BB06
Registered User
- Jun 1, 2020
- 2,973
- 4,322
The class divert and look for any spec of dirt to discredit the victim but in this case going as far to reach into family history. Literally has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
RD Mitchell Miller - Tri-City Storm, USHL (2020, 111th, ARI, rights renounced)
- Thread starter Pavel Buchnevich
- Start date
The class divert and look for any spec of dirt to discredit the victim but in this case going as far to reach into family history. Literally has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
There are two types of people in my estimation when it comes to issues like this, two types of people very specifically who find two different types of defendants sympathetic.
You have some people who find a defendant like Miller very sympathetic. Say he was a kid, and he has some future prospects that shouldn't be ruined, and he comes from a good family. Like these are arguments that one group of people find sympathetic. And these people argue that for these clients the justice system shouldn't ruin your life. It shouldn't end your prospects. And other people find this type of defendant very unsympathetic. They see him as like a rich, privileged child, a part of the oppressive system and this overarching villainous social structure. And they want to be as punitive with these individuals as possible.
And then there's another group that finds a different group of people sympathetic. Like a client we had recently whose case just closed, he was a domestic violence perpetrator. He was a minority. He came from a family that perpetrated DV. So he maybe came from a harder background. And some people will say well this is a guy whose life we shouldn't ruin. #banthebox. Other see this guy as a monster, as a repeat offender, as a violent criminal, and the ideal type of guy to keep away from society and punish as long as possible.
Maybe there's like a third group of people who find all defendants unsympathetic. I don't think that's an admirable position though. That's like the DA's position haha.
And here's the trip, because I see a lot of people talking about remorse. To be quite frank, that's a very high bar for most defendants. Not that the lawyers can't instruct the defendants to act remorseful, though specific instructions would violate ethics codes. In juvenile court maybe more so, or in specialty courts, maybe more defendants act remorseful. In my experience, and it's just my experience so take it with a grain of salt, but not that many defendants make straight showings of remorse, particularly due to our incredibly gnarly plea system which encourages people to plea guilty for things they might otherwise contest, but that's a story for another day. But if the idea is ban the box...for those who express that they are sorry. There are many defendants of all different colors and walks of life that go uncovered there.
Everyone loves the Bryan Stevenson quote "Each of us is more than the worse thing we've done." I think, if it wasn't already, it's fast becoming cliche within courtrooms around the country. But I never got the sense that most people actually believe this statement, because everyone, myself included, has a type of defendant that we find so repulsive that it makes it difficult for us to see them as more than the worst thing they've done. I don't naturally find a defendant in the style of Mitchell Miller to be sympathetic, and in fact I don't understand how other people do. That said, I do think I need to check myself. Because if I'm going to argue that Mitchell Miller shouldn't have job prospects because of something he did, and then didn't demonstrate enough remorse for...there are a lot of defendants that I find sympathetic that, by the same rule, would never reintegrate into society again.
You have some people who find a defendant like Miller very sympathetic. Say he was a kid, and he has some future prospects that shouldn't be ruined, and he comes from a good family. Like these are arguments that one group of people find sympathetic. And these people argue that for these clients the justice system shouldn't ruin your life. It shouldn't end your prospects. And other people find this type of defendant very unsympathetic. They see him as like a rich, privileged child, a part of the oppressive system and this overarching villainous social structure. And they want to be as punitive with these individuals as possible.
And then there's another group that finds a different group of people sympathetic. Like a client we had recently whose case just closed, he was a domestic violence perpetrator. He was a minority. He came from a family that perpetrated DV. So he maybe came from a harder background. And some people will say well this is a guy whose life we shouldn't ruin. #banthebox. Other see this guy as a monster, as a repeat offender, as a violent criminal, and the ideal type of guy to keep away from society and punish as long as possible.
Maybe there's like a third group of people who find all defendants unsympathetic. I don't think that's an admirable position though. That's like the DA's position haha.
And here's the trip, because I see a lot of people talking about remorse. To be quite frank, that's a very high bar for most defendants. Not that the lawyers can't instruct the defendants to act remorseful, though specific instructions would violate ethics codes. In juvenile court maybe more so, or in specialty courts, maybe more defendants act remorseful. In my experience, and it's just my experience so take it with a grain of salt, but not that many defendants make straight showings of remorse, particularly due to our incredibly gnarly plea system which encourages people to plea guilty for things they might otherwise contest, but that's a story for another day. But if the idea is ban the box...for those who express that they are sorry. There are many defendants of all different colors and walks of life that go uncovered there.
Everyone loves the Bryan Stevenson quote "Each of us is more than the worse thing we've done." I think, if it wasn't already, it's fast becoming cliche within courtrooms around the country. But I never got the sense that most people actually believe this statement, because everyone, myself included, has a type of defendant that we find so repulsive that it makes it difficult for us to see them as more than the worst thing they've done. I don't naturally find a defendant in the style of Mitchell Miller to be sympathetic, and in fact I don't understand how other people do. That said, I do think I need to check myself. Because if I'm going to argue that Mitchell Miller shouldn't have job prospects because of something he did, and then didn't demonstrate enough remorse for...there are a lot of defendants that I find sympathetic that, by the same rule, would never reintegrate into society again.
GermanSpitfire
EU Video Scout for McKeen’s | Rest Easy #13
- Jul 20, 2020
- 12,443
- 22,548
Miller’s issues were well known pre draft. you think the Coyotes organization didn’t know about his past when the information about Miller was public knowledg?, so much so it was discussed in LENGTH on this very form.
This cancel culture is frustrating, if you researched this kid for even a second pre draft, you would find mountains of articles about this very topic.
This cancel culture is frustrating, if you researched this kid for even a second pre draft, you would find mountains of articles about this very topic.
Last edited:
Realgud
Not good enough for SKA
- Nov 4, 2013
- 5,883
- 7,388
CutOnDime97
Instant Expert
- Mar 29, 2008
- 16,223
- 10,617
14 is young. Definitely young enough to not understand the gravity of your words (just hop in any Xbox game lobby) and actions. I think it's certainly possible to mature and grow past this behavior.
That being said someone definitely should ask him about the lack of a personal apology.
That being said someone definitely should ask him about the lack of a personal apology.
CutOnDime97
Instant Expert
- Mar 29, 2008
- 16,223
- 10,617
Again, as a previous poster mentioned, is anyone saying this was OK?
JPeeper
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2015
- 12,749
- 10,460
Yeah, and you'd find how unremorseful and full of shit he is.
It's been posted many times in this very thread, but the kid sent 31 NHL teams an apology letter so he could salvage his career. Never sent or cares about sending an apology to the victim he bullied. Clearly he doesn't care about anyone but himself.
His second chance some of you keep claiming he should be given was the chance to apologize, which he still hasn't done the past 4 years. So no, he absolutely f***ing does not deserve a second chance.
serp
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 21,178
- 13,137
I feel like just calling it bullying is playing down what he did. It was worse . Much worse imho. There's a reason was put in front of a judge for what he did. That doesn't happen for stuff i'd considering "bullying"
Nobody is contending that the Coyotes were unaware. Not sure where you picked that up.
I found it disappointing that the Coyotes
-- Did not contact the victim's mother at any point when they were supposed to be doing due diligence.
-- Continually refer to "an incident that happened when Miller was 14" but they have joined Miller in making zero mention of the years of physical and racist abuse that occurred before that.
"Kids"? Right, only a kid would criticize you here? I'm 36 years old and I'm an academic researcher. Instead of dismissing me as a kid perhaps re-consider what usefulness your information has here. It has absolutely nothing to do with Miller or the case against him. Being able to use the internet is great, good for you, but you have to know what information is useful for and not useful for.
You didn't help the conversation. You don't seem to know what helps the conversation. I highly doubt discussing your personal experiences would help the conversation.
JungleBeat
Registered User
Just bullying is something that can be forgiven and made up. At least in my classes, most boys did it at some level to someone at some point, but in the end everyone was friends again.
What this guy did was years and years of constant physical and mental abuse. Oh and crystal clear racism, with no sign of remorse for any of it. I bet he'll do a really nice apology now with the public pressure coming in, but that wont mean shit when it was forced out of you
Last edited:
Billy Kvcmu
Registered User
People can change yes, especially at a young age
What people don’t realize is, how hard it is for scumbag to become a normal person. It’s ally easier the other way around
What people don’t realize is, how hard it is for scumbag to become a normal person. It’s ally easier the other way around
JetsWillFly4Ever
Registered User
I came into the headline wanting to give someone the benefit of the doubt. We all did some shit when we were 14, I'm sure I dropped a few hard r's. I was young and dumb.
This is way, way beyond that. This is sociopath behaviour. The complete lack of apology, the lack of responsibility taken, is as disturbing as the incident. What absolute pathetic people his parents must be to not force their kid to apologize in person. This story is sickening, and the Coyotes, of all teams are the one to draft him. Man. Ugh, what else can you say.
This is way, way beyond that. This is sociopath behaviour. The complete lack of apology, the lack of responsibility taken, is as disturbing as the incident. What absolute pathetic people his parents must be to not force their kid to apologize in person. This story is sickening, and the Coyotes, of all teams are the one to draft him. Man. Ugh, what else can you say.
- Oct 26, 2019
- 2,390
- 3,866
I agree with the journalists and papers arguing that Arizona should release him. The guy never even sent the court mandated letter to the victims family, and has never apologized to the victim or shown contrition. Frankly years of racist action to the degree that he did with no apology should have no place in the NHL. If he had apologized to the victim at some point and shown through action that he had grown past this then giving him a chance would be fine. That isnt the case here.
Auto Pilot
Registered User
- Sep 7, 2019
- 3,909
- 3,794
What he did was a hate crime, a violent hate crime he has shown no remorse for and his scum family and he are really evasive about it and he never apologized to his victim, but did apologize to all the NHL teams to save face and try to keep a career in this league open as a possibility.
yea, just calling what he did bullying doesn’t really give the full weight of what he did. He beat the kid up, forced him to eat a push up pop they rubbed in a urinal and he screamed racial slurs at him to demean him and degrade him all on top of the violence.
people harping on his age and how it was a mistake are white washing what he did. It would sound just as ridiculous to do so with a 14 year old school shooter.
saw a quote today that said if Hannibal Lecter could run a 4.3 they would white wash what he did down to having an eating disorder.
Also this piece of garbage has gone private on all social media.
also ND and USA hockey deserve as much blame for this getting to the point he could get drafted by Arizona.
LeafChief
Matthew Knies Enthusiast
Kevin Costner didnt draft a top flight quartback prospect because nobody on his Wisconsin Football team came to his party when he turned 21 which showed he wasnt a good leader or well liked, yet This Miller guy has all sorts of red flags and character issues and still gets drafted. unbelievable
That's not accurate.
"Joni Meyer-Crothers said the other boy broke down in tears while personally apologizing to her son, yet Miller has never personally apologized, she said, other than the court-mandated letter."
Here's the link to the USA today article.
Realgud
Not good enough for SKA
- Nov 4, 2013
- 5,883
- 7,388
Have you read the story or not? It could help dispel some naysayers about what happened since the case isn't isolated to only Miller.
rt
Clean Hits on Substack
That's not the way I interpreted his position. I think the level of detail available to use is fairly thin and many here are taking some artistic license when filling out the context mentally.
It seems to me that Miller and another boy had an extremely abusive relationship with a third boy over an extended period of time. This culminated with a disgusting and violent assault, which led to criminal charges against Miller and his counterpart when they were 14 years old.
At some point in the process, Miller's counterpart apologized in-person to the victim and the victim's family. The family has since expressed that this had at least some positive impact, or if nothing else, was a gesture that indicates at least to some degree that he's more remorseful than Miller.
It's not clear whether the in-person apology happened before or after the court ordered that the bullies offer written apologies to the victim and his family. But it seems Mitchell's only apology was in the form of this letter, which the victim's family claims they never even received.
According to the victim's family, after the incident involving criminal charges, Miller continued to exhibit some behaviors which they interpreted as taunting in nature. They have noted that this behavior, and the lack of an apology leads them to believe Miller is not remorseful. It seems the official responsible for their sentencing also singled Miller out as not remorseful.
Some unknown period of time elapsed after the alleged roller-blading incidents and a time period in which Miller points to as the beginning of changes within himself which have led to his no longer considering himself a racist bully. Officials with the Tri-City Storm, the University of North Dakota, and the Arizona Coyotes have all noted that Miller has changed and is no longer a risk to behave in the ways that led to his previous crimes.
It's possible Miller spent his entire 15th year with a worldview similar to his 14th year. It's possible Miller didn't begin making the changes necessary to grow beyond this until he was sixteen or nearly sixteen. It could be the changes seen by hockey officials after this time are what they've noted when asked. It's possible that this was too little, too late in the eyes of the victims who were never given an apology earlier in the process, when the assault was more recent.
It's also possible Miller is just lying about these changes, and feels no remorse for his actions, and is only saying what he thinks he needs to say to help his hockey career. It's also possible these hockey teams are essentially doing the same thing; saying whatever they think will allow them to add a good player, while limiting negative perception as much as possible.
Anyone could fill in any of that with whatever bias, projection, or imaged context they want. It's easy enough to invent reasons why Miller is even worse than he's being portrayed and deserves no opportunity ever again or that he's actually much less of a villain and should be given an opportunity to prove himself.
So far, what I've been able to piece together is a pretty small picture. I think Miller did some really nasty things to another kid for an extended period of time, right around Middle-School/Junior High/Secondary School. I think his partner in crime apologized in person and Miller didn't. That strikes me as a really bad sign. As does the victims and the judge singling him out. I don't know if that's because Miller got a much later start on his path to self-improvement, and the victims and the judge are going off of old data. Or whether it's simply because Mitchell has only offered lip-service when it has been convenient and suited his own interest. I don't know whether he's lying or not. And I don't know whether Tri-City, North Dakota, or Arizona actually care whether he's lying or not. I suspect they do care, and I suspect they believe he's not lying. But they could easily be wrong. And so could I.
rt
Clean Hits on Substack
I think there's a really good chance that Miller doesn't regret his behavior and really only cares that he got into trouble. I also think there's a good chance that he has grown and has changed. In either case, I think he sent that letter. Even if he didn't mean it, and only did it to minimize negative consequences. If we was ordered to write the letter in order to avoid further trouble, I have to think he wrote it. Even if it was only for his own self-interest.
rt
Clean Hits on Substack
Right. And when she was talking about not getting a letter, I think she must've meant the one he sent to NHL teams. That he didn't also send her one.
