The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Weren't there witnesses to the attack? I don't care if the driver was an illegal alien (or an actual alien), drunk and high on smack. If Kane participated in a violent beat down on the cabbie, over a measly 20 cents (or $1.20) he needs to pay some penalty. A quick agreement between the parties, $200,000 or so to the caggie, ought to do the trick. As for "your take", that's the biggest bunch of BS I have heard in quite a while. They were actually going to tip him quite well, but didn't because he didn't return the $1.20 change. Sure, that makes a LOT of sense, Sen. Actually, Deano, why yes - there were witnesses - all of whom seem to be supporting the Kanes' version of the events, which you'd know had you tuned into this morning's TV news here in the BuffTown. So there, Your Belligerence! Harrrumph!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Actually, Deano, why yes - there were witnesses - all of whom seem to be supporting the Kanes' version of the events, which you'd know had you tuned into this morning's TV news here in the BuffTown. So there, Your Belligerence! Harrrumph!!!!! So Kane didn't hit the cabbie and take the money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 So Kane didn't hit the cabbie and take the money? Well, the driver's attorney - prominent BuffTown mouthpiece Andrew C. LoTempio - may have doubts himself... "The driver's attorney, backpedaling on his client's accusations a day before, said the incident had been "blown out of proportion," and a prominent Buffalo attorney hired by Kane said he was convinced that the former No. 1 draft pick had not committed a crime.... "It's a dispute over a cab fee, and unfortunately Mr. Radecki didn't recognize Mr. Kane and just thought they were a couple of college kids," LoTempio said. "We should be able to work things out." LoTempio told WGN that cabdrivers in Buffalo often lock their doors until the fare is paid because passengers sometimes flee without paying. He suggested that was partly to blame for what happened Sunday." link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Well, the driver's attorney - prominent BuffTown mouthpiece Andrew C. LoTempio - may have doubts himself... "The driver's attorney, backpedaling on his client's accusations a day before, said the incident had been "blown out of proportion," and a prominent Buffalo attorney hired by Kane said he was convinced that the former No. 1 draft pick had not committed a crime.... "It's a dispute over a cab fee, and unfortunately Mr. Radecki didn't recognize Mr. Kane and just thought they were a couple of college kids," LoTempio said. "We should be able to work things out." LoTempio told WGN that cabdrivers in Buffalo often lock their doors until the fare is paid because passengers sometimes flee without paying. He suggested that was partly to blame for what happened Sunday." link OK, you have yet to answer if the witness saw Kane attack the cabbie (the only real issue here...the rest is bulls#it). And now you supply evidence that Kane was pissed because the cabbie treated he and his cousin like regular passengers (of college age) and not like stars. I can't figure out if your justification for Kane beating a cabbie is due to $1.20 change, or not being recognized as an NHL player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 OK, you have yet to answer if the witness saw Kane attack the cabbie (the only real issue here...the rest is bulls#it). And now you supply evidence that Kane was pissed because the cabbie treated he and his cousin like regular passengers (of college age) and not like stars. I can't figure out if your justification for Kane beating a cabbie is due to $1.20 change, or not being recognized as an NHL player. Yeah see Dean I didn't interview the witnesses, so I don't know what they said. How 'bout you? And nice Dean-like mutation of the 'evidence' I provided that Kane was pissed at a lack of star-treatment - the only thing drunken-hack's own lawyer was implying was that if his drunken-hack client had recognized Kane for the millionaire he is, he probably would have expected to be paid - and well-tipped - and wouldn't have treated him like any other college kid and locked him in the back of his cab. (Not sure that's legal either, but we're sure to find out.) Your third sentence is unintelligible - how can I possibly be justifying something that I'm saying never happened in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Money will change hands. The cabbie will recant and "disremember". Life will go on as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Yeah see Dean I didn't interview the witnesses, so I don't know what they said. Actually, Deano, why yes - there were witnesses - all of whom seem to be supporting the Kanes' version of the events, which you'd know had you tuned into this morning's TV news here in the BuffTown. Which is it, Sen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Money will change hands. The cabbie will recant and "disremember". Life will go on as usual. My prediction - cabbie will do some jail time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 And nice Dean-like mutation of the 'evidence' I provided that Kane was pissed at a lack of star-treatment - the only thing drunken-hack's own lawyer was implying was that if his drunken-hack client had recognized Kane for the millionaire he is, he probably would have expected to be paid - and well-tipped - and wouldn't have treated him like any other college kid and locked him in the back of his cab. (Not sure that's legal either, but we're sure to find out.) So, Kane would have given the cabbie a bigger tip after receiving his $1.20 change, but since he didn't receive his change, he punched the cabbie and took his money back? Sure, that happens. Why not just let the cabbie keep the measly $1.20 and call it a day? Or, if he felt there was some impropriety, call the cab company, police, etc, if it is really that big of a deal. Smacking a cabbie and taking the fare back is hardly the way to settle this. And you have yet to deny he hit the cabbie, as far as I can tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 As always, there are at least two sides to every story... "The city cab driver who has accused National Hockey League star Patrick Kane and his cousin of robbing and attacking him Sunday morning has two drunken driving convictions and had no valid driver's license at the time of the incident, The Buffalo News has learned." Link - Buffalo Snooze article My take - recidivist drunk operating cab illegally without license locks two kids in the back of his cab - apparently a common practice among BuffTown hacks who often get stiffed on the fare transporting college kids from the ChipStrip. They get pissed, hand him $15 for the $13.80 fare and demand the $1.20 change that aforementioned recidivist drunk thought he'd just pocket. (Certainly they're not going to tip him for treating them like schitt.) Then the trouble starts. If illegal cab driver had not locked them in, he probably would have ended up with his fare and a nice tip. Stupid hack brought it on himself and this will be settled very quietly with a very small payout, if any at all. Next case... I wasn't aware that there's a section of your state law which provides excuses for assault. Interesting. Patrick Kane Taxi Cab Company - Dropping The Gloves On High Prices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Which is it, Sen? You into your cups this early Deano???? It's both - there were witnesses, and I didn't interview them. Kane's attorney said he's found information that will exonerate his client and disputed the cab driver's claims of injuries. "I know he [Radecki] said that, but it's not my client who committed any crimes against him," Cambria said. "When all of the facts and circumstances come out concerning the incident, then the public will have a better idea of what exactly happened and whether or not there is any criminal activity there...." "When all this is put into perspective, it's going to appear vastly different than the first impression." Why don't you calm down a bit, and let all the facts come out before you convict Kane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I wasn't aware that there's a section of your state law which provides excuses for assault. Interesting. Patrick Kane Taxi Cab Company - Dropping The Gloves On High Prices I can only reply the same way I replied to The Dean... Why don't you calm down a bit, and let all the facts come out before you convict Kane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 So, Kane would have given the cabbie a bigger tip after receiving his $1.20 change, but since he didn't receive his change, he punched the cabbie and took his money back? Sure, that happens. Why not just let the cabbie keep the measly $1.20 and call it a day? Or, if he felt there was some impropriety, call the cab company, police, etc, if it is really that big of a deal. Smacking a cabbie and taking the fare back is hardly the way to settle this. And you have yet to deny he hit the cabbie, as far as I can tell. I wasn't there. You saw him hit the cabbie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 OK, you have yet to answer if the witness saw Kane attack the cabbie (the only real issue here...the rest is bulls#it). And now you supply evidence that Kane was pissed because the cabbie treated he and his cousin like regular passengers (of college age) and not like stars. I can't figure out if your justification for Kane beating a cabbie is due to $1.20 change, or not being recognized as an NHL player. Treated like regular passengers? Locking people inside your cab is regular treatment of passengers. If that happened to me I might even give the guy a beat down. Or at least a call him every name in the book. That's wrong man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linksfiend Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I don't support either side here but I must say I'm pretty uncomfortable with cab drivers being able to unlawfully imprison their fares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 You into your cups this early Deano???? It's both - there were witnesses, and I didn't interview them. Kane's attorney said he's found information that will exonerate his client and disputed the cab driver's claims of injuries. "I know he [Radecki] said that, but it's not my client who committed any crimes against him," Cambria said. "When all of the facts and circumstances come out concerning the incident, then the public will have a better idea of what exactly happened and whether or not there is any criminal activity there...." "When all this is put into perspective, it's going to appear vastly different than the first impression." Why don't you calm down a bit, and let all the facts come out before you convict Kane? Actually, Deano, why yes - there were witnesses - all of whom seem to be supporting the Kanes' version of the events, which you'd know had you tuned into this morning's TV news here in the BuffTown. The bolded text suggests you believe the witnesses all support Kane's version. How do you know this? What is Kane's version (not "the Sen's fictional account")? Since you know the witness support Kane's version, you should be able to tell me a little bit about that. I didn't suggest YOU interviewed the witnesses, you implied you knew what the witnesses saw. Given your post, I inferred it was because you saw/heard them being interviewed. So what are you saying now? You believe the witnesses support Kane's version (still not clear on whether or not he hit the cabbie) because Cambria's statement? Let me make my questions very clear, Sen. Did you hear, read, any first had accounts from the witnesses? If so, what did they say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 The bolded text suggests you believe the witnesses all support Kane's version. How do you know this? What is Kane's version (not "the Sen's fictional account")? Since you know the witness support Kane's version, you should be able to tell me a little bit about that. I didn't suggest YOU interviewed the witnesses, you implied you knew what the witnesses saw. Given your post, I inferred it was because you saw/heard them being interviewed. So what are you saying now? You believe the witnesses support Kane's version (still not clear on whether or not he hit the cabbie) because Cambria's statement? Let me make my questions very clear, Sen. Did you hear, read, any first had accounts from the witnesses? If so, what did they say? LINK (Are we f%cking finished with this, Your Belligerence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 LINK "The Kane's were simply defending themselves." OK, question answered. Kane attacked the cabbie. Case will be settled quietly with Kane giving cabbie a large cash payment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I don't support either side here but I must say I'm pretty uncomfortable with cab drivers being able to unlawfully imprison their fares. Only airlines may do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 "The Kane's were simply defending themselves." OK, question answered. Kane attacked the cabbie. Case will be settled quietly with Kane giving cabbie a large cash payment. Lets see - cabbie has me locked unwillingly in the back of his cab. I want to get out but he won't let me out. He refuses to unlock the doors. Witnesses corroborate that fact. His own lawyer acknowledges that his client did as such. Goes on to say that in no way could this be described as a robbery. The odds of Radecki getting a large cash settlement are about as long as the odds of you not pouring yourself another drink in the next five minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts