As I understand the Blackhawk's policy, the issue should have been brought to the attention of HR immediately. It falls under their jurisdiction to address the problem. The report indicates that it was a full month before HR was notified.

If, as it appears, McD assumed responsibility for taking the issue to HR, I agree with the statement that SB "harbors the least amount of responsibility".

How much responsibility he should harbor is an interesting question. Presentism - judging past actions by today's standards - has become the norm. It is unclear to me whether SB had a responsibility to ensure that HIS BOSS followed through...as measured by the standards at that time.

To me, we need to be careful of applying today's standards to history, whether it be this situation or simply eating a hamburger. It is possible that people 50 years from now will judge us, who still eat meat, as utter barbarians, lesser humans and/or cannibals.

I cannot speak for all "Boomers" - and would be interested in the perspective of others in management roles during that time. But I can say that that had I been in a meeting with my boss 11 years ago and he/she told the group that they would take care of something, that was that. I would also be 100% certain that they would follow through on a timely manner.

So, I am uncomfortable with SB getting fired for his boss's obvious negligence. I see him as a bit of a scapegoat who was fired because somebody in that meeting needed to be sacrificed and he was one of the two remaining. I also don't agree that he "covered it up for 10 years" - to me, the clock stopped when HR (which did not report to SB) was notified.

All that said, I would have fired SB for the teams abysmal start this year.
- Snakebit12

You’re at your place of work. You witness a sexual assault and report it to your supervisor. A week later the person who committed the assault is still there and it appears nothing has been done. Do you follow up on the complaint taking above your boss’s head or do you look the other way and remain quiet. If you choose not to follow do you think you are right or do you think you’re an accessory to the cover up?

That’s basically where Bowman stands. He didn’t cover anything up, he did part of his job reporting the crime but he allowed the cover up to happen, essentially being an accessory to it. Or at least that’s how I view it.

been a bit under the weather the last few days. I have heard that both that John Doe 1 is KB and John Doe is KB

My understanding from the report is KB is John Doe and John Doe 1 was a player or org person KB confided in. Frustrating the media cannot even keep that straight.

Regardless, its horrible what KB has gone thru.

Let's think this through for a moment. Who are the players supposed to report this to (if they knew about it when it was happening)? Coach? GM? President of Hockey Operations? HR? Owner? It seemed like the coach, GM and Pres did know about this. I do not know how you can blame the players for this failure. Thinking about where I work, I would notify my supervisor, and then I would hope that it would be taken up from there. So those of you who say Toews, Kane, Keith are jacking this around, it is not their issue to resolve. They are not paid to make HR decisions.
- powerenforcer

It’s the organizations fault yes. But why is it that all the players that are now retired say everyone knew and the active players are lying through their teeth? They’re covering their own asses. Just come clean. I don’t really expect any repercussions for players. This is on all the staff who knew and did nothing or worse actively covered it up.

Beach is contending that not only were the players aware of it some were using homophobic slurs against him. If true it’s hard to defend the players even factoring in their age.
- paulr

and this is where everyone has to be careful, journalists and consumers of the info alike

He said he "feels" like everyone knew. Without saying more, as someone who has been in Kyle's shoes, it can feel like everyone knows, every whisper in the room is about you, every non-specific comment/slur was directed at you. It's devastating - of that, there is no doubt.

Sopel is now saying he "thinks most" people knew. While it may be true everyone did know, there's a lack of certainty there that might be important in determining how we feel about the individual players involved. The investigation could not confirm Sopel and Boynton's assertions and when they were pressed for specifics about who, what conversations had transpired that made them certain of that, etc, they couldn't provide those specifics. Back to fuzzy memories after 11 years and biases coming into effect.

As I said above, I hope the players who were there have a chance to make amends for whatever they did or did not do, should Beach want to have those conversations.

Beach is contending that not only were the players aware of it some were using homophobic slurs against him. If true it’s hard to defend the players even factoring in their age.
- paulr

Although that is bad, don't you think that happens every day in a professional/college/high school locker room in any sport? Maybe he was judging those comments from a different viewpoint.

According to capfriendly Kane is on the team as a non roster player along with stillman and Kairi. I don't think trades happen maybe at the deadline or offseason.
- Scott1977

Those three are in covid protocol. If you look at the Penguins, you will see that LeTang and Carter are both in covid protocol and not on the penquins teams roster . They show up as non-roster in cap friendly.

Although that is bad, don't you think that happens every day in a professional/college/high school locker room in any sport? Maybe he was judging those comments from a different viewpoint.
- powerenforcer

I get that but my point is now players from that team are saying they weren’t aware of what happened.

Thought some who remember when Beach was drafted and his time with the organIzation might find this interesting. Written in 2011 3 yrs after he was drafted.

Chicago Blackhawks: Will Kyle Beach Ever Make It to the NHL? https://syndication.bleac...ke-it-to-the-nhl.amp.html

And that draft yr: https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2008e.html
- Mr Ricochet

I recall going to a game in Hamilton to watch the Ice Hogs play during the NHL lockout year and the Hawks had Saad, Shaw, Kruger and Leddy playing with Rockford at the time. Watched Beach closely and remember being totally unimpressed with his skating and foot speed. Despite his size, to me he just didn't look like a candidate to make the Hawks or even play in the NHL.

His play and stats during his junior career were impressive, maybe with the exception of about 200 PIM's per year. But in that WHL,stats a can be very misleading because there are a lot of very young players and they are no match for a kid already in a man sized body.

been a bit under the weather the last few days. I have heard that both that John Doe 1 is KB and John Doe is KB

My understanding from the report is KB is John Doe and John Doe 1 was a player or org person KB confided in. Frustrating the media cannot even keep that straight.

Regardless, its horrible what KB has gone thru.
- glennjpawlak22

The report clearly states that they were two different players.

and this is where everyone has to be careful, journalists and consumers of the info alike

He said he "feels" like everyone knew. Without saying more, as someone who has been in Kyle's shoes, it can feel like everyone knows, every whisper in the room is about you, every non-specific comment/slur was directed at you. It's devastating - of that, there is no doubt.

Sopel is now saying he "thinks most" people knew. While it may be true everyone did know, there's a lack of certainty there that might be important in determining how we feel about the individual players involved. The investigation could not confirm Sopel and Boynton's assertions and when they were pressed for specifics about who, what conversations had transpired that made them certain of that, etc, they couldn't provide those specifics. Back to fuzzy memories after 11 years and biases coming into effect.

As I said above, I hope the players who were there have a chance to make amends for whatever they did or did not do, should Beach want to have those conversations.
- pdx2ord

You’re correct I’m sure Beach thought the whole world knew. But it’s the slurs directed at him that has me curious. As PE says slurs are always out there . I mean it wasn’t that long ago the F word was a very common thing to say to an opponent. Were the slurs directed at him prior to and after the incident or only after? If only after it would make me believe the players knew.

As I understand the Blackhawk's policy, the issue should have been brought to the attention of HR immediately. It falls under their jurisdiction to address the problem. The report indicates that it was a full month before HR was notified.

If, as it appears, McD assumed responsibility for taking the issue to HR, I agree with the statement that SB "harbors the least amount of responsibility".

How much responsibility he should harbor is an interesting question. Presentism - judging past actions by today's standards - has become the norm. It is unclear to me whether SB had a responsibility to ensure that HIS BOSS followed through...as measured by the standards at that time.

To me, we need to be careful of applying today's standards to history, whether it be this situation or simply eating a hamburger. It is possible that people 50 years from now will judge us, who still eat meat, as utter barbarians, lesser humans and/or cannibals.

I cannot speak for all "Boomers" - and would be interested in the perspective of others in management roles during that time. But I can say that that had I been in a meeting with my boss 11 years ago and he/she told the group that they would take care of something, that was that. I would also be 100% certain that they would follow through on a timely manner.

So, I am uncomfortable with SB getting fired for his boss's obvious negligence. I see him as a bit of a scapegoat who was fired because somebody in that meeting needed to be sacrificed and he was one of the two remaining. I also don't agree that he "covered it up for 10 years" - to me, the clock stopped when HR (which did not report to SB) was notified.

All that said, I would have fired SB for the teams abysmal start this year.
- Snakebit12

Fabulous post.

You’re correct I’m sure Beach thought the whole world knew. But it’s the slurs directed at him that has me curious. As PE says slurs are always out there . I mean it wasn’t that long ago the F word was a very common thing to say to an opponent Were the slurs directed at him prior to and after the incident or only after? If only after it would make me believe the players knew.
- paulr

Yeah, the specifics and timing details are critical here (at least for me in deciding whether I've lost all respect for each individual player involved or not). The players who teased him about his "boyfriend Brad" and the other player about the sex acts with Aldrich are at top of my lost respect list. Everyone else, it gets murkier depending on their individual involvement at the time.

Beach roomed with Shaw in Rockford and we all remember him throwing out that word at a ref, then having to walk the McD public apology plank (rightfully so). So, like you say, that was not an uncommon slur then (or, sadly I suspect, now).

As I understand the Blackhawk's policy, the issue should have been brought to the attention of HR immediately. It falls under their jurisdiction to address the problem. The report indicates that it was a full month before HR was notified.

If, as it appears, McD assumed responsibility for taking the issue to HR, I agree with the statement that SB "harbors the least amount of responsibility".

How much responsibility he should harbor is an interesting question. Presentism - judging past actions by today's standards - has become the norm. It is unclear to me whether SB had a responsibility to ensure that HIS BOSS followed through...as measured by the standards at that time.

To me, we need to be careful of applying today's standards to history, whether it be this situation or simply eating a hamburger. It is possible that people 50 years from now will judge us, who still eat meat, as utter barbarians, lesser humans and/or cannibals.

I cannot speak for all "Boomers" - and would be interested in the perspective of others in management roles during that time. But I can say that that had I been in a meeting with my boss 11 years ago and he/she told the group that they would take care of something, that was that. I would also be 100% certain that they would follow through on a timely manner.

So, I am uncomfortable with SB getting fired for his boss's obvious negligence. I see him as a bit of a scapegoat who was fired because somebody in that meeting needed to be sacrificed and he was one of the two remaining. I also don't agree that he "covered it up for 10 years" - to me, the clock stopped when HR (which did not report to SB) was notified.

All that said, I would have fired SB for the teams abysmal start this year.
- Snakebit12

And relative to your last two paragraphs, that is exactly what Danny Wirtz did. They solved a problem (rudderless ship taking on water) by taking advantage of an opportunity (scandal leads to cleaned house) to do so. Could be wrong, but I don't think so.

Exactly. A week after the incident, Beach tells coach Paul Vincent (the only member of management who acted properly) and he runs it up the flagpole. Why do people assume that everyone knew? Sopel and Boynton mentioned knowing about Aldrich's sexual preference and knowing something was up. They could not provide any details of knowing about the incident with Beach. They claim they knew that Aldrich engaged in inappropriate conduct, but that could have been the pictures he sent to another player.

And we don't know if anything was said to the captains. Maybe they discussed with with Beach and they told him to go to a coach he trusted? Maybe Beach didn't say a word. I do like how many people are going after Kane here for "what he knew."

Nothing is going to happen to the players. If Beach would have approached Keith, Seabrook or Toews with the incident and they told him to ignore it, then you have something. The fact that upper management knew about the incident a week after it happened pretty much makes the player coverup theory total bullpoop.
- Tanuki

Spot on.

Based on Sopel's statement yesterday (differs a bit from his original statements to Westhead), he and Boynton knew, took it Vincent, who told them he would take it to HR. And as Sopel said, they then assumed it was being handled and felt it wasn't their place to follow-up. When the players came back the following year and Aldrich was gone, they assumed it had been handled.

https://twitter.com/emily.../1453445863188086789?s=20

As clumsy, ill-advised, and cringeworthy as the Kane/Toews statements were, Toews' especially, they do both mention that they wished they had tried to get more details and had done more to help Beach.

Regardless of the definitive statements on SM, there are of course questions about what they knew, who knew at what level of specificity, how each individual responded, and who did the harassing still out there. Not sure we can answer them without Beach and/or those players sharing more specifics. For example, even after reading everything and watching Beach's interview, I'm personally still not clear on whether the FO and players knew it was a full-blown sexual assault or it was sexual advances that were rebuffed and associated threats to the players' careers.

In the end, what matters is that Beach can hopefully start healing and the players who did not do right by him can spend a lot of time looking in the mirror and deciding how to behave differently going forward. Maybe, if Beach is open to it, they can try and make amends.
- pdx2ord

Hadn't it been handled by then? The guy was out and got no reference letter. The issue is the length of time it took, and the reason for the delay. And Gary's actions. Aldrich was around for the Finals, the players were gone for the summer and the scum was indeed gone. Should've been gone immediately rather than two weeks later. Hawks should have offered support to Beach immediately.

This is well said.
- mohel

Lol the trolls are coming out in force.

Yeah, the specifics and timing details are critical here (at least for me in deciding whether I've lost all respect for each individual player involved or not). The players who teased him about his "boyfriend Brad" and the other player about the sex acts with Aldrich are at top of my lost respect list. Everyone else, it gets murkier depending on their individual involvement at the time.

Beach roomed with Shaw in Rockford and we all remember him throwing out that word at a ref, then having to walk the McD public apology plank (rightfully so). So, like you say, that was not an uncommon slur then (or, sadly I suspect, now).
- pdx2ord

Not saying it was right but this was a common thing guys said to each other on a team. Was on quite a few teams, football especially, if teammates didn't feel you were pulling your weight. Not saying it was right but it happened all the time.

Here’s my $0.02 on how it should have been handled, unfortunately I have terminated some long term employees in my career. Once the incident is reported, you cannot assume that the predator is guilty.
1. You send the accused home, cannot report to work until notified.
2. You prioritize the investigation, with a target of said investigation to be completed within 72 hours.
3. If accused is found guilty after investigation, accused is asked to report to management.
4. Once accused reports, you inform him of investigation results and inform him of employment termination.
5. Security follows him to collect personal belongings and walks him off premises.
6. NHL, NHLPA, and police are notified of results of investigation.
7. Victim is sent to counseling and management should follow up every couple of days with victim.
If the investigation would have been completed in a timely manner, management would have determined that it was not actually harassment, but assault.
- Angotti

Yep.
Perfect.

LOL

You obviously care or you wouldn’t have put your 2 cents in.

Everyone is hating the Blackhawks and I love it. TARNISHED cups. Toews is a coward. Love it
- KINGS67

Lol you are pathetic...go pound sand...
You should be proud of Richards, Voynov, and company as well.... Douche

As I understand the Blackhawk's policy, the issue should have been brought to the attention of HR immediately. It falls under their jurisdiction to address the problem. The report indicates that it was a full month before HR was notified.

If, as it appears, McD assumed responsibility for taking the issue to HR, I agree with the statement that SB "harbors the least amount of responsibility".

How much responsibility he should harbor is an interesting question. Presentism - judging past actions by today's standards - has become the norm. It is unclear to me whether SB had a responsibility to ensure that HIS BOSS followed through...as measured by the standards at that time.

To me, we need to be careful of applying today's standards to history, whether it be this situation or simply eating a hamburger. It is possible that people 50 years from now will judge us, who still eat meat, as utter barbarians, lesser humans and/or cannibals.

I cannot speak for all "Boomers" - and would be interested in the perspective of others in management roles during that time. But I can say that that had I been in a meeting with my boss 11 years ago and he/she told the group that they would take care of something, that was that. I would also be 100% certain that they would follow through on a timely manner.

So, I am uncomfortable with SB getting fired for his boss's obvious negligence. I see him as a bit of a scapegoat who was fired because somebody in that meeting needed to be sacrificed and he was one of the two remaining. I also don't agree that he "covered it up for 10 years" - to me, the clock stopped when HR (which did not report to SB) was notified.

All that said, I would have fired SB for the teams abysmal start this year.
- Snakebit12

I thought about this as well, but as a senior leader in an organization, regardless of title and reporting structure, you have a duty to ensure your employee's well being. Saying "it's not my job" or "I told my boss" is not enough action. Would we have accept this excuse if it was our child you experienced this abuse? Of course not. I will grant that McD created an environment that made it very difficult for Stan to take action. However, if Stan truly disagreed with how the situation was handled (and it was against his moral code) he could have and should have resigned. At that point he would have been able to get another job in hockey, unlike now.

As I understand the Blackhawk's policy, the issue should have been brought to the attention of HR immediately. It falls under their jurisdiction to address the problem. The report indicates that it was a full month before HR was notified.

If, as it appears, McD assumed responsibility for taking the issue to HR, I agree with the statement that SB "harbors the least amount of responsibility".

How much responsibility he should harbor is an interesting question. Presentism - judging past actions by today's standards - has become the norm. It is unclear to me whether SB had a responsibility to ensure that HIS BOSS followed through...as measured by the standards at that time.

To me, we need to be careful of applying today's standards to history, whether it be this situation or simply eating a hamburger. It is possible that people 50 years from now will judge us, who still eat meat, as utter barbarians, lesser humans and/or cannibals.

I cannot speak for all "Boomers" - and would be interested in the perspective of others in management roles during that time. But I can say that that had I been in a meeting with my boss 11 years ago and he/she told the group that they would take care of something, that was that. I would also be 100% certain that they would follow through on a timely manner.

So, I am uncomfortable with SB getting fired for his boss's obvious negligence. I see him as a bit of a scapegoat who was fired because somebody in that meeting needed to be sacrificed and he was one of the two remaining. I also don't agree that he "covered it up for 10 years" - to me, the clock stopped when HR (which did not report to SB) was notified.

All that said, I would have fired SB for the teams abysmal start this year.
- Snakebit12

I thought about this as well, but as a senior leader in an organization, regardless of title and reporting structure, you have a duty to ensure your employee's well being. Saying "it's not my job" or "I told my boss" is not enough action. Would we have accept this excuse if it was our child you experienced this abuse? Of course not. I will grant that McD created an environment that made it very difficult for Stan to take action. However, if Stan truly disagreed with how the situation was handled (and it was against his moral code) he could have and should have resigned. At that point he would have been able to get another job in hockey, unlike now.

The LA Kings are a garbage organization!

Kopitar is a coward.

Doughty is always gonna be a piece of poop scumbag loser!

Dustin Brown is one of the biggest wieners in the league and on top of it he’s a coward!

All the other meaningless players in between are ugly and fat and slow.

Their fans are all cowards! And also ugly.

Anyone who says otherwise is clearly just an awful human being.

I thought about this as well, but as a senior leader in an organization, regardless of title and reporting structure, you have a duty to ensure your employee's well being. Saying "it's not my job" or "I told my boss" is not enough action. Would we have accept this excuse if it was our child you experienced this abuse? Of course not. I will grant that McD created an environment that made it very difficult for Stan to take action. However, if Stan truly disagreed with how the situation was handled (and it was against his moral code) he could have and should have resigned. At that point he would have been able to get another job in hockey, unlike now.
- DarthKane

If that was the policy they.wanted at a certain level, it should have been communicated to those individuals if you want it to be a fireable offense. To decide later that the company policy was not strong enough and fire a guy who followed the written rules seems wrong to me. Also, for McD, Gary, and Stan to get the same punishment also seems wrong.

If that was the policy they.wanted at a certain level, it should have been communicated to those individuals if you want it to be a fireable offense. To decide later that the company policy was not strong enough and fire a guy who followed the written rules seems wrong to me. Also, for McD, Gary, and Stan to get the same punishment also seems wrong.
- mohel

Absolutely correct brother but you know as well as I and everyone else that everything is looked at through the lens of today.

Hi, Sage. Two questions....what are thoughts on the game last night?

And how's the recovery going for Mrs. Sage?

Well, one more....does she know that you are called Sage here?
- mohel

They generally played well last nite - but they just can’t score - especially with Kane not scoring even when he’s playing. Both goals were off the rush last nite - my fading recollection is that most of the goals this season - certainly 5x5 - have been off the rush - which is fine, but they have too little dangerous 5x5 ozone time, too few skaters at or going toward the net….

Mrs. Sage is recovering nicely, walking well with a walker. New knee a definite improvement over before.

If she new anyone called me Sage, she’d be laughing so violently that she might reopen the surgical scar.