Kane Incident 'Blown Out of Proportion', says taxi driver's attorney

davetherave wrote:And now, 48 hours after the incident, the mea culpa in the media is taking place. ESPN, Sportsnet, and The Hockey News, just to name a few, are now presenting their attempts at a 'balanced' view...here is one:

LAWYER: KANE DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME
ESPNChicago Staff/ESPN.COM, August 10, 2009

Patrick Kane's attorney said on Tuesday that the Chicago Blackhawks star did not assault or rob the cab driver who claimed he was attacked early Sunday in Buffalo, N.Y.

Paul Cambria, speaking on "The Waddle and Silvy Show" on ESPN 1000, said Kane, 20, and his cousin James, 21, were trapped inside the car when cab driver Jan Radecki, 62, wouldn't unlock the doors.

"[Patrick Kane is] devastated that anybody would accuse him of a crime," Cambria said. "He's not that sort of person.

"He wanted nothing to do with the cab driver in any way, shape or form. He simply wanted to get out of the cab. It's been revealed today that the cab driver admitted he locked these two guys in the car and wouldn't permit the one guy to stand up and simply reach for his wallet. There's more and more being developed about this."

The Kanes are facing felony robbery and misdemeanor counts of theft and criminal mischief. Patrick Kane has pleaded not guilty and is scheduled for a court hearing Monday in Buffalo.

"[Radecki] said he wasn't going to let the one fellow out to get his wallet," Cambria said during the radio interview. "He said that in an interview that I heard.
"Apparently he said that's his MO. Anytime he takes young people, college kids or whatever, any place at night he locks them in the cab until he pays. His lawyer said this morning in an interview I heard that in the past many of his passengers have become upset because they're angry that they're being trapped in a car and not being trusted to stand up and get their money out."

Cambria was asked if Kane did anything wrong or anything he regretted.

"He regrets that he was there, obviously, who wouldn't?" Cambria said on "The Waddle and Silvy Show." "On the other hand, did he do anything wrong? Did he violate the law? Everything we have demonstrates no, and he emphatically said, 'No.' I have absolutely no reason to disbelieve him and every reason to believe him."

Cambria was asked on the show if Kane touched Radecki. "He did not assault the cab driver. He did not rob the cab driver. He did not cheat him out of his fee. None of those things. He tried to get out of a locked cab," Cambria said.

As far as Kane's cousin, Cambria would not elaborate.

"I'm not blaming or defending his cousin," Cambria said. "He has an attorney, and his attorney can speak for him. I think it's clear there is no question the cousin is the one who was involved in the financial transaction with the cab driver. The police claim they found a partially torn bill or something in the cousin's pocket. He his own attorney, and his attorney can speak for him."

Radecki's lawyer, Andrew LoTempio, said on WGN radio on Monday that he didn't believe the case would end up as a felony, and that the incident had been blown out of proportion.

"There was a dispute over the fee and it just kind of escalated from there," LoTempio told WGN. "It was not really a robbery. That is probably a large distortion of what happened."

"I think we should be able to work things out," LoTempio added.

Cambria also addressed a report in Tuesday's edition of the Buffalo News that Radecki had two drunken driving convictions and had no valid driver's license at the time of the incident.

The Buffalo News said Radecki hung up the telephone when a reporter tried to talk to him Monday. LoTempio told the News he had represented Radecki in one, unspecified DWI case, but would not comment on the license issue.

"That's a matter that's going to be used to make a credibility determination concerning this guy," Cambria said on "The Waddle and Silvy Show." "Apparently, he's had other skirmishes with people in the past, and other difficulties, and all that will play out in the courtroom."

As far as Kane's demeanor, Cambria said: "Pat is like, 'Why me? I didn't hit the guy. I didn't assault the guy. I wasn't involved in pay or not paying for the fare. I can't believe I'm in this.' "

---

Beyond the relatively civil parameters of the GMHockey Forum, I have personally addressed and challenged a number of reporters, bloggers and fans on the entire issue of Kane being tried and judged without all of the facts having been presented.

The hostility towards Kane--and the hostility towards me, in some cases--has been fascinating in its intensity.

It makes one stop and wonder where our society is at, when the feeding frenzy for gossip and scandal has reached such a point where people cannot agree to disagree.

The most bizarre aspect in all of this, is that, IF Patrick Kane HAD assaulted Mr. Radecki, I would have concurred wholeheartedly that he should be dealt with accordingly to the full extent of the law.

But Kane was simply accused of a crime...and I believe that he deserves to be given the legal right to have his case heard in a proper legal manner.

I also believe it is tragic that Jan Radecki, whose living as a cab driver may be threathened by the revelations now coming out, could end up being even more of a victim...duped into spilling his story, so the media and scandal-starved fans could feed on it.

All in all, a sad tale.

davetherave wrote:
Prager, bear in mind the report on Radecki was written by The Buffalo News, the same newspaper that broke the original story on the incident.

So, please point out to me how The Buffalo News article citing Radecki's history is an attack on him, as you suggest.

Furthermore, if Radecki was driving without a valid licence, it raises the possibility that should this case ever go to court, questions about how the taxi company could allow him to drive a cab without a valid licence could lead to a dismissal of the entire case. A lawsuit against Radecki and the taxi company might even follow.

Mr. Radecki does not deserve to have his life exposed in public, no more than Patrick Kane deserves to be tried in the media and the 'court of public opinion'.

But that is what we have, and the Pandora's Box has been opened because of the rabid rush to judgement that characterizes contemporary North American society.

Vandelay wrote: While I agree with your point for the most part, it is a little contradictory. You're saying the media is taking this "story" and running with it and we, the public are following like lost sheep. It's a valid point and we see it every day...it really has gotten out of control. All of that I agree with and in fact was a small part of why I left the country...getting out of that crazy North American culture...anyway, you can't prove this theory with other articles from the media. Your whole point was how unreliable the media is and how they jump all over a story because the media loves it which is true. But using other media sources to show this doesn't work. Media is unrealiable. Bottom line, unless someone knows Kane personally or was a witness, without video of the whole thing, we'll never know.

SeawaySensFan wrote:Dave, is "John Grigg" your nom de plume?

davetherave wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:Dave, is "John Grigg" your nom de plume?

:^^^^:

SSF...I read The Hockey News when I was I a kid...but I doubt THN would hire me, especially after some of the things I've said about them.

shabbs wrote:If Radecki retracts any of his previous statements about the incident, the judge would then be in a position to throw out the case. Radecki's lawyer has tried to downplay what occurred, so it seems to be leaning in Patrick Kane's favor for the moment.

HA HA!

I sense a retraction coming very soon...

And when I say retraction... I mean payoff.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Judgest thou lest ye be judged, shabbseth (I'm not sure if that's a question or a warning, punctuation withheld)

SeawaySensFan wrote:

shabbs wrote:If Radecki retracts any of his previous statements about the incident, the judge would then be in a position to throw out the case. Radecki's lawyer has tried to downplay what occurred, so it seems to be leaning in Patrick Kane's favor for the moment.

HA HA!

I sense a retraction coming very soon...

And when I say retraction... I mean payoff.

Judgest thou lest ye be judged, shabbseth (I'm not sure if that's a question or a warning, punctuation withheld)

TheAvatar wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Judgest thou lest ye be judged, shabbseth (I'm not sure if that's a question or a warning, punctuation withheld)

I had to read this a couple of times; good thing I haven't had a drink yet ...

davetherave wrote:And now YahooSports adds its voice to the Hockey Media revising their position on the Patrick Kane case...

AT THE MOMENT, KANE NOT GUILTY OF ANYTHING
Sean Leahy, YahooSports.com, August 11, 2009

In the time since the story of Patrick Kane's(notes) arrest broke, he's been convicted over a thousand times. When the cab driver, Jan Radecki, who was allegedly assaulted and robbed, told his side of the story to a local news station, Kane was convicted another thousand times.

When the mug shot of the Chicago Blackhawks young star was released on Sunday, he was convicted even more.

What do we really have to base opinions off of in this case?

We only have the events from Radecki's side that he told Buffalo news station WIVB in this video. We don't have the story through Patrick or his cousin's eyes.

We also have Kane's lawyer, Paul Cambria, saying that this issue is overblown and his agent, Pat Brisson, confident that the Blackhawks forward will be exonerated.

Oh, and the cab driver's lawyer agrees with things being exaggerated. Is this just setting up for an out-of-court settlement or are the "jump to conclusions" mats out in full-force?

As Cambria pointed out, nothing in the police report indicated that Kane was intoxicated. Grabbing a cab at 5 a.m. in an area of Buffalo that is full of bars would lead one to believe that alcohol had to be involved, but wouldn't that have come out already? Wouldn't Radecki have, in his statement or television interview, noted that the two kids he's accusing of assaulting and robbing him were drunk?

The trial for Patrick Kane has apparently already ended and he's seen guilty through the eyes of many that are basing their opinions on the story currently out there.

A story I might add, that has still yet to be proven true and features only one side.

Kane's image on the cover on the upcoming videogame NHL10 is already being questioned. Speculation is running rampant about his future in Chicago. Rumors about Kane's attitude and Wang are beginning to creep into the mainstream. Where is the support for Chicago's young star?

If the athlete in question had past issues with the law (like Radecki apparently does), a shady background (according to Kane's lawyer), or was a member of the Cincinnati Bengals, I could at least understand the public's early urge to convict.

While not right, I could see why they'd judge so soon. In this case, we have one of the National Hockey League's rising superstars, a kid who's just 20-years old and been nothing but an ambassador for the game in Chicago and his hometown of Buffalo in just two-years as a professional.

Can we let the legal system play out before the kid is labeled for the rest of his career undeservedly?

It may turn out that Kane was indeed guilty of a crime and he'll be punished for his actions by the legal system and the NHL. It may also end up that the events are truly "blown out of proportion", as the lawyer's on both sides have stated.

If he's innocent, will those in the media who've scolded a yet-to-be proven guilty 20-year old kid ask for forgiveness? Likely not.

The case against the Duke University lacrosse players wasn't that long ago and showed that initial allegations don't always end up being completely factual.

As we stand, early in this story, Patrick Kane should be given a bit more benefit of the doubt in this case until it fully develops.