by ldh2013 » Thu Jul 07, 2016 8:48 am
While some could argue that P. .K. Subban is the most talented Montreal Canadiens skater since Alex Kovalev, the former Habs forward has a strong difference of opinion. Kovalev, in Montreal for a charity golf tournament, didnt mince words on Tuesday regarding the superstar defencemans style of play and his new contract that makes him the highest paid player in franchise history. "First of all I dont understand how they get these contracts," Kovalev told Philippe Lehoux of RDS on Tuesday. "I know its a different lifestyle, different times...if you go back to the 70s they werent making the big contracts either and they probably felt the same way about us when we came into the league and started making big money. Now its the same thing for us." Kovalev, who played five seasons with the Canadiens from 2004 to 2009, added that hes not a fan of Subbans play on the blue line. "Im not saying that he isnt a good hockey player - hes not the guy," he said. "Hes a risky defenceman and hes a wide open defenceman. What Im saying is that he can give up five goals and score five goals, and the scores still going to be zero-zero. So if for example, he saves five goals and scores five goals, thats a different style of hockey. So I always compare him with (former Rangers teammate) Brian Leetch, because he wants to play the same kind of style and be more offensive. Hes not making the right decisions. Hes making the risky plays, hes not making the right decisions sometimes. He just plays like we used to play on the street...street hockey." Subban, who was a restricted free agent with arbitration rights this summer, agreed to terms on an eight-year, $72 million contract with the team on Aug. 2, avoiding a salary arbitration ruling from a hearing that tok place less than 24 hours earlier. He signed a two-year deal worth an average annual value of $2.875 million contract prior to the 2012-2013 season - a season that saw him capture the Norris Trophy as the NHLs top blueliner. He also scored 10 goals and added 43 assists in 82 games with the Canadiens in 2013-14 and led all Canadiens skaters in postseason scoring. That resume, however, is not enough to convince Kovalev that Subban has earned his long-term payday. "Maybe because he won best defenceman of the year, thats how they get paid these days," he said. "You know, you win best player of the year and you get a big contract right away. But for his game, I dont understand why he got so much money." . -- Kevin Durant insists he and Russell Westbrook arent turning their first-round series into a two-man show, even if the NBA scoring champ says they may be shooting too much. .twitter.com/xBTpoAKLJk — Daryl Zerr (@darylzerr) May 29, 2014 @BarDown I give to you the @SquirrelsNCHL aka the Fighting Squirels. . - As Danelle Jacobs and a crew of volunteers decorated their Rose Parade float, strong winds from a blustery winter storm blew flowers into the air.The Oscar Pistorius trial has resumed following a month long break. During that time, Pistorius underwent a psychiatric evaluation at the direction of the court to determine if he suffered from general anxiety disorder (GAD) at the time he killed Reeva Steenkamp. The Charges The issue being determined at trial is whether Pistorius killed Steenkamp intentionally, or as Pistorius alleges, he killed her by accident believing her to be an intruder. Form a legal standpoint, this distinction is really important since it ties into the charges faced by Pistorius. There are three possible scenarios with respect to the charges: Premeditated murder, murder and culpable homicide. Premeditated murder requires an intent to murder plus planning the murder. Premeditation is reserved for more robust planning and generally doesnt capture an intent that materialized right before a crime was committed. There was no significant planning to the crime, so premeditated murder will likely fail. Even if the prosecution cant make out premeditated murder, it can still get Pistorius on the lesser charge of murder. In order establish murder, they only need to show that he intended to kill Steenkamp (no planning element needed).Should the prosecution fail on murder, there is another lesser charge that could come into play: culpable homicide. This charge means that Pistorius negligently killed Steenkamp (or that he killed her by accident). Premeditated murder would get Pistorius a compulsory life sentence, while murder would result in a compulsory sentence of 15 years. For culpable homicide, the sentencing is discretionary (varies from fines to prison time), although its not unusual to see prison time in South Africa of 5-10 years for this type of crime. Facing very serious charges, the defence team wanted to establish that Pistorius should not go to jail because he was mentally ill when he fired those four gunshots the night of Valentines Day. And thats where GAD comes into play. General Anxiety Disorder And Diminished Capacity A defendant that suffers from a mental disorder can be found not criminally responsible on the basis that he or she could not appreciate the difference between right and wrong at the time the crime was committed. If such a finding is made, one possible outcome is the trial ends right then and there, and the defendant is committed to an institution indefinitely. In essence, it would look very much like an acquittal with ongoing psychiatric care. So if it was concluded that Pistorius had a mental disorder that made him incapable of appreciating the wrongfulness of his act, the trial could have come to a very abrupt end and Pistorius could have avoided jail time. Psychiatric Finding The psychiatric report concluded that Pistorius was not mentally ill at the time he killed Steenkamp. As per the report, "at the time of the alleged offenses, the accused did not suffer from a mental disorder or mental defect that affected his ability to distinguish between the rightful or wrongful naturee of his deeds". . So that means the trial continues and Pistorius does not avoid prison in favour of an institution. Mental Illness No. 2: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Things didnt end with GAD. On July 2, the defence team declared that Pistorius was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and as result was suicidal. "He is...mourning the loss of Ms Steenkamp," said Barry Roux, Pistorius lawyer. "Should he not receive proper clinical care, his condition is likely to worsen and increase the risks for suicide." Is this a meaningful finding with respect to exonerating Pistorius? No. This mental disorder speaks to Pistorius state of mind AFTER the murder and not before or during the act. The key is in the name of the affliction: POST-traumatic stress disorder and not PRE-traumatic stress disorder. So that means that even if it can be shown that Pistorius suffers from PTSD, his mental illness did not render him unable to appreciate the difference between right and wrong at the time of the killing since he would have only developed the illness after the crime. Accordingly, as far as being a defence to the core issue in this trial, namely that Pistorius did not intend to kill Steenkamp, its irrelevant and of no import. However, the defence team may have raised PTSD as further evidence that Pistorius did not intend to kill Steenkamp. The defence team would argue that Pistorius is distraught to the point of being suicidal because he never intended to kill Steenkamp. If he did intend to kill Steenkamp, he would not be suicidal. Of course, this argument is vulnerable to attack. Pistorius intending to kill Steenkamp is not incompatible with feeling profound remorse and guilt after the fact. Indeed, it could be argued that experiencing feelings of anguish and accountability after intentionally killing someone is not unusual in this type of circumstance. The defence team also raised PTSD so they could rely on it as a possible mitigating factor to reduce his prison time come sentencing. The idea would be that he would need ongoing psychiatric care, which could only be adequately provided in an institution outside of prison. Next Steps Once the defence has called all its witnesses, it will close its case. That should within the next week or so. After that, both parties will present their closing arguments with a view to persuading the court of their respective positions. Once closing arguments wrap up, the Court will schedule a date to announce the verdict. Following the determination of guilt, a sentencing hearing will be held where both sides will present arguments with respect to the appropriate sentence. Thereafter, Judge Masipa will hand down her sentence. At the rate the trial is proceeding, expect it to conclude sometime in mid-summer. Pistorius claims lack believability and veracity. Given the number of improbabilities in his story (as discussed here), it would not be a surprise to see Pistorius convicted of murder. ' ' '
