Sentencing this morning

here is his apology read in court

In terms of apologies, I would like to first and foremost apologize to (the teenaged girl). She is wonderful to our children, our children adored her, she had a great relationship with my wife, and I think it's been documented throughout all of this, we treated her with absolute respect the year that she babysat for us, and this would not have happened in a hundred million years had I not put myself in the position to be on medication. Nevertheless, my heart goes out to her and my apology is profound.

To her mom and dad. I know this is your daughter. I have a little girl. I know that women and daughters are precious, and my heart goes out to you. I thank them for extending me grace by accepting my apologies.

To my wife, who's been amazing through all of this, who didn't deserve this public humiliation, you are tremendous with our children who I love dearly, and who's been subjected to so many false rumours and so much ridicule. There are no words.

To my mom and dad, who raised us with a moral compass, who always taught us the value of other people, who always taught us to treat other people with dignity, and I've tried to honour them by living my life this way, the way that I have. It pains me beyond words that 10 or 15 seconds of my life could impact them so significantly, and I'm so profoundly sorry.

To Jim Hopson, who hired me, to Rob Pletch and the board of directors, Kenny Miller, to the coaches and players, the people that I've worked with and share my love of the Saskatchewan Roughriders, I apologize.

And, last but not least, to the good people of this province. One of the things I've said many times about moving here is that the wonderful thing about raising children here is the sense of pride, the sense of family, the fact that people care about things that matter here. I know people here care about not only their good names, but the good name of this province, and I'm profoundly sorry that I brought embarrassment to not only the organization and my family, but to people throughout this province.

As (defence lawyer Aaron Fox) said several times, this has been incredibly painful for me. That said, it should be noted I should be last on that list. I take full responsibility for my actions, and my emotion today is for other people that I know have been impacted. It's been painful for them.

And while there are no adequate words, I apologize, your honour. It was very wrong."

Unconditional Discharge

So Eric Tillman gets off with an absdolute discharge with no penalty and no criminal record.

Now tell me all are equal before the law.............

Interesting, isn't it. the Riders will make a statement shortly about his Rider Future.

I agree. I found this disturbing, even after it was explained on The Current this morning. My first reaction was that what you can do under the influence of drugs, you can do sober. The drugs only decreased his inhibitions, so he could actually commit the crime.

He should at least have a record, and perhaps do some community service or something.

give me a break, st judds...

drunk drivers who kill people get a slap on the wrist.  considering the state of our justice system right now, this is exactly what he should have gotten.

nonsense.

i have been ridiculously drunk a few times, and i did things that i would NEVER do when i'm sober.  same thing with drugs... back in university, i did things while i was high that i wouldn't even contemplate doing if i hadn't smoked pot.

what a bizarre statement, northwind.

Well sighs, that was my first impression. That is all. Bizarre or not.

So what is your impression of his "consequence" to this? It seems you believe our views are crazy, what is yours?

personally, i'm disgusted by what he did.  if my daughter had come home and told me that someone had done this to her, that man would still be choking on his testicles.

however, our justice system takes into account intent.  he was stoned, there are many witnesses to that fact.  even the guys at the rider front office say he was 'loopy', thats why they sent him home early.   he has no previous record of anything, let alone a sexual assault.  therefore, you simply can't prove that he intended to do this, or that he set out to sexually assault his babysitter.   in fact, the family of the girl in question has repeatedly said they never wanted charges to be laid.  

right now, a guy can KILL SOMEBODY with a vehicle, and if he was drunk at the time, the consequences are ridiculously minimal.   as far as i'm concerned, if that is the precedent, then what tillman got was appropriate.

I haven't followed the case but, based on the two articles Crazyheart posted, I would think that he made a mistake while under the influence of drugs, and that he, and his family, have suffered a great deal since then. 

His act was wrong.  It shouldn't have happened.  But I would think that on a grand scale of sexual assault cases this would be on the minor end.  The girl and her family are ready to move on.  I think that he and his family should too. 

Again, I don't know all the facts.

umm, i remember having drunken men kiss me when i was a teenager, and make lude remarks...doesn' t make it right...is way inappropriate, but i'm thinking this is similair in nature....

he was bombed..he pulled her towards him...probably did a bump/grin..she said "no" ..it stopped.

To have a criminal act one must have two ingredients ... 

(1) a guilty act

(2) a guilty intent (in doing the act)

If either one of those ingredients is missing then no criminal act has occurred.

By pleading guilty Tillman has admitted that both ingredients  were present and that he consents to the court moving on to the matter of determining what it ought to do to protect the public from the danger that Mr. Tillman will re-offend by incarcerating him or otherwise limiting his freedom ...

(a) in order that public resources can be expended and brought to bear upon him for the purpose of rehabilitating him so he may become a full and productive member of society;

(b) and/or to protect the public from him if there is any reasonable expectation that he will re-offend or otherwise harm the public.

Tillman's guilty plea shows he has taken responsibility for his actions and is willing to cooperate with the court in taking the steps necessary to assist him to become a full participant in our civil society.  His extreme remorse shows that this process is already complete.  Given that this a first offence for Tillman and that he has led an otherwise exemplary life in which he has displayed leadership and contributed to civic and charitable causes, it is unreasonable to believe there is a likelihood of re-offence.  There is, therefore, no justification for incarceration and the expense to be incurred by taxpayers in effecting it would be wasted.  Likewise where rehabilitation is not needed (which certainly seems to be the belief of the victim and her family)  no "sentence" is needed either.  In a case where a sentence would serve neither to rehabilitate the accused nor to protect the public from re-offence a sentence of any kind is inappropriate.  When a sentence is inappropriate then a court should  discharge the accused as it has done in this case.

I am always amazed at the way cases like this evoke the sentiments and attitudes of the Old ("eye for an eye") Testament.  So many people seem very disappointed that the law has decided not to "pile on" in a way calculated to destroy the future life and career of the accused.  Luckily the legal principals that led to Tillman's sentencing have their genesis is Christian principals of both our founding nations and the exaction of revenge has no place in modern law or sentencing.

I congratulate the judge on a merciful, wise and just decision that shows that our legal system is working exactly as it should be.

That is a good explanation qwerty, thank you.

For the record, I was not advocating an eye for an eye vengence thing. I was only commenting on my first impressions. First impressions are almost always modifiable.

As for the allegation that there are no consequences for impaired driving, may I refer sighs to the Criminal Code of Canada, and the Motor Vehicle Act of your province. There are significant consequences. It is a matter of whether they are enforced I am sure. I know that the police in this area have been very active in addressing this issue, and other aggressive driving behaviours. As a result, they reported that there were fewer people driving after drinking this New Years Eve.

Qwerty,

Can you re-read your  "I am always amazed... " paragraph? It is an ouch for me.

I, personally, do not like the juxtaposition of an "Old Testament God of wrath" with an "New Testament God of love". A good and a bad.  It is almost Marcionite.  

Both Jewish and Christian sources contain what is retributive... and both contain ugly, misogynistic, intolerant.... material.

Thanks Qwerty. 

If anything, though, it honestly does feel he has paid way too much for this one.

Sorry, folks, maybe I am being naive, but criminal charges?  I can see why he pleaded..but, if it is what was stated..then, dang it,seems like overkill to me on the charge.

he certainly has been contrite.

he needs to be.

the chances of him keeping his job are slim.

The big thing for me here is that there was such a huge power differential in this situation.

Peace

Joel

 Luckily I am not a Christian if these are the principles they supposedly operate within.

The principles I am referring to are:

1.  So if soemone wants to commit a crime they need to ensure that they don't get caught because then it is their first offence and they should not get a penalty but get grace.

2.  No counselling or drug rehab for pedophiles who blame drugs for their actions.    They are felt sorry for because it might hurt their career.

3.  Restitution is not revenge.  He hurt society at large as well as the victim.  He sucks big time as a role model.   He has wasted tax payers' money and time in court.

So if you think that it is right just to wash this under the rug I am not in agreement and ashamed to be Canadian.

what do you mean??

this sentence makes no sense whatsoever.  geez, are you harpers speechwriter or something???

LOL!!  the guy is probably looking at the end of his career here...  i'm not sure where you are even getting this from.

huh??  i think i agree with you, but then i re-read this and i'm not sure...

LOL!!  man, if i had a loonie for every time i've heard some joker level some ultimatum and then say 'or else i'm ashamed to be a canadian!!'

use your head already.

In my opinion this case shouldn't even have had to go to court. 

Of course what he did was wrong.  Probably if I was the girl I would have shouted at him "What the hell do you think your doing? Where's my coat?  Pay me!  I'm out of here."   and not been available to babysit again.

If I was upset enough to tell my parents, then they should have confronted him.  He should have appologized.  "Look, I was woosey from over-medication.  I don't remember but I was not myself.  I'm sorry it happened.  What can I do to make it up to her?"

Then if could have been forgotten.    Overmedication.  Bad judgement.  Bad experience.   Good babysitter no longer available.   The end. 

Agreed.

He has not gotten caught before.  We do not know for sure if this is a first time offense or not.   We only know that he has not gotten caught before.  We have the only the pervert's word it was a first offense.

I think he should have to pay the court costs.  If I lived in Saskatchewan I would rather have the money than the empty words of an abuser.

well, by that logic i think that YOU should be charged with rape, theft, and murder.  your name is an obvious confession of poor moral choices on your part.

i mean, we only have YOUR WORD that you haven't done it before....

so, shall i call the police, or are you just going to turn yourself in and save us all a lot of tax dollars here???

The issue here is not just his word.  He has done it and may do so again.  This comes off his record in a year.  So he just has to be good for a year and then he can grope young girls again.

I used the wrong phrase in my previous message.

This isn't a case of "Rich Man's Law", as Tillman isn't seen as rich.

Please replace the phrase with "Old Boy"s Network" or "Old Boy's Law"

re: power.

Tillman is one head of the most popular organization in Regina\Saskatchewan.  He was the girls employee.  In this situation Tillman had a great deal of power to weild agiast this girl and to deflect any replusion.  She also would have felt (I would guess) very vunderable being 16 and deciding what to do about her boss\popular GM\respected community leader taking advantage of his position when she has little recourse.

For this power differential I see this crime as being more traumatic than the simple physical happenings.

Peace

Joel

I don'tknow about you folks, but, for me, babysitters have always came from within my social circle.  In addition, I never as a child, babysat up a social circle, though I may have gone into areas which were less affluent.

So...I am not sure where the presumption is that she didn't come from a family that had equal sway and/or financial.  In other words, that their parents were not peers.  Given the actions that followed, it is almost surely so, as the parents didn't give a shit.  In fact, they may not have liked him.. 

What I find interesting is that the parents/daughter chose to go to the police for this item, and got a sexual assault charge laid.  Many, as sigh indicated, would have taken a more direct approach.

He's guilty, sure....but...there's more to this story, I am sure.   I am not second guessing the judge, and I think the price he has paid is already way too high. 

To me, the power imbalance is about age.

(I hope they sent him home in a taxi . . . or gave him a ride home.  It would be interesting to know if he felt too "loopy" to drive or not?)

Would this have made the news or had the attention if he wasn't a high profile sports (or other) personality?

I agree Pinga, power imbalance in this case is about age and the fact that he is likely her parents' friend. He is also her employer basically, since she babysat for him.

not at all.

my feeling is that any way he might have 'got off easy' for this (and he hasn't)  would have been far outweighed by the media circus surrounding this anyways.

heck, i was listening to the radio here in ottawa and they cut right in the middle of the song to broadcast the report of his plea live from the courthouse in regina. 

2pm Press Conference. Tillman resigned. Riders accepted resignation.

my point wasn't about money or circle.  The point is that Tillman was a hugely popular and respected figure.

if you are suggesting that tillmans popularity and previous respect somehow won him a favour here, then you need to open your eyes...

he had no previous record of anything, let alone sexual assault.  the sentence the judge gave was NO DIFFERENT than what he would have gotten if he were a co-op delivery guy or a telephone operator at sasktel.

however, the fact is that if he was a co-op or sasktel employee, preecy, he would still have a job this morning.

so what you are saying is false. 

yeah, i doubt that there was much of a power imbalance due to his position in society between the girl and him, the girl's parents and him, or the girl's judge and him.