Kane Legal Saga VI - Charges not being filed
- Thread starter No Fun Shogun
- Start date
- Status
Ace Rothstein
Aces High
- Mar 13, 2012
- 6,232
- 853
I know this outlet isn't considered legit around here but I think they probably ended up with the best coverage of this story from any media outlet.
http://sportsmockery.com/2015/11/tim-graham-permanently-damaged-patrick-kanes-reputation-with-lies/
http://sportsmockery.com/2015/11/tim-graham-permanently-damaged-patrick-kanes-reputation-with-lies/
Glacial
Registered User
- Jan 8, 2013
- 1,704
- 116
While their other coverage is tabloidy, their writing on the Kane matter was surprisingly factual, doing significantly better than all the 'professional' outlets that had their heads up their you-know-what on reporting on the topic. I found their main value was as a news aggregate on the subject, with finding new articles via their links in their own articles.
As bad as the Score (Bernstein, Dicaro, Rozner) were on this, they were essentially parrots or me-toos riding the coattails of everything Graham put into motion. Tim Graham was the worst reporter in all of this. He was the first voice essentially calling for a pitchfork & torches mob, agitating the outrage against Kane. Question- Wouldn't Kane have grounds to sue Graham & the Buffalo News for this garbage? What would it be formally considered? Defamation? Libel? Slander? Any legal experts care to give a streamlined definition of the differences of each.
I don't think he would have grounds, but I am not an attorney.
When I think back to the articles written by The Buffalo News, they did report on the investigation fairly accurately up to a point. A lot of what they said actually was correct in the sense that they reported what the allegation was and the allegations surrounding it, even the talk of settlements as the DA said there were texts from lots of people on the complainants phone about monetary settlement (I believe from Kane himself, I'd have to go back and watch again to be certain). Where they failed was that they never reported that there were doubts surrounding the veracity of the allegations from the start, excepting the interviews they did with the bar owner and Kane's law enforcement escort, which they took a lot of heat for and took down from their site. They were accused of promoting rape culture and insensitivity. It's safe to assume now that those interviews were accurate.
I didn't pay much attention to Tim Graham's Twitter because he does come across like a jerk sometimes. The bit about the belief law enforcement had that he would turn himself in could be what BroadwayJay said was the police running PR in an attempt to distort the facts, and Graham ran with it (I don't believe it was ever in print though). We now know the police wanted Kane to cooperate but that didn't happen.
hisgirlfriday
Moderator
- Jun 9, 2013
- 16,742
- 184
No. For many reasons. One of the biggest is that he's a public figure which means that not only would Kane have to prove what Graham/Buffalo News reported was false but also prove that they published the falsehoods with ill intent (the legal term is "actual malice"). Very hard for any public figure in the U.S. to win a defamation suit.
What's ****ed about the system is that it costs this woman nothing to drag Kane through the mud...disrupt his life...cause all sorts of aggravation and legal fees.
If a woman cries rape, and it's either found it didn't occur...it was a false accusation...they should be subject to the same level of punishment as a person would had they committed the crime.
If a woman cries rape, and it's either found it didn't occur...it was a false accusation...they should be subject to the same level of punishment as a person would had they committed the crime.
Glacial
Registered User
- Jan 8, 2013
- 1,704
- 116
I had the same thought- the woman lies to police in an attempt to wrongfully convict and/or extract monetary payment (essentially blackmail), wrecking his name to the public, painting him as a rapist in the eyes of many, as well as squanders police resources & time on a crime that never happened and the Buffalo News and Tim Graham smear Kane's name repeatedly by getting ahead of where the facts are and printing extremely inflammatory 'facts' in their articles, many of which are discredited, leading to the giant outcry and witch hunt against Kane. And what do they face for this? The woman faces no criminal charges and may escape civil suits and Graham & the Buffalo News face no lawsuits, him no termination for shoddy journalism to such a degree, it deceived the public (and was so bad, Sedita was mentioning how so much was printed, which from what we've seen from each of the local papers was Buffalo News more than others, was completely devoid of the true facts). Everyone goes on their merry way with no punishment and no guilt (because they seem shameless) for their part in this travesty.
Evidently putting a dampening effect on filing false police reports and squandering police resources & time for a greedy payday isn't deemed important and for a paper to punish a reporter for violating the basic tenets & practices of their field (he made himself a mouthpiece for apparently one of her attorneys or perhaps the family itself but he wasn't merely a parrot, as others noted he seemed to have a burning hatred of Kane in this, perhaps from being fed this false info and that showed through in his articles later the first week and into the next week) aren't deemed important enough to do. Who knows what the quality of *anything* Buffalo News publishes is. We don't know if any anonymous sources are giving them bogus information and if the paper doesn't know enough to spot it or doesn't care and chooses to run with it. At multiple points in these 3 months, it became clear these sources were garbage and the media was giving "sources" a veneer of credibility that didn't belong, seemingly passing off rumors and gossip as "credible information". The story in the story should be exposing how shoddy journalism can be in putting the source label on people who should never be sources and as a result, end up significantly misleading the public to such an extent, their view of a topic is 180° from what the facts indicate.
I do wish Kane would sue the Buffalo News, find out what they knew and when they knew it, if they published information knowing it was very POV (woman's legal camp/family) and passing it off as if it's from a non-biased source (like 'the investigation'), maybe get ahold of Graham's texts and emails to check if there was malice involved at some point. His later articles early on and appearances on radio programs in hindsight do seem like someone with an axe to grind. Maybe he was ok with Kane prior to August 3rd and was fed all sorts of false, lurid, graphic details of the rape, which incensed him so much, he went on a crusade, having been manipulated, but that doesn't excuse tossing his credibility out the window. I also wonder where or who he heard the Kane hiding from the cops in the closet comment from. He dropped that one in later, when the heat of outrage in the first week or two started to die down as the case dragged on and mixed information emerged. He seemed to stoke the flames, trying to keep the outrage up. Things like that make me wonder what he motivation was in all of this and what he might've been thinking at different points, at least in August. He quieted down for the most part since then. Bernstein was an armchair agitator (DiCaro was trying to muddy up the DNA report and distract away from the DA's press conference with her "source"'s lies, making her more a local Graham that wasn't able to gain traction), just responding to what others put out there rather than do anything new on the subject. Graham was steadily pushing things out, in print and in interviews.
It's the other way around. There are lots of texts on Kane's phone from the complainant's side and even herself suggesting monetary settlement.
I thought they only got the warrant for Kane's phone, so I assumed the texts are on his phone. But maybe that's not the case.
Anyway. So does he mean that certain offers were made by complainant's side, then they discussed it with each other?
Anyway. So does he mean that certain offers were made by complainant's side, then they discussed it with each other?
Sarava
Registered User
The impression I got is they found discussions/texts about possible settlements on the accuser's phone. Nothing from Kane's phone.
Seems like they checked a lot of people's phone.
And whether or not such text messages were sent to Kane's phone, he did not make any incriminating replies.
edit: I think he meant that they found discussions about accuser making settlement offer in a lot of people's text messages.
Last edited:
Uhh, except for when they published the accuser's name. That site is disgusting, and that article in particular is a joke. Yeah, sure, Tim Graham is the reason Kane was/is associated with rape. It's not because he was accused of rape or anything.
WaltWhitman
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2010
- 942
- 1
Graham contributed to the association in a huge way with his biased reporting.
I thought it was a good article.
much better than the anti-Kane feminist activist **** that deals in suspicion and innuendo and not the evidence that dominated the coverage of this story and still doesn't admit it was wrong.
When did they do this? I recall them being very careful to not release the name, even after pretty much everyone knew it anyway. I'm not saying they're a paragon of stellar journalism, but for the most part they were actually pretty accurate and fair with this case.
Last edited:
To the best of my knowledge, they never did. They made mention that they knew her identity, but chose not to disclose it.
That site is a tabloid though. A lot of their Kane coverage was labeled as RUMOR.
Ace Rothstein
Aces High
- Mar 13, 2012
- 6,232
- 853
At least they labeled things as rumors though. Graham and DiCaro never did while their sources ended up being wrong about everything.
Sarava
Registered User
That site is tabloid. I 100% agree. They also were a lot closer to the truth throughout this investigation than other news organizations. Call it a lucky guess or whatever you want.
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
I'm not a fan of Sports Mockery at all or how they handle themselves, but that article was a good one, or at least did a good job picking out that Graham was clearly biased throughout the process.
Reading the father's Facebook and Twitter is pretty disturbing. He even has a somewhat threatening @name. So far he's had the Facebook picture of him holding a large hunting knife, and another with blood splatter all over. His tweets on Twitter are threatening not only Kane ("puck boy" is going to get his), but the DA as well. And, of course, he draws like people. He's very complimentary of Tim Graham, though, and Graham tweets him a thanks, nice of you to say. I think thanks to Graham publicizing a false accusation (and seemingly with an agenda) now means Kane better have security for a while.
CourtneyDagger50
Resident Pig Expert
Regarding the father's Twitter, did you see who replied to him? Wonder if SportsMockery will pick up on that.
I'm not disclosing his identity (although by now it's really easy to find out). The father should go back and read the court decision on the lawsuit he filed and lost.
I'm not disclosing his identity (although by now it's really easy to find out). The father should go back and read the court decision on the lawsuit he filed and lost.
CallMeShaft
Calder Bedard Fan
- Apr 14, 2014
- 15,886
- 21,551
Reading through the father's twitter account. Dude's a complete moron. This is a snippet of a tweet from him...
Kane should move his ass out of Buffalo before this crazy ******* father does something.
Also, him and Graham are besties on Twitter.
Kane should move his ass out of Buffalo before this crazy ******* father does something.
Also, him and Graham are besties on Twitter.
- Status
