Sabres halt contract talks with Kassian after charge

[rbochan]

"The Buffalo Sabres have suspended contract talks with first-round draft pick Zack Kassian after the forward was charged with assault for allegedly punching a man at a bar in Windsor, Ont..."

 

clicky clicky for article

 

Great. His pussification has already begun! Ruff will have an easy road with this kid now.

[Marvelo]

so the kid has a temper. At least he has a pulse, which is more than I can say for the rest of these robots in the Sabres organization. I'm sure Regier will be caught sleeping next to the fax machine and some bigger, smarter NHL team will be more than happy than scoop up our #1.

[static70]

Regier is an idiot.

This is exactly the type of player this team needs and he puts contract talks on hold?

Jeez, If my employer suspended me for all of the bar room altercations I got into as a kid I would have owed him money.

 

This was a very poor decision on the organizations part in my opinion.

[SwampD]

Can you say "Discount!"? I hope this is just a ploy to get him for less money.

 

 

Great comment on that page:

"Interesting.

 

He punches somebody on the ice and chips a tooth, he probably moves up a few spots in the draft.

 

He punches somebody off the ice and chips a tooth, and his contract talks stall.

 

I don't think we're making it easy for these kids to mature into reasonable adults, and we shouldn't be surprised when the just about kill each other on the ice."

[Mbossy]

Regier is an idiot.

This is exactly the type of player this team needs and he puts contract talks on hold?

Jeez, If my employer suspended me for all of the bar room altercations I got into as a kid I would have owed him money.

 

This was a very poor decision on the organizations part in my opinion.

 

Yes, Regeir IS an idiot.

 

But in this case you have to wait to talk more. You can't go signing somebody that has a pending felony or misdemeanor on his hands. That's not a good message to send to these kids.

 

Your employer wouldn't hire you if you were in a pending court case either.

[Mbossy]

so the kid has a temper. At least he has a pulse, which is more than I can say for the rest of these robots in the Sabres organization. I'm sure Regier will be caught sleeping next to the fax machine and some bigger, smarter NHL team will be more than happy than scoop up our #1.

 

He's got another year of Junior eligibility, no worries.

[PASabreFan]

Regier is an idiot.

This is exactly the type of player this team needs and he puts contract talks on hold?

Jeez, If my employer suspended me for all of the bar room altercations I got into as a kid I would have owed him money.

 

This was a very poor decision on the organizations part in my opinion.

 

Seriously. Who among us never smashed a wooden stool over someone's head in a barroom brouhaha?

[tom webster]

First off, they suspended talks, not ended them.

 

Second, there is a real possibility, however small, that the kid may not be able to get his work visa. Things have changed since 911 and its no slam dunk that someone with an assualt conviction would be allowed into the States.

 

Thirdly, as someone else said, its more about sending the kid a message. This is his 3rd offence.

[deluca67]

Yes, Regeir IS an idiot.

 

But in this case you have to wait to talk more. You can't go signing somebody that has a pending felony or misdemeanor on his hands. That's not a good message to send to these kids.

Your employer wouldn't hire you if you were in a pending court case either.

He is being charged with punching someone in the face. Is that not why they drafted him? I wouldn't be surprised if Kassian told the Sabres to go F**k themselves and re-enters the draft.

[shrader]

I can't wait for the day that someone in the Sabres front office cures cancer, just to see how everyone here would complain about that. The kid needs to get his legal situation in order first, then he can go back to ironing out a contract.

[Mbossy]

He is being charged with punching someone in the face. Is that not why they drafted him? I wouldn't be surprised if Kassian told the Sabres to go F**k themselves and re-enters the draft.

 

They drafted him to punch someone in the face on the ice, not in a bar. Kassian can't tell the Sabres anything until he's 20 yrs old. They've got until this time next year to sign him. My concern is he'll miss another development camp.

 

He needs another year in Juniors anyway.

[carpandean]

Seriously people, relax. I read this on WGR.com the other day and thought "oh goody, now I get to hear (read) everyone at SabreSpace jump up and down about how they've already started toward taking out his backbone." Darcy was very supportive of Zach when talking about this and certain that he would learn from it. He specifically said that "you have to walk away from situations like this; you're not on the ice, you have to walk away." As others have said, the organization has just suspended talks while things get worked out and to show that the organization doesn't support off-ice criminal activity. Yes, he just go in a bar fight and most likely this will be nothing more than a bump in the road, but no team is going to come out and say that they signed somebody who was arrested earlier that week. They'll wait a little bit, then restart talks. Not a big deal.

[Mbossy]

For the lawyer types out there....

 

The article quotes Chief Ron Smith of U.S. Customs and Border Protection who stated that:

 

 

"If an individual has an assault charge on their record, they’d be found inadmissible into the United States, . . . There are ways to mitigate that, primarily through the Department of State, which issues visas. But under normal circumstances, initially, the individual would be inadmissible in the United States for the assault charge.”

 

 

With all due respect to Chief Smith, he is wrong on both the law, and on the procedure. All assault convictions do not render an individual inadmissible from the United States. To the contrary, in most instances, simple assault does not constitute a crime involving moral turpitude that would have any immigration consequences. See Matter of Perez-Contreras, 20 I&N Dec. 615, 618 (BIA 1992); Matter of Short, 20 I&N Dec. 136, 139 (BIA 1989).

 

The reason for this is that in most jurisdictions you may be convicted for simple assault without having any evil intent, depraved or vicious motive, or corrupt mind that is normally associated with crimes involving moral turpitude. See Matter of J-, 4 I&N Dec. 512, 514 (BIA1951); Matter of J-, 4 I&N Dec. 26, 27 (BIA 1950); Matter of O-, 3 I&N Dec. 193, 194-95 (BIA 1948).

That being said, a conviction for a more serious assault may render an individual inadmissible if the underlying conviction includes an aggravating circumstance, such as, but not limited to, the intent to cause serious bodily harm, or if the assault included a dangerous weapon. Matter of Solon, 24 I & N Dec. 239 (BIA 2007) [A conviction under New York Penal Code § 120.00(1) is a crime involving moral turpitude because the assault must include both the specific intent to cause physical injury.]

 

In order to determine if an assault conviction has immigration consequences you must look to the language contained in the underlying criminal statute which differs by jurisdiction. Parenthetically, it makes no difference what crime an individual has been charged with, but rather what an individual is ultimately convicted of.

If Mr. Kassian is convicted for an offense that renders him inadmissible to the United States that does not mean that he will NEVER be allowed into the United States. There is a waiver that is available that would enable him to be admitted, which requires a balancing of several factors as well as an exercise of discretion.

 

The Sabres would be best served to get Kassain's Canadian criminal defense attorney in touch with a United States immigration attorney that has experience in inadmissibility issues prior to entering into any plea negotiations.

 

As for the procedure for applying for the waiver, Chief Smith shoots the puck wide of the net again. The United States Department of State would ONLY be involved with Mr. Kassian's waiver application if he were applying for it in conjunction with a visa application. As a citizen of Canada, Kassian would not need a visa in most instances so long as he has advance approval from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services when applying for admission to the United States, and if the waiver was approved by the Attorney General.

 

 

The moral of the story is this: don't get your immigration advice from employees of Customs and Border Protection.

[That Aud Smell]

it really is discouraging (annoying?) to see members posting that the wussification has started, that punching people in the face is part of why they drafted him, etc.

 

whether it makes sense, or whether it don't, hockey players don't get arrested for having a (sanctioned) scrap on the ice in which they bust up a guy's face, but very likely will get arrested for having a scrap in a bar in which they bust up a guy's face. and having a prospect with a pending felony charge is a ticklish business for a number of reasons (even setting aside any concerns with his immigration status).

 

i'm all for having a prospect who plays with an edge, but suspending talks while this kid gets his legal situation straightened out (and until he gets his head screwed on straight) is really the team's only choice at this point.

[static70]

For the lawyer types out there....

 

The article quotes Chief Ron Smith of U.S. Customs and Border Protection who stated that:

 

 

"If an individual has an assault charge on their record, they’d be found inadmissible into the United States, . . . There are ways to mitigate that, primarily through the Department of State, which issues visas. But under normal circumstances, initially, the individual would be inadmissible in the United States for the assault charge.”

 

 

With all due respect to Chief Smith, he is wrong on both the law, and on the procedure. All assault convictions do not render an individual inadmissible from the United States. To the contrary, in most instances, simple assault does not constitute a crime involving moral turpitude that would have any immigration consequences. See Matter of Perez-Contreras, 20 I&N Dec. 615, 618 (BIA 1992); Matter of Short, 20 I&N Dec. 136, 139 (BIA 1989).

 

The reason for this is that in most jurisdictions you may be convicted for simple assault without having any evil intent, depraved or vicious motive, or corrupt mind that is normally associated with crimes involving moral turpitude. See Matter of J-, 4 I&N Dec. 512, 514 (BIA1951); Matter of J-, 4 I&N Dec. 26, 27 (BIA 1950); Matter of O-, 3 I&N Dec. 193, 194-95 (BIA 1948).

That being said, a conviction for a more serious assault may render an individual inadmissible if the underlying conviction includes an aggravating circumstance, such as, but not limited to, the intent to cause serious bodily harm, or if the assault included a dangerous weapon. Matter of Solon, 24 I & N Dec. 239 (BIA 2007) [A conviction under New York Penal Code § 120.00(1) is a crime involving moral turpitude because the assault must include both the specific intent to cause physical injury.]

 

In order to determine if an assault conviction has immigration consequences you must look to the language contained in the underlying criminal statute which differs by jurisdiction. Parenthetically, it makes no difference what crime an individual has been charged with, but rather what an individual is ultimately convicted of.

If Mr. Kassian is convicted for an offense that renders him inadmissible to the United States that does not mean that he will NEVER be allowed into the United States. There is a waiver that is available that would enable him to be admitted, which requires a balancing of several factors as well as an exercise of discretion.

 

The Sabres would be best served to get Kassain's Canadian criminal defense attorney in touch with a United States immigration attorney that has experience in inadmissibility issues prior to entering into any plea negotiations.

 

As for the procedure for applying for the waiver, Chief Smith shoots the puck wide of the net again. The United States Department of State would ONLY be involved with Mr. Kassian's waiver application if he were applying for it in conjunction with a visa application. As a citizen of Canada, Kassian would not need a visa in most instances so long as he has advance approval from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services when applying for admission to the United States, and if the waiver was approved by the Attorney General.

 

 

The moral of the story is this: don't get your immigration advice from employees of Customs and Border Protection.

Mbossy, thank you for pointing out the specific facts of this. I have to wonder why this guy was even quoted after reviewing the case law you cited and looking at the circumstances of the situation.

You sir, are a valuable asset, now, I need to know your retainer fee :blush:

[Mbossy]

Mbossy, thank you for pointing out the specific facts of this. I have to wonder why this guy was even quoted after reviewing the case law you cited and looking at the circumstances of the situation.

You sir, are a valuable asset, now, I need to know your retainer fee :blush:

 

One Stanley Cup. :thumbsup:

[Eleven]

For the lawyer types out there....

 

The article quotes Chief Ron Smith of U.S. Customs and Border Protection who stated that:

 

 

"If an individual has an assault charge on their record, they’d be found inadmissible into the United States, . . . There are ways to mitigate that, primarily through the Department of State, which issues visas. But under normal circumstances, initially, the individual would be inadmissible in the United States for the assault charge.”

 

 

With all due respect to Chief Smith, he is wrong on both the law, and on the procedure. All assault convictions do not render an individual inadmissible from the United States. To the contrary, in most instances, simple assault does not constitute a crime involving moral turpitude that would have any immigration consequences. See Matter of Perez-Contreras, 20 I&N Dec. 615, 618 (BIA 1992); Matter of Short, 20 I&N Dec. 136, 139 (BIA 1989).

 

The reason for this is that in most jurisdictions you may be convicted for simple assault without having any evil intent, depraved or vicious motive, or corrupt mind that is normally associated with crimes involving moral turpitude. See Matter of J-, 4 I&N Dec. 512, 514 (BIA1951); Matter of J-, 4 I&N Dec. 26, 27 (BIA 1950); Matter of O-, 3 I&N Dec. 193, 194-95 (BIA 1948).

That being said, a conviction for a more serious assault may render an individual inadmissible if the underlying conviction includes an aggravating circumstance, such as, but not limited to, the intent to cause serious bodily harm, or if the assault included a dangerous weapon. Matter of Solon, 24 I & N Dec. 239 (BIA 2007) [A conviction under New York Penal Code § 120.00(1) is a crime involving moral turpitude because the assault must include both the specific intent to cause physical injury.]

 

In order to determine if an assault conviction has immigration consequences you must look to the language contained in the underlying criminal statute which differs by jurisdiction. Parenthetically, it makes no difference what crime an individual has been charged with, but rather what an individual is ultimately convicted of.

If Mr. Kassian is convicted for an offense that renders him inadmissible to the United States that does not mean that he will NEVER be allowed into the United States. There is a waiver that is available that would enable him to be admitted, which requires a balancing of several factors as well as an exercise of discretion.

 

The Sabres would be best served to get Kassain's Canadian criminal defense attorney in touch with a United States immigration attorney that has experience in inadmissibility issues prior to entering into any plea negotiations.

 

As for the procedure for applying for the waiver, Chief Smith shoots the puck wide of the net again. The United States Department of State would ONLY be involved with Mr. Kassian's waiver application if he were applying for it in conjunction with a visa application. As a citizen of Canada, Kassian would not need a visa in most instances so long as he has advance approval from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services when applying for admission to the United States, and if the waiver was approved by the Attorney General.

 

 

The moral of the story is this: don't get your immigration advice from employees of Customs and Border Protection.

 

Holy sh&t, a legal issue actually explained by someone who knows what he's talking about--and with citations.

 

But you missed the real issue: Were Kassian to enter the States, it would create an instant RICO violation.

[K-9]

First off, they suspended talks, not ended them.

 

Second, there is a real possibility, however small, that the kid may not be able to get his work visa. Things have changed since 911 and its no slam dunk that someone with an assualt conviction would be allowed into the States.

 

Thirdly, as someone else said, its more about sending the kid a message. This is his 3rd offence.

 

+1

 

The Sabres would be remiss is they signed him before resolution of his legal issues. Can you imagine what the naysayers would be like if the Sabres DID sign him only to find out later he was barred from playing in the U.S. because he couldn't obtain a work visa?

 

And the point you make about the Sabres sending him a message shouldn't be overlooked, either. There is a pattern to his behavior that speaks of immaturity issues. Let the kid soak in that message while everyone waits and sees what happens with his legal issues. Could be the best thing to happen to Kassian.

 

GO SABRES!!!

[PASabreFan]

Holy sh&t, a legal issue actually explained by someone who knows what he's talking about--and with citations.

 

But you missed the real issue: Were Kassian to enter the States, it would create an instant RICO violation.

 

Let's leave number 7 out of it.

[Mbossy]

Let's leave number 7 out of it.

 

Couldn't resist.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx64_N4AA04

[That Aud Smell]

But you missed the real issue: Were Kassian to enter the States, it would create an instant RICO violation.

:lol:

:thumbsup:

 

 

Let's leave number 7 out of it.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

:thumbsup:

[PASabreFan]

Couldn't resist.

 

 

Oddly, the video and your avatar go well together.

[WannabeGM]

For the lawyer types out there....

 

The article quotes Chief Ron Smith of U.S. Customs and Border Protection who stated that:

 

 

"If an individual has an assault charge on their record, they’d be found inadmissible into the United States, . . . There are ways to mitigate that, primarily through the Department of State, which issues visas. But under normal circumstances, initially, the individual would be inadmissible in the United States for the assault charge.”

 

 

With all due respect to Chief Smith, he is wrong on both the law, and on the procedure. All assault convictions do not render an individual inadmissible from the United States. To the contrary, in most instances, simple assault does not constitute a crime involving moral turpitude that would have any immigration consequences. See Matter of Perez-Contreras, 20 I&N Dec. 615, 618 (BIA 1992); Matter of Short, 20 I&N Dec. 136, 139 (BIA 1989).

 

The reason for this is that in most jurisdictions you may be convicted for simple assault without having any evil intent, depraved or vicious motive, or corrupt mind that is normally associated with crimes involving moral turpitude. See Matter of J-, 4 I&N Dec. 512, 514 (BIA1951); Matter of J-, 4 I&N Dec. 26, 27 (BIA 1950); Matter of O-, 3 I&N Dec. 193, 194-95 (BIA 1948).

That being said, a conviction for a more serious assault may render an individual inadmissible if the underlying conviction includes an aggravating circumstance, such as, but not limited to, the intent to cause serious bodily harm, or if the assault included a dangerous weapon. Matter of Solon, 24 I & N Dec. 239 (BIA 2007) [A conviction under New York Penal Code § 120.00(1) is a crime involving moral turpitude because the assault must include both the specific intent to cause physical injury.]

 

In order to determine if an assault conviction has immigration consequences you must look to the language contained in the underlying criminal statute which differs by jurisdiction. Parenthetically, it makes no difference what crime an individual has been charged with, but rather what an individual is ultimately convicted of.

If Mr. Kassian is convicted for an offense that renders him inadmissible to the United States that does not mean that he will NEVER be allowed into the United States. There is a waiver that is available that would enable him to be admitted, which requires a balancing of several factors as well as an exercise of discretion.

 

The Sabres would be best served to get Kassain's Canadian criminal defense attorney in touch with a United States immigration attorney that has experience in inadmissibility issues prior to entering into any plea negotiations.

 

As for the procedure for applying for the waiver, Chief Smith shoots the puck wide of the net again. The United States Department of State would ONLY be involved with Mr. Kassian's waiver application if he were applying for it in conjunction with a visa application. As a citizen of Canada, Kassian would not need a visa in most instances so long as he has advance approval from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services when applying for admission to the United States, and if the waiver was approved by the Attorney General.

 

 

The moral of the story is this: don't get your immigration advice from employees of Customs and Border Protection.

 

Is the difference in the words "charged with" and "convicted of"? I'm not a laywer, but the article keeps talking about someone who is charged with, but not yet convicted. Does that matter?

[Mbossy]

Is the difference in the words "charged with" and "convicted of"? I'm not a laywer, but the article keeps talking about someone who is charged with, but not yet convicted. Does that matter?

 

Sure it does. Like if you get a speeding ticket and it gets reduced to a parking ticket and school.

[spndnchz]

Moral Turpitude vs. Simple Assault. Assault may or may not involve moral turpitide. Simple assault is generally not considered to be a crime involving moral turpitude.

 

For example, if u got into a fight at a bar because someone was calling u names and egging u on. Hence U slug him and take out a tooth, simple assault. When this also includes 'aggravating' factors (death, weapons), such as the guy being a officer on duty and u show a deliberate disregard for the law; moral turpitude.

 

If Kassian had hit the guy (off duty officer) that came over to see the situation he'd be in BIG trouble.

 

And yes, I took my LSAT's on Monday.