Bill Peters' open apology to Treliving. UPD: Aliu responds

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I like the apology overall, although the fact that it didn't mention Akim at all is weird. I feel that it shouldn't make a shred of difference in regards tow hat happens next but I do like that he didn't try and deny anything.



My first thought as well.

It really isn’t an apology. The intention was to suggest certain facts which might tend to minimize the event.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Peaceful Warrior

I haven't been following this whole ordeal minute by minute -- has it now come out that Peter's called Aliu a ######? I thought that he said to turn off the ###### music?

Neither is acceptable, but there is a difference between using the unacceptable term to describe the music and directly calling a specific human being of colour a ########, and if you didn't direct it specifically at someone, you probably don't owe them a direct apology.

He said N*** music. Which means that the music is made by/enjoyed by people he calls N***s. And it was being played by a black guy.

If I see you driving a particular car and I say only XXXs drive that car, the I’m calling you XXX.

So it’s a meaningless distinction. As I’ve said elsewhere, my suspicion is that it was very purposefully directed at Aliu.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I said make amends so I don't think we even need to get into a technicality of who's lying. Going into the lockerroom to apologize to the entire team is not making amends to Aliu, (especially when he's drafting up a letter to have him sent down...). Not when Aliu still apparently has a very reasonable grudge a decade later.

Even a personal apology isn't making amends in this situation. Not given the outcome. If he wanted to make amends for his actions, he should have done something to try and really make amends, explain the situation to Bowman, bring in some type of conflict management expert, but instead it appears he tried to relieve himself of the "problem child" instead of trying to fix the situation that was so clearly broken by him. And in doing so he could have ruined Aliu's career.

Even if you buy into Peters bs, he's saying he's regretted actions since then. So what has he done in the last 10 years to make up for it to Aliu? I'll await confirmation that Peters has tried to contact and apologize to Aliu several times as anyone else who has regretted their actions but I have a feeling I will be waiting awhile.

As per the accusations there was no indication that he EVER apologized for anything, yet Peters is saying that he did.

Having dealt with legality issues before, I know that if you are writing a letter like this when big money and contracts are involved you DO NOT blatantly lie to cover your ass. Be as obtuse as possible, sure but not lie.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Again, you cannot violate a contract before you enter into it. The contract could contain some representation on his part that he has disclosed all relevant information about his past work history to the team, or some such, but a breach of a representation isn't generally enough to terminate a contract.

It's possible they're negotiating, but that doesn't seem like sound strategy to me. It could take a while, all the while the media spotlight is on the team for all the wrong reasons. Just doesn't seem worth it. Fire him first, then negotiate to settle his potential lawsuit, if that's the road you want to go down.

Don’t you think that’s exactly what Flames are going to assert to him? That he violated his contract. Otherwise he’d be gone already and they’d pay him his money due.

They need to show they have gathered all available information in coming to this conclusion or wouldn’t Peters use that against them in negotiation or arbitration?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Azure

How isn't it strange?

Peters is saying in an official letter to the world that he apologized to the team 10 years ago when the incident happened.

Doesn't make him less of a ###### for saying it to begin with, but if he apologized well than part of the allegations were completely misleading.

Strange that in the last 48 hours he was unable to find anyone to go on the record to say he apologized.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Peaceful Warrior

I haven't been following this whole ordeal minute by minute -- has it now come out that Peter's called Aliu a ######? I thought that he said to turn off the ###### music?

Neither is acceptable, but there is a difference between using the unacceptable term to describe the music and directly calling a specific human being of colour a ########, and if you didn't direct it specifically at someone, you probably don't owe them a direct apology.

Yeah, you don't need to apologize for yelling at a black man to turn off his "n###### music". What a great take bud.

Anyways, back to trying to decide if Aliu is still lying even after Peters admitted that he said the N word because of course Aliu couldn't be telling the truth about his experience. I wonder why people are bending over backwards to try and fault Aliu but giving every single chance to explain away Peters racist words. I guess we'll never know.

[dammage79]

Treliving: "You saw the letter, I saw the letter and I'm updating you to.tell you there is no update, maybe tomorrow"

Love that guy

[Flash Walken]

If the flames are trying to fire him for cause and his defense is that this occured prior to his employment with the flames, then the only thing that matters in this letter is establishing the time period, expressing remorse, and illustrating that he is an otherwise good employee.

He apologizes to the organization unreservedly, establishes the length of time that has elapsed between the incident and his current employment and stresses his acceptance of the flames process in this, intimating cooperation.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Treliving: "You saw the letter, I saw the letter and I'm updating you peopleto tell you there is no update, maybe tomorrow"

Love that guy

Fixed

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Azure

As per the accusations there was no indication that he EVER apologized for anything, yet Peters is saying that he did..

He could have gone into the room, kicking the garbage, yelling a profanity laced tirade and telling Aliu to turn off his n------ music, cool down after the captain talked to him and then went into the lockerroom and apologized for being frustrated and mad to the entirety of the team.

Both cases would be true then. He never apologized for using the word to Aliu but still apologized to the room.

[oldschoolcalgary]

FWIW, I don't think Bill Peters is a racist.

I do, however, believe that he is a bully that has tried to intimidate players through offensive language, taunts and even physical contact. This is not things in the distant past; there have been numerous examples of these actions at just his last coaching stop.

Peters should not be coaching the Flames. An apology after you have been caught red-handed isn't an apology made out of remorse; its an apology made for self-preservation

This doesn't mean he should not be coaching hockey ever again. No one is beyond the opportunity for rehabilitation so long as they are honest and truly contrite about their past behavior.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Serious: What does a person do to atone from this? Can they ever regain respect from the general populace?

If I was Bill Peters, I would be in a pretty dark place right now. Your livelihood is likely (rightfully) gone. What do you do? Live out the rest of your life in solitude?

We live in an extremely forgiving time, just not in the moment. Don’t imagine he will coach in the NHL again, but then neither will I.

He can recover from this if he wants to.

[gamesaver]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

He said N*** music. Which means that the music is made by/enjoyed by people he calls N***s. And it was being played by a black guy.

If I see you driving a particular car and I say only XXXs drive that car, the I’m calling you XXX.

So it’s a meaningless distinction. As I’ve said elsewhere, my suspicion is that it was very purposefully directed at Aliu.

So here comes a question: What if that music was played by a white guy and he said the exact same sentence? Is that going to make a difference? I thought the word itself is a problem.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Peaceful Warrior

I haven't been following this whole ordeal minute by minute -- has it now come out that Peter's called Aliu a ######? I thought that he said to turn off the ###### music?

Neither is acceptable, but there is a difference between using the unacceptable term to describe the music and directly calling a specific human being of colour a ########, and if you didn't direct it specifically at someone, you probably don't owe them a direct apology.

Akim, in his tweet, stated that Peters directed the n bomb toward him several times for his choice of music. I would interpret that as a more direct/personal attack on Akim as opposed to just ranting about n-music.

[Peaceful Warrior]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Yeah, you don't need to apologize for yelling at a black man to turn off his "n###### music". What a great take bud.

Anyways, back to trying to decide if Aliu is still lying even after Peters admitted that he said the N word because of course Aliu couldn't be telling the truth about his experience. I wonder why people are bending over backwards to try and fault Aliu but giving every single chance to explain away Peters racist words. I guess we'll never know.

Nope -- the take I replied to suggested that Peters' called Aliu a N####. I have not heard anything from anywhere that this happened.

I wonder why people are willing to attribute things to the situation that didn't occur, even in the victim's account.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

If the flames are trying to fire him for cause and his defense is that this occured prior to his employment with the flames, then the only thing that matters in this letter is establishing the time period, expressing remorse, and illustrating that he is an otherwise good employee.

He apologizes to the organization unreservedly, establishes the length of time that has elapsed between the incident and his current employment and stresses his acceptance of the flames process in this, intimating cooperation.

Thing is, a letter like this is absolutely meaningless from a legal standpoint. It’s all after the fact, its not a filed pleading, it’s evidence of nothing. The time period was established from the start, his remorse is meaningless, and so is his cooperation. “Otherwise good employee” neither proved not disproved by writing this.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

As others have mentioned probably a legal strategy.

The Forbes article I linked in the other thread said that one of the possible ways that Peters could defend himself against termination with cause and keep getting paid is to argue that the incident took place such a long time ago that it had no effect on his employment with the Flames.

Fair enough, that does make sense and I should have known better.

Still annoys me though

[calumniate]

Peters threw a slider here. He can get bent if you ask me

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Strange that in the last 48 hours he was unable to find anyone to go on the record to say he apologized and in fact there are third party witnesses from the team who said he did not apologize.

At this point I'm not surprised that someone in the hockey world would share or not share stuff that happens.

Two people said he never apologized. Did we hear from anyone else?

I'm beginning to wonder if the Flames did some interviews with people involved and were also told Peters had apologized at the time, and it threw another wrench into the plan to fire him.

Again, given where Peters is at right now, I just don't feel he comes out and lies about something like that. It is a bigger deal than most people here would like to admit, especially when lawyers are drafting his statements.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by gamesaver

So here comes a question: What if that music was played by a white guy and he said the exact same sentence? Is that going to make a difference? I thought the word itself is a problem.

It is a huge problem by itself. It’s an even bigger problem when directed to a black kid.