Sunday, April 16, 2017

Councillor Fuller On Wendy Pratt Event

The following was posted on Facebook by Councillor Fuller who seems to be providing some clarity on a situation that has been subject to much speculation of late.

This was originally posted as a comment on Municipally (A)MUSING as well as Nanaimo Talk.

I will make this as perfectly clear as I can.

On February 27th Wendy Pratt ran at and hit Tracy Samra. it was uncalled for and was witnessed by myself and a number of other people. Some may/will say what provoked, in what context did it happen; that is not the point as assault should not be a resort; first, last or in between.

This was the result of escalating behaviour over time by Wendy, all witnessed, and as a couple of folk whom have worked with her previously have stated they too have seen such escalation and could see some such coming.

If this had been me or one of the other males that did this, especially to a female staff, we would be tarred and feathered by the community without a trial and except for the tarring and feathering I would say rightly so. Assault, Male/Male, Female/Female, Male Female should not be condoned.

I hope that what happens in this case is the special prosecutor offers a conditional discharge to Wendy after she pleads guilty; effectively meaning that after a set time period if no other things come up her record would be clean. These are used all the time for folk without a history of criminal behaviour.

Saying this in no way makes me a misogynist or anti feminist. I know the press will likely pick up on my comments but I will not make any other statement than I have here.

Reason For Delay?

Unless there was another event at city hall that resulted in a reported arrest with release on conditions it would seem the event referred to by Fuller and the reported event are one and the same.

If that is the case and it happened on Feb. 27 in the sight of several witnesses why does it take a month and a half to decide whether or not to lay charges? I understand the court system is burdened these days but a month and half to make this decision begs a few questions as to whether there is any political influence in how this decision is made? I would hope that all citizens would receive the same treatment under the law, whether we are elected officials or not and that gender would have no bearing on the outcome.

allvoices

7 comments:

  1. Finally the truth is told by an eyewitness.

    The one-sided blog sites, like Better Nanaimo, need to print what happened and tar and feather Pratt and not keep quiet. If they don't then they are indeed garbage sites which only tell fiction and lies and should NOT be bothered with by any sane person!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Who cares what Fuller says..... like he has any credibility? Why don't you let the SP do his job? I doubt Fuller's eyewitness account (which has now changed from the original) will even be allowed or considered as reliable testimony in any further proceeding (if there is any further proceeding) since he is making conflicting statements in public.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You should not allow "Anonymous" to post...If people can't put their names on a comment they should keep quiet.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Don't disagree with the comment about Anonymous posts, however, there is no way to authenticate any name that is posted. So, as with some other things caveat emptor. Not only does that apply to something tangible you might buy, apply it also to ANYTHING you read, even if you know the name.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Was it the aggressive woman from hell or just someone who didn't want to be videographed? Is it transparent mud or true? The few who might have the answers to that are either waiting quietly for the justice system to process the evidence or using it as a smear campaign. To the point that supporters go so far as to say Brennan next, what is this? Is this a call out from a concerned and genuine councilor or just another dirty game of hard ball? I didn't see it, first I heard of the theory expressed by Dominic and would like to see that source of info too but then what I think does not matter. What matters is the truth. What are the hopes of that happening? At any rate is there any real news that can be told in full, anything going forward to talk about? Because talking about this one is only gossip at this point IMHO. The only conclusion we can reach is the obvious one. All persons are entitled to due process before they are tried on social media. They are entitled to a decision by impartial persons. Being innocent until proven guilty they are also entitled to their privacy. Such rights extend to private and public persons. So can we please put an end to various slants and get on with the cities real business?

    ReplyDelete
  6. A statement from someone who actually witnessed the event is not the same as speculation from all sides. To my knowledge Fuller is the only person who has been willing to speak clearly about this issue to date. All else, from Dominic and others is nothing more than speculation.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This is my second attempt to register a legitimate comment on this story. I simply don't understand why the first was not published.

    Going from memory alone I'll try again and in the process expand slightly upon the argument I advanced the last time.

    The nub of the first part of what I said the first time around is this: I don't agree with Jim Taylor that Gord Fuller's comments should be assigned any higher status than second hand accounts and that is because his comments have not been tested in court -- especially so since, according to one of the contributors to this thread, Councillor Fuller evidently provided two different versions of what happened.

    But even if that were not the case the argument still holds because witnesses to the same event often have quite different ideas about what actually happened and no one account is superior until tested against others and found to be the most credible or most persuasive. And GF was by his own account only one of a number of witnesses.

    As well, in court GF would almost certainly be required to explain precisely what he meant by the terminology he used. He would also be required to explain where he was in relation to the incident and of course, most importantly, he would be under oath and be subject to cross-examination.

    I also indicated that Councillor Fuller has quite likely complicated relationships at council through his gratuitous involvement in this case and also, quite possibly, tainted any legal proceedings that might occur by potentially influencing other witnesses who might be called upon to testify.

    It is especially disturbing that GF seems to think it is okay to appoint himself star witness, judge and jury -- complete with his idea of an appropriate sentence.

    To say the least, it is very inappropriate for one councillor to be making such a declaration about another councillor who has evidently been charged but who has not entered a plea to whatever charge may have been laid.

    Further to my comment about the status GF's eye witness account should be given, I also indicated that there's a very good place for anonymous comments in online discussions because:

    a) some people like to express a point of view without having to subject themselves to irrational and insulting personal criticism of the kind that is so often part and parcel of online discussions;

    b) some people don't like putting their names in public because it can lead to even more threatening behaviour; and

    c) when it comes to city hall issues , some people don't like putting their names in public out of a concern that council members or city administrators might more than take exception to their comments -- in some situations they could even possibly adversely affect that individual's relationship with council or staff or both.

    I understand that Jim Taylor does not approve of anonymous comments but he does publish them, as evidenced by contributions to this particular thread. He also "moderates" contributions, which is admirable, and that alone should render moot any concern he may have about anonymous comments -- including this and my previous submission on this story.

    ReplyDelete

Your comment will appear after moderation before publishing,

Thank you for your comments.Any comment that could be considered slanderous or includes unacceptable language will be removed.

Thank you for participating and making your opinions known.