I hope for Ferlands sake he wasn't raging and was acting like a tough guy, rather find out a want to be tough guy brought the fight to Ferland.
Sorry if this shocks or upsets anyone who reads this but I grew up when times were not what they are now.

You mean when you grew up guys weren't hospitalized with severe injuries after being punched in the head by strong adults? Because once you're over the age of about 16, any 'normal' fight can result in broken bones, fractured skulls, concussions, or even death. As a taxpayer, I don't want to foot the medical bill for a morons who behave as though aren't more mentally developed than 12-year-olds.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by zuluking

I don't think you've spent too much time around sports fans. As someone who has spent 25 years being a sports fan, fandom truly does show a person's true colours. I've had many friends and associates talk about what consistent guys they are and how they are always fair....but go to a few Flames games with them and their criticisms of only the opposing team players are just flying everywhere. So they are rational, they are just irrational when they're at sporting events? Being a sports team fan prevents you from properly analyzing your actions, you simply do whatever you feel, which is what an individual who believes in their actions will do. If you're suggesting that isn't true, then you've clearly never been a fan of a sports team in your life.

Then I guess I've never been a sports fan in my life. Because I can set aside my emotional connection in favour of a rational assessment at pretty much any time. Especially when it comes to off-ice matters. Why in the heck would someone who wears a particular jersey be a better person off the ice than someone who wears a different jersey? I can't even begin to put myself into the frame of mind where I'd believe that's true.

Clearly, a lot of people involved in pro sports are capable of this as well. Otherwise, GMs and scouts would always be biased in favour of their own players, their own prospects. Nobody would be able to accurately assess player value.

Some people are more rational than others. For example, some dads can fairly coach or even referee in a game their child is participating in. Some can't.

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by RobDoupe

Then I guess I've never been a sports fan in my life. Because I can set aside my emotional connection in favour of a rational assessment at pretty much any time. Especially when it comes to off-ice matters. Why in the heck would someone who wears a particular jersey be a better person off the ice than someone who wears a different jersey? I can't even begin to put myself into the frame of mind where I'd believe that's true.

Clearly, a lot of people involved in pro sports are capable of this as well. Otherwise, GMs and scouts would always be biased in favour of their own players, their own prospects. Nobody would be able to accurately assess player value.

Some people are more rational than others. For example, some dads can fairly coach or even referee in a game their child is participating in. Some can't.

Missing context. And good for you.

[MoBiBu]

If the 'victim' was a regular and this occurred at the bar in Cochrane where such events usually transpire at (especially with 'outsiders') then most any witness testimony is highly suspect - the locals circle the wagons quite quickly for their own. Ferland being a Flames prospect would only sweeten the pot for the locals.

[Rasalghul]

Originally Posted by MoBiBu

If the 'victim' was a regular and this occurred at the bar in Cochrane where such events usually transpire at (especially with 'outsiders') then most any witness testimony is highly suspect - the locals circle the wagons quite quickly for their own. Ferland being a Flames prospect would only sweeten the pot for the locals.

It is most unlikely that people will want to testify against Ferland. He is a young kid, may possibly have a great career and people understand that. A fight is a fight and I think he should receive a mulligan on this one. I do not think anybody should ever hurt anyone unless the other person consents to the violence but these young hockey players should catch a break.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Rasalghul

It is most unlikely that people will want to testify against Ferland. He is a young kid, may possibly have a great career and people understand that. A fight is a fight and I think he should receive a mulligan on this one. I do not think anybody should ever hurt anyone unless the other person consents to the violence but these young hockey players should catch a break.

You think that "young hockey players" should be above the law? Why?