Patrick Kane: [Updated] D.A. Decides Not to Prosecute; NHL Determines Claims "Unfounded"

[LGR4GM]

eh, while I do love Office Space, I don't think it requires it.

 

His answer was the same as most of his responses "I respect where you are coming from and understand the question but there is a legal process happening and we need to respect that process and let it play out."

[qwksndmonster]

What was the answer?

[That Aud Smell]

Wow.  Should have stayed at Timon for the extra two years, I guess.

 

 

What was the answer?

 

I'm sure it was scripted the right way -- "that I will be absolved of having done anything wrong" or "that I will be absolved of any wrongdoing." He just let his eyes wander from the piece of paper and sort of ad libbed it. I think he was trying to come off as cool and confident; he wound up bungling his own prepared statement.

 

His answer to the drinking question was a non-answer. It was the non-verbal reaction (big exhale, eyebrows up) that seemed like a tell.

I can't get over the fact that his prepared statement had a double negative that would insinuate guilt.

 

NFW that's how it was written.

[LGR4GM]

 

:w00t:

[sabills]

If Darcy had managed to pull off the trade and we picked Patty Kane in his draft year, what are the chances he'd be serving jail time or be dead by now? I mean, regardless of what ever happens with this, he's gotten in trouble a couple times when coming back into town, can you imagine if he lived here full time?

[X. Benedict]

"I will be absolved of having done nothing wrong."

 

curious phrasing there. 

[3putt]

Absolution, at least in the Catholic sense, means, that you are absolved of the consequences of your sins.  To be absolved one must admit that they have sinned.  Saying nothing would have been better. 

Edited September 17, 2015 by 3putt

[That Aud Smell]

Absolution, at least in the Catholic sense, means, that you are absolved of the consequences of your sins.  To be absolved one must admit that they have sinned.  Saying nothing would have been better. 

 

Man - good point. Absolution follows a confession of sin, innit?

 

More colloquially, "absolve" means to be found free of something, it indicates the absence of that thing of which you are being absolved.

 

Why not have the statement read: "Out of respect to the legal process, I will not comment on anything relating to any allegations that may have been made against me. I am confident that I will be found to have done nothing wrong." 

 

The clunkiness of the language suggests that a committee of people worked it over pretty good. Maybe Kane's team had one version (that was more straightforward), but the Hawks wanted it to be more of a fudge (since they were going to sit up there and implicitly endorse whatever Kane was going to say).

So, this is how the local paper is reporting that piece of the statement:

 

“I am confident I will be absolved, having done nothing wrong.” 

 

That is not how I heard it. Also, that's fine for a written statement. But when spoken? Awkward. Ambiguous.

I heard him correctly. He added the "of".

 

[Hoss]

Saying "Out of respect to the legal process I will not comment on the allegations" and "I am confident that I am innocent" is a contradiction. Will you or won't you comment?

[Neo]

Makes me think the briefed Blackhawks have some confidence. Comments from those more familiar with the process?

[That Aud Smell]

Saying "Out of respect to the legal process I will not comment on the allegations" and "I am confident that I am innocent" is a contradiction. Will you or won't you comment?

 

Shoot. Fair point. 

 

See? This is why I'm not in p.r.

So, tweak it to say: "I have too much respect to address the specifics of any allegations"?

Edited September 17, 2015 by That Aud Smell

[Stoner]

Makes me think the briefed Blackhawks have some confidence. Comments from those more familiar with the process?

Maybe. That's a lot of Hawks logos right there, yikes.

Clearly Bill Clinton assisted in drafting the language.

 

So WTF did the sheet say? No way Kane pulled "absolved" out of thin air.

[MattPie]

Maybe. That's a lot of Hawks logos right there, yikes.

Clearly Bill Clinton assisted in drafting the language.

 

So WTF did the sheet say? No way Kane pulled "absolved" out of thin air.

 

Before we go down the rabbit hole on this one, it's IMPOSSIBLE that a lawyer said to Kane, "Hey, when you get asked about the case, just say "I'm confident that I did nothing wrong" or "I will be absolved in this case", OK?" and Kane mashed it up the wrong way.

[That Aud Smell]

So WTF did the sheet say? No way Kane pulled "absolved" out of thin air.

 

Appears that the sheet said: "I will be absolved, having done nothing wrong."

[Hoss]

Shoot. Fair point.

 

See? This is why I'm not in p.r.

 

So, tweak it to say: "I have too much respect to address the specifics of any allegations"?

That's basically the only way you can comment about not commenting, innit?

 

My comment was more about Kane than your tweak. He went up there and said he wouldn't comment then commented immediately.

[That Aud Smell]

Right, right.

 

What an absolute disaster that was.

[SwampD]

You guys really are nuts.

 

Down here, on Earth, where the spaces between the words aren't analyzed to death, the presser was fine for what it was.

[shrader]

Appears that the sheet said: "I will be absolved, having done nothing wrong."

 

"I will be absolved.  I did nothing wrong."  That would probably have been a more natural way to write it out.  Still, easy to screw up if you read it fast and turn it into one sentence like the one you've been quoting.

[That Aud Smell]

You guys really are nuts.

 

Down here, on Earth, where the spaces between the words aren't analyzed to death, the presser was fine for what it was.

 

I understand the criticism. But this isn't analyzing words to death. This was hearing what he said, and immediately saying, "WTF - did he just say what I thought he said?!"

 

Furthermore, the guy may need to be a witness. He doesn't have to be, obviously. Tell 'em Dave

 

 

but there's that chance. I'd actually heard some rumblings that his counsel might look to have him testify before the Grand Jury.

 

So, following hours of coaching and practice to get his story straight and placed in the best possible light, can he communicate what he needs to communicate? Based on his flubbing of a short scripted speech, I'm thinking maybe not.

"I will be absolved.  I did nothing wrong."  That would probably have been a more natural way to write it out.  Still, easy to screw up if you read it fast and turn it into one sentence like the one you've been quoting.

 

It was written the way lawyers write. It was not written the way normal people speak. Big A mistake, imo.

Edited September 18, 2015 by That Aud Smell

[WildCard]

I don't think anyone here even mentioned the most important words from that presser, made by the Hawk's.

 

"[We] pride ourselves on trying to make calculated and deliberate decisions based on what we have at the present time....based on our discussions with his legal reps., who are very close to this matter, we have decided to have Patrick join us for training camp."

 

Sounds to me like Kane's lawyers are very confident in either winning the case or coming to a settlement. 
 

[TrueBlueGED]

I don't think anyone here even mentioned the most important words from that presser, made by the Hawk's.

 

"[We] pride ourselves on trying to make calculated and deliberate decisions based on what we have at the present time....based on our discussions with his legal reps., who are very close to this matter, we have decided to have Patrick join us for training camp."

 

Sounds to me like Kane's lawyers are very confident in either winning the case or coming to a settlement. 

 

 

Or it's just a bunch of BS because they want their second (at worst, third) best player to be on the team this season and they can't rightly come out and say something like "we don't give an F what's going on, he's here to help us win."

[WildCard]

Or it's just a bunch of BS because they want their second (at worst, third) best player to be on the team this season and they can't rightly come out and say something like "we don't give an F what's going on, he's here to help us win."

Is the GJ decision out before the season starts?

[TrueBlueGED]

Is the GJ decision out before the season starts?

 

Could be, but may not be. Really no way to know how long that proceeding is going to last.

[That Aud Smell]

I don't think anyone here even mentioned the most important words from that presser, made by the Hawk's.

 

"[We] pride ourselves on trying to make calculated and deliberate decisions based on what we have at the present time....based on our discussions with his legal reps., who are very close to this matter, we have decided to have Patrick join us for training camp."

 

Sounds to me like Kane's lawyers are very confident in either winning the case or coming to a settlement. 

 

It was odd language, given the circumstances -- "calculated."

 

I read it more as the Hawks laying the thing at the feet of Kane's attorneys.

[3putt]

Based on recent precedent, i.e. Richards, Voynov, without a criminal complaint, the Hawks couldn't not let him come to camp.  He is under contract, they can't suspend him, and the NHLPA would probably go to the mat to defend his right to work absent any legal prohibition to his participation.  I inferred this was the calculus involved.

Edited September 18, 2015 by 3putt