Guys, please put all your thoughts here (if you posted them in another thread, repost them here) regarding The Oregonian (specifically Canzano, since he is the one I’m angry with for demanding Luke not pitch, an outrageous “moral superiority”/high-horse request). There are a lot of contradictions, hypocrisy, etc, and I can’t find or remember them all myself. It’s flat out “virtue signaling” by Canzano.
This is the article I’d like to deconstruct. It’s a complete mess from a logical standpoint. Any examples you can think of that contradict, etc.
Once we get them all here in one thread, I can put thoughts together an article and send it to him. Canzano and I have been speaking via PM. He told me to call the show as a standard caller, but there’s too much to discuss in a couple minute phone call. I asked him to book me for a half hour and never heard back. So I want to collect all key points and put them in writing here, then send them over to him and see what he does.
Again, I don’t support Luke, yet I don’t support a media member calling for his head, either. Especially when said media member seems to carefully select when he’s going to call for someone’s head and is a hypocritical walking contradiction with an agenda. Let’s get at it and try to stay on topic. If you want to talk about the other issues, use the threads below.
Turn on your adblocker before viewing any Canzano links. Can’t help the guy out
From his article:
B) Some people, myself included, don’t believe a registered sex offender has a place on a major college athletics team. I don’t believe an athlete who has committed a violent offense, including domestic violence, belongs there either
I mean, with this one Silver already showed him contradicting himself by praising Oregon for giving a felony assault (that lead to murder) a 2nd chance. Any more examples of this? I’m trying to remember any other weapon/assault charges…Beavs or Ducks, just to see if he’s always inconsistent. Coye Francies had that weapon charge, but it didn’t lead to assault. Can’t think of any others.
Oh, any OT comment will be deleted. As stated, post them in the other threads. This is to collect data.
Again, anything but what’s asked for in the OP will be deleted. Can’t be anymore clear.
Let’s do this.
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2009/11/legarrette_blount_could_learn.html
Is it fair to ask if they’ve done background checks for violent assault or sex offending as part of the Oregonian hiring process? And if not, why, since it is so important to them?
Is it fair to ask for a list of names of their workers so we, the public, can go research their backgrounds? I mean they are public figures, and the justification they’re giving us is that this was fair game for Luke since he’s a public figure.
I also am curious how they’d feel if Luke killed himself from all the shame. But again, I’m not sure if that’s a legit point. But I do wonder it since public humiliation/shaming people is well documented in leading to suicides.
I don’t want to tangent the conversation, and I’m not sure if these type of angles are on-point enough.
I noticed that any comment about the Oregonian editor’s 1998 DUI conviction is immediately deleted.
Point C from his article:
C) I don’t believe Casey knew about Heimlich’s past until The Oregonian/OregonLive discovered it. Doesn’t excuse him. It’s exposed a flaw in his recruiting process.
Where was he when Chip missed Colt’s steroid use, Blount’s drug abuse, etc etc? Give me more examples.
I actually agree with him that background checks are probably wise for any recruit. But you have to hold all coaches to that standard then, and to my knowledge he hasn’t.
Regarding background checks, would the recruit have to consent to one? I mean, when you apply for a job you usually have to check a box for consent. Would such a requirement be a deterrent in the recruiting process if OSU is the only school conducting background checks? I don’t want to, nor do I, support the “win at all costs” mentality, but I just wanted to put this out there. I’d like to see every school held to the same standard.
Regarding background checks on all recruits, how much money would that cost the university/tax payers if every university in the state with sports had to do background checks? Also, when do you request the background check in the recruiting process; and if there is something on their record, who do you report that to so other colleges and universities know about their offense so they don’t waste their time in recruiting the player?
There is a lot of regulations, rules, and bylaws that would need to be written by the NCAA in order for this to be required. Universities are not employers of the student athletes, so they aren’t required to run background checks unless the student athlete gets a job, which I believe is a violation of NCAA rules for Scholarship athletes to hold a job?
The demand that Heimlich never play for OSU again is absurd. Baseball players represent their universities the same way anyone represents any organization they’re a part of. It’s not clear what Canzano thinks is an acceptable future for him if his juvenile offense prohibits him from being a part of any group. Why is it any more okay for Luke to work at, say, Nike and be a representative of the company, than it is to play a sport at OSU?
Seems to me a far better outcome would be for Luke to become vocal about the subject and use his visibility to bring awareness and education to try to prevent other teenagers from making a similar mistake.
The demand that Heimlich never play for OSU again is absurd.
Yep, it’s what made me turn on the O. At first I thought they did a good job with the story, but once Canzano comes in basically demanding Luke not pitch (when he has no pending crime) and uses distorted logic that contradicts many of his pasts stances, it switches to bizarre very quickly.
So maybe asking him what he thinks the proper future for Luke is? Is it okay for him to work anywhere ever again, or should he just retire/eat pringles in his mom’s basement/kill himself in Canzano’s world?
Also maybe ask why the fact that this person plays a sport seems to make such a difference to Canzano. If the average Joe did this, he’s implied that’s not as a big a story. You can’t take those conflicting stances AND claim to care first and foremost about victims.
I don’t believe DM does background checks on all his profile articles – Tres Tinkle?
If this were discovered about a promising scholarship musician – would they be dismissed from the university orchestra or denied a promising solo career and never allowed to perform or play again? OTOH, nobody would probably write about it. Luke’s talent just happens to be pitching a baseball.
It is this attitude that if someone who committed this crime garners too much fame, money, or success after they have moved on with life and paid for the crime according to the dictates of society then we reserve the right to take it all away as another punishment. This bothers me. Who gets to decide that future punishment needs to happen again and for which mistakes. I do not have the same mistakes as Luke in my past, but I would not enjoy it if my success motivated someone from my past to desire punishment.
This is also the reason that victims do not get to decide the punishment as they are notoriously lenient or want to exact a pound of flesh for every mood swing or bad day. Because of the nature of this crime anyone who finds out about it will also feel like a victim to a degree. This is one of the arguments for keeping this type of crime private as possible. If society en mass discovers the crime they could be motivated to enact public shaming or there are cases of mob justice. I don’t know that is healthy for everyone to know about these past events, just as I do not want to know about every recovering gambling addict, sex addict, alcoholic, or drug addict. This does not mean we completely hide past crimes.
What gives Canzano the right to be judge, jury, and executioner of how the rest of Luke’s life turns out? People want, can and do change their ways all the time, but Luke knows how his one lack of judgement and character can damage himself the rest of his life. Are we as a society not claiming and spouting how we should try to rehabilitate people with crimes to keep them from becoming repeat offenders? This is a prime example of where Luke has to follow all team rules in order to stay on the team.
What tells me that Luke is a mature person is the fact that he pulled himself from pitching in the Super Regional to keep his team focused, doesn’t that say a lot about who he is as a person? He thinks of others and not himself. I have known someone who committed a measure 11 crime and contemplated suicide, but was taken in by family instead and they turned themselves in and he did the time. While he was doing time, he was able to teach inmates to read, saved a guards life, and was well liked by the guards in the prison. He made a life for himself in the prison that was positive instead of dwelling on his crime and had the, “woe is me” mentality. So yes, people can change in the right circumstances. He just needs to be careful in not letting himself get on an island.
Sorry, I digress.
Just want to point out that I’m a Beav, not a Bear. Berkeley? Gross.
There have been plenty if pro players with felony convictions who have continued to have a career, without Canzano asking them to walk away from their careers. Blazers have a had several. He’s been critical of them, but never asked them to retire from the team.
Any specific names he wrote about on the Blazers?
No link and not sure his opinion, but worth digging up when Lamichael clapped his girlfriend. That was a current in that moment as well. Not 6 years ago.
How about Blount punching Boise and coming back. Where was his stance.
I seem to remember he was rightfully on the uo basketball players who raped a woman. Again currently and the school hid it so they could play in the tourney.
Just a few to dig into.
If anyone could dig up links for these would appreciate it.
Canzano’s tone towards Woods and Blount seems pretty amiable here. He says, “let’s discuss the value of a second chance.” – I guess LH doesn’t deserve a second chance….
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2009/11/legarrette_blount_could_learn.html
I believe the victim is now about 11 years old and is trying to forget what happened. How does the Oregonian’s bashing of Heimlich help her forget?
Anyone close to the family, or even in the same town, will be able to out the victim, too.
The reporters from the O should be taken to task for what they did. IMO it is egregious as Heimlich’s actions.
Apparently he got approval from the mother, who said the girl approved of the story and it gave her a voice…so I don’t think that angle is going anywhere.
https://twitter.com/johncanzanobft/status/873757425467179008
I don’t think the girl was asked at all. The mom made the decision but her opinion is much less important than the girls. I find it extremely hard to believe an 11 year old wants to be known by all her middle school and high school peers grom here on out as the abused one. Probably would make it very hard for her to fit in or have boys much interested in dating her during formative years. These possible yet to develop scars could end up even worse as these years tend to have more lasting impact into adult life. I think the Oregonian did a very huge disservice to her all for the sake of a story.
Blount punching someone as an adult and on the football field in IMO should have more bearing on college eligibility than an event as a minor. Luke has never disrespectef his college opportunity unlike Blount and the Oregon basketball players. You have to go back 6 plus years, none of it as an adult, versus the others were all current transgressions as an adult. Big difference and by all indications Luke has been on the right path for many years and his entire adult life.
I don’t want to be overly cynical here, but I wonder if the Mom figured she might as well try to stop the big payday coming Heimlich’s way once Moran got a hold of her about the citation in Benton County. I don’t blame her, I think it’s human nature for a victim and their family to not want the criminal to have any success irregardless of whether they have successfully served their sentence.
F) Worth noting that Heimlich was apparently ignorant of Oregon law that required sex offenders to register in person within 10 days of their 21st birthday. He was cited for this. That’s on him. If you’re a registered sex offender, you’d better make it your business to know the law. Anyone blaming the law enforcement officer who caught the failure to re-register? Stop now. That officer is trying to protect the public.
Didn’t Luke’s attorney make a statement that he had registered in Washington/didn’t have to register in Oregon, and that’s why the charge was dropped? Can’t find it now. Anyone clarify?
G) There are about 750,000 sex offenders in a country with a population of 321 million. If we use those same ratios on Oregon State’s 2016 campus enrollment (31,303), you’d expect there to be approximately 70 registered sex offenders on campus. The other 69 or so are allowed to go to school, matriculate, pursue rehabilitation, etc. without the rest of us up in arms. Some are fashioning this into an argument as to why Heimlich shouldn’t have been singled out. I’ll go back to “Point B” above. As an athletics representative of the university and public figure, Heimlich plays by different rules. Same would go if it turned out after three years at the university, hypothetically, that a registered sex offender was the campus student body president.
Again, you can’t make this claim that it’s him being an athlete as to why it matters, and then claim to care about the victims. What about the other 69 victims? Canzano doesn’t care about them because the perps don’t play sports. Solid logic, John. Then why get on the high-horse and virtue signal you’re a champion of victims? Gross.
Seriously very good points. Not defending lukes previous actions but on the Oregonian being full of it. They should dig into every single athlete in Oregon and Washington than. And we should have every single piece of info on all journalists and their past too. If he digs into all athletes and all journalist and we have a full state wide cleanse I’m all for that
The Benton Co DA dismissed the charge on 5/17/17
“for the reason that: follow-up investigation reveals insufficient evidence of defendant’s knowledge of Oregon reporting requirements.”
I) For those making the, “He deserves a second chance!” argument … where is that written? You make your own second chance in life. Also, your first. Heimlich is in control of his future just as he’s always been. He will determine where his life leads. Your actions, if inappropriate, will result in opportunities being closed to you. That is no one’s fault but your own. It’s probably a good message for young people to absorb.
This one he should be absolutely killed on. So many times in the past he was the virtue-signalling champion of second chances.
M) The usual partisan bickering between Ducks fans and Beavers fans mostly doesn’t bother me. But when it comes to a serious issue regarding a registered sex offender and a child who was molested, it sickens me that some simply draw their conclusion based upon which team they root for. We need to remove the sports here and get back to the notion that human life has value. If you’re a Ducks fan celebrating the bad news, grow up. If you’re a Beavers fan who is digging in and attacking the story — or worse, the victim — take a big step back and ask yourself if you’ve lost your way. This isn’t a partisan issue. It’s a human issue. There’s only one side.
So here Canzano says we need to “remove sports” from the equation. Yet earlier he says Luke deserves this more than the other 69 perps on campus because he plays sports. Then he says “human life has value”, but in point B he says the victim’s life has more value than Luke’s. Just…extremely odd logic. Canzano is now the voice in which lives have value, how much, etc? He seems to think all lives have value, yet…some more than others…and someone sports factor in, even though we need to remove them from the equation. Twilight Zone logic. Bizarre.
I don’t read blogs other than this one, and also the comments in the oregonian.. It seems to be that Duck fans have been remarkably polite. Only a few addressing it from a duck/beav standpoint.
I don’t understand this:
>C) I don’t believe Casey knew about Heimlich’s past until The Oregonian/OregonLive discovered it. Doesn’t excuse him. It’s exposed a flaw in his recruiting process. A source inside the baseball program told me on Friday that Casey doesn’t conduct background checks when recruiting. He never has. My suspicion is that a lot of major college coaches heard about this story, turned to their staff and said, “We need to conduct background checks — like now.” Casey should have known. Someone on his staff should have caught it before reporter Danny Moran did.
Heimlich’s records were sealed, since he was a juvenile offender, a background check wouldn’t have revealed anything until his failure to register. Are they supposed to run a background check on every player every day to see if anything comes up?
Juvenile records are not sealed in Washington. I’m not sure of the process but wouldn’t all criminal charges show up on a background check? Or is it state-to-state, as in only Oregon charges would show?
>Juvenile records are not sealed in Washington.
Interesting. I just did a little research and it looks like in Washington, juvenile records aren’t sealed automatically but they can be sealed if you meet some set of criteria (that aren’t listed) and ask a judge to seal them.
I’m not sure if they did that or not but I thought I’d read somewhere that they were sealed in Washington but I don’t know for sure.
Yeah, my understanding was that the Washington information was available, but nobody was running any background checks on Heimlich. I do think the argument can be made that Heimlich and his family could/should have been forthright during the recruiting process, but they probably understood the consequences and believed again that Heimlich had served his sentence as a minor.
But it has to be part of the reason they wanted him out of Puyallup as early as possible.
Angry — do you want me to re-post in this thread my recent posts in the other two threads? Or, since you are already aware of those prior posts, would that just clutter this new thread?
Regarding your upcoming discussion with Canzano, I think there is a danger in trying to do too much, and listing too many points/contradictions/fallacies. Canzano, in response, will likely take that as an opportunity to focus on the less important points, and ignore the more important ones.
I think a better approach is to focus, laser-like, on a few key points.
The CWS begins in a few days. The key question is whether Luke should be allowed to pitch in the CWS, or not. Canzano takes the position that OSU should prohibit Luke from pitching in the CWS, and that Luke is not entitled to a second chance. But that seems hypocritical and inconsistent with Canzano’s prior positions in cases such as Rodney Woods and LeGarette Blount, where Canzano praised the University of Oregon for giving second chances to athletes who committed serious, violent offenses (and did so as adults, not as juveniles).
It will be difficult — to say the least — for Canzano to defend his draconian and extreme position that a juvenile conviction for child molestation (not rape) justifies an absolute prohibition on future participation in college athletics. Canzano’s defense will be made more difficult by Canzano’s strong advocacy for second chances given to Duck athletes.
Meanwhile, as a policy matter, Canzano’s position against second chances for juvenile sex offenders is undercut by the long and detailed New Yorker article I referenced yesterday: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/03/14/when-kids-are-accused-of-sex-crimes I think it would be very useful for Canzano to read that New Yorker article, if you can get Canzano to do so.
Yes, repost and chime in with any opinions on my thoughts. Maybe I’m wrong in my thinking…I want to stick to facts and logic – zero emotional arguments.
Makes you wonder if Luke’s best option would be playing in Japan. Good money playing at a high level.
Q) For those who say Heimlich has, “Paid his debt to society” or “Been punished for his crime,” and should be left alone — huh? An important part of his punishment is that he has to register as a sex offender. There’s a reason a felony crime is a felony crime. The punishment is supposed to act as a deterrent.
Again, can anyone confirm? I believe he did register in WA under his family address, and didn’t have to in OR because of that? Anyway, the charge was dropped for some reason like this, to my knowledge. Please clarify so I can write an accurate piece for JC.
R) Let’s be clear: I don’t wish for Heimlich to die, or rot, or never be allowed to better himself. I don’t know how anyone could draw that conclusion. I feel awful for the victim of his crime. I think about her first. I pray for her. And I know she’s in for a long recovery. She had her childhood stolen. She will deal with this for life. Long after that child, I think about the person who victimized her. The only positive that can come from this story is that Heimlich lives a long, productive life that has meaning. That he looks back at age 90 and realizes that he’s overcome a horrible crime and done the best he could. The meaning in his life does not rely upon baseball. When you make it about that, you minimize the value of his life.
WTF is he even talking about here? Yes, only dicks victim blame, so I think most people agree with that part. Nobody is blaming her and we all wish her well, right? I’d assume so. Canzano then gets back on his high horse and claims he doesn’t want Luke to die, rot, etc, and wants him to have a productive life. Yet, he then writes, “The meaning in his life does not rely upon baseball.” Says who? If that’s his natural gift then it’s his entire life. So he wants him to have a productive life, just not at baseball. WTF? So he can go work at Nike but not MLB. Why? Again, terrible logic. I don’t know if Luke has any interest in this, but if he truly has become a good guy, he can do a lot more with a large platform like MLB and become a spokesman for these issues. I’m not saying he will do that, and he might very well be a piece of shit just trying to get out of this situation, but if he wants to do it, he has more opportunity to bring light to these issues, etc with a larger platform. I don’t care either way what happens to Luke, but I do care about the terrible logic of Canzano here. Canzano also speaks from a position of authority, that he knows the victim will deal with this for life. McKalk said yesterday that he was molested and gives two shits to this day. I witnessed physical abuse as a kid, give two shits about it, and maybe got into just a handful of fights my entire life. So, it’s a bit offensive for JC to act like he’s an authority on the matter and that everyone is doomed to this fate. BTW, I was on a jury last year for a human trafficking case, and one of the questions they asked the jurors was how many had been abused (they were trying to remove the biased ones). About 30% of the women raised their hands. I was in shock. But when asked what their current professions were, etc, almost all of them had gone on to lead productive lives. Human mind is resilient. I don’t think JC understands this. Again, I am NOT saying she will recover, it will be easy, etc, just that JC has no fucking clue what he’s talking about in that he knows she will suffer for life. She might, and that would be terrible, but he doesn’t know that.
According to the Moran article, Heimlich registered as a sex offender in Benton County after arriving at Oregon State. Heimlich also met the law requirements when he changed addresses.
His problem was that he failed to report to authorities within 10 days of turning 21 but the charges were dismissed on May 17th.
Why did he suddenly stop registering when he had been doing it his entire life? I thought I read the attorney said that since WA was his permanent address and he registered there, he was okay, and that’s why it was dismissed. Maybe it was an ABer who wrote that, though.
I’ve been following this story closely but I am not aware of reading anything about his attorney’s comments on the WA address.
Attorney said he was not required to register annually in Oregon.
Okay. That’s what I thought.
He followed the law and registered when he moved to Oregon, and registered again when he moved and is not required to register annually. But the law says within 10 days of turning 21 you need to register.
Seems strange to me…
I always thought that Canzano was a dick, he has just cemented that to me over the past week.
M) If you’re a Beavers fan who is digging in and attacking the story — or worse, the victim — take a big step back and ask yourself if you’ve lost your way.”This isn’t a partisan issue. It’s a human issue. There’s only one side.”
Point A: Is there any proof that there are Beaver fans that are attacking the victim????? This is a false assertion and quite insulting to Beaver nation.
Point B: Given today’s political climate and all time levels of distrust of the media, it will be natural that people will attack the story. Canzano is clear proof of someone pushing some sort of agenda that gives the struggling Oregonian more attention and $$$$.
Point C: Canzano is too ignorant to acknowledge opposing points of views.
There are numerous views to this story and all of these views should be acknowledged. Some people believe that LH should be given an opportunity to better his life and given a second shot. Others feel he should be locked up his entire life. There is no right answer to this debate, yet Canzano believes there is only one side to this issue.
“There is no right answer to this debate, yet Canzano believes there is only one side to this issue.”
That’s what Canzano is saying at this moment. But it’s not what he has said at other moments. At those other moments, he was eager to focus on the “other side” of the issue, and argue for second chances for adults who had committed violent offenses, while ignoring the victims of those offenses in those cases.
Canzano’s statement that “there is only one side to this issue” is wrong, and ignorant. Of course there is more than one side to this issue (again, Canzano should read the New Yorker article). Canzano does not know all the facts. Not even close. And the Oregonian did not know all the facts before it rushed to publish its initial article, to be sure it impacted the upcoming super regionals and got maximum attention.
I would ask Canzano why he refuses to differentiate between a minor and an adult as it relates to sex crime convictions and rehabilitation and why he has not taken the time to do any research on it. The New Yorker article takes about 10 or 15 minutes to read.
Since we aren’t talking about a current crime, I would be curious to see how Canzano feels about Altman and Riley continuing to coach despite essentially playing dumb to sexual assault situations under their leadership. If Brenda Tracy had not come forward, we would still have no knowledge of those events and Altman was part of a bumbling press conference where he pretended to be in the dark regarding Brandon Austin’s trouble at Providence. Canzano called for Altman’s firing at the time, does he still take that position? He apparently believes in second chances for leaders who fail miserably at taking a proactive stance against sexual assault.
Canzano called for Altman’s firing
Did he really? He will probably use that to say “See, I’m not anti-Beavs…” etc. So is he completely arbitrary? He called for Altman’s firing, didn’t call for Riley’s…wants Luke to sit, didn’t want the felons on the Ducks to sit. It’s hard to make sense of him other than he seems to take the contrarian view and/or gets on his high horse and virtue signal.
This is an old Facebook post of Canzano’s. My computer is acting funky, maybe someone can link the article? If this does not work?
Ducks basketball coach Dana Altman should have been fired months ago… now the UO faces a lawsuit that should do the job. Link: http://www.oregonlive.com/…/canzano_every_day_oregon_stan
Here’s that link.
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2015/01/canzano_every_day_oregon_stand.html
And here’s a link to a 2017 article by John Canzano, praising Altman and calling him “a terrific coach” and “a deeply religious man”. http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2017/03/canzano_oregon_ducks_final_fou.html
Canzano references his previous article (cited by mcKalk and Cake above), mentioning that Altman “played players who were under investigation for sexual assault.” But then Canzano manages to see “the other side” of the issue, to justify giving Altman a second chance:
“Maybe we’ll never agree on what Altman should have done. Maybe none of us would have done better. Maybe I’d have blown it worse than Altman. Tough to say when you’re not walking in his wing-tips. But what I like most now about that period of time is that Altman announced after he’d move away from building his program with transfers. He committed to reinventing the way he’d construct the roster, and no one can argue that the character of this Final Four roster is impeccable.
Altman did that. He built it. The Ducks don’t win it without him building the roster and coaching it.”
So, Canzano initially insisted that Altman to be fired by Oregon for playing players who were at the same time being actively investigated for sexual assault. However, Canzano’s position now is that Altman is a terrific coach and a great guy. Altman redeemed himself in Canzano’s eyes, and Canzano now sees another “terrific” side to Altman (despite Altman and the Ducks having ignored and disrespected female victims and all women on the Oregon campus by their earlier misconduct) . Meanwhile, in the case of Luke Heimlich, juvenile sex offender, there is only one side to the story, and no second chance should be granted.
Anyone remember the team’s general performance around that time? When he called for the firing, where they doing poorly?
At the time he wrote this about Altman, was it during that stretch when Altman wasn’t doing so well? I’m just wondering why just this one time he called for a Duck to get punished. I can’t find any other instance of him doing this, so I wonder if it’s b/c the team wasn’t doing great at that time and he wanted a new coach…if not, what’s the pattern? it seems random otherwise
I don’t see a pattern, I don’t think Canzano is anti-Beaver. He’s an inconsistent hypocrite.
He’s grandstanding, in a time where news print is a dying medium. He’s random in who deserves second chances or Heimlich is the only one who doesn’t might be a better assessment of his comments.
Canzano seems like he’s confusing this event with other cases that are completely different. A lot of these athete/sexual crimes go unpunished and the athletes are allowed to play and given honors. This is not the case here. The perp admitted guilt, did his time, registered as a sex offender and has been shamed in court of public opinion. That is a really different context from all the other cases where the athlete “gets away with it” or there is a cover up on part of police/school admins and is allowed to play while the victim gets no justice. I feel like that’s an important distinction that I haven’t seen anywhere.
I think Canzano is virtue signaling to get clicks and judging by his history regarding the Duck’s misdeeds he is not treating these cases with the same weight. So yeah, I think something is going on with him and his motivations.
Well he does view molestation as worse that murder so ther
Opps- there’s no telling what or how the guy thinks.
This, per Canzano three days ago,
“Oregon State shouldn’t have a single athlete on its campus who is guilty of a felony conviction involving a violent offense or a sex offense. “…That ban needs to extend to incoming freshman, and include all athletes, just to be clear. It needs to be part of the vetting process when the university is recruiting. And it needs to be non-negotiable.
He has been inconsistent in his application of his own clearly stated standard (Bount, et al). A standard which is in direct opposition to the US Dept. of Education’s 2016 directive as cited in the original article by Moran. A standard by which Canzano differentiates between athletes and other students.
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2017/06/canzano_making_a_pitch_for_dec_1.html
US Dept. of Education’s 2016 directive
What’s it say?
It focus’s on the value to society of reducing barriers to higher education faced by “justice involved individuals”. Canzano opposes this and advocates for the exclusion of these people.
From the conclusion:
“The U.S. Department of Education encourages college and university officials to look beyond the box by removing unnecessary barriers to higher education for justice-involved individuals, and demonstrate that a postsecondary education can help to offer students a second chance to change their lives.”
54 pages long, here is the link:
https://www2.ed.gov/documents/beyond-the-box/guidance.pdf
Yes, this and the fact that he was a minor are the most impirtant reasons why this is different and rehabilitation should be a higher priority. All indications are Luke has been doing everthing right as a young man since turning 16 and for his entire adult life. Oregon State serving the publuc interest of educating him and helping to ensure he has best odds of staying on the right path is clearly in societies best interests.
He will move on because he has fought hard and been making right choices for years. Unfortunately for the girl I am very concerned the Oregonian drumbeating has too much chance of opening old scars and forming new ones well into her high school years and beyond. Would not be surprised at all if the release to all the public ends of scarring her far more than what happened to her as a child. Oregonian only cared about clicks and their agenda is only more likely to cause additional pain versus healing.
Only problem with the 2nd paragraph is they got the okay from the mother prior to publishing. So not sure you can blame them at that point. If the mother said don’t print it, would they? That’s a good question.
This gets a bit too much into speculation and I want to stick to facts best as possible.
I only remember a sidewalk where I rode my big wheel from age 6. Beyond that next to nothing. The risk reward of whether the Oregonian’s story will cause her additional pain in middle school and high school now and possibly longer is greatly skewed to the risk here as the chance that this could help her seems quite slim. Canzano’s high horse preaching from his soap box ignores this fact.
Angry — I think it’s wise on your part to avoid getting into speculation about the victim, her mother, her future, etc. None of us knows all the relevant facts about the victim and her family.
But of course neither does Canzano.
This point is made forcefully by a recent poster over at the Oregonian (in a comment to http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2017/06/why_we_published_the_story_abo.html )
Rolling Buck Thunder 8 hours ago
I’m going to be completely honest – I read Canzano’s piece and I couldn’t sleep. It’s currently closed to comments, so I’ll post my memo to Canzano here. I’m not going to go through all his “points,” rather, I’m just going to address his pompous smug better-than-thou speech.
Full disclosure: I am a survivor. I was molested at 4 years old by a gay man in McNary – 1974, trailer court J. He was our neighbor. In my mind, I’ve always called him Bill, but I doubt that was his name. I know he was either a cop or a security officer for someone, and he had a gay roommate. He was never caught; nor was he even reported. At 4, I knew what happened, but I didn’t even have a name for it, or the degree of wrong that it was, or why I didn’t want him as a babysitter. I didn’t have a name for it until I was almost 12. I don’t think I realized how it affected me until after the Navy, while I was at OSU. That’s all the details I’m going to give. Unlike OLive so-called “journalists,” I know the better of decorum.
That being said, Mr. Canzano and the rest of you “journalists”: Stop. Stop telling everyone how she feels or what she has to live with or what’s going to go through her mind for the rest of her life. YOU don’t know. You think you have this idea in your head on how she feels, but really, you don’t have even the slightest clue. She’s a person first and above all else. You’re the one labeling her a victim, punishing her over and over again every time you say the word in her reference. Your simpleton diagnosis and smug attitude that you know something better or that your morals are somehow higher because your outraged are all misplaced and ignorant. Not because you’re stupid. And not because your morals are all-loving. But because YOU don’t know. Just stop.
You didn’t do great work; you failed at being human. You think you’re championing a little girl by reinvigorating a crime that happened 5/6 years ago and bringing it out to the open? Really? Did your discussion start out “Hey, we can champion the little girl by destroying everything this guy has worked towards over the last three years and make sure everyone calls him a sex offender because we never know when we’re going to have him over to babysit.” I mean, jeezus, did you guys read what you wrote? The details you guys included…my gawd. I’m now more ashamed of my state because even our journalists are idiots.
Let me ask you this: if the news story is about a convicted sexual molester being on the baseball team, why didn’t you ask Casey before you printed it? Why didn’t you ask him why he was there? Why didn’t you ask Ray? You didn’t because that’s not the news story. The news story is The Oregonian found out a past sexual molester is also a baseball star for OSU and masquerades championing a little girl as a victim while patting yourselves on the back. That’s what you’re proud of – and that’s the very thing I find disgusting.
Another point that hasn’t really been mentioned, is that Canzano thinks the worst punishment for Luke was to sit. I personally feel that’s the easier of the two situations. Going out there and pitching a day after being publicly shamed is much harder than hiding in the dugout. Does he not understand the court of public opinion? Vandy and their fans would have been all over him. Honestly, it worked in our favor he sat, in retrospect. I’d like to ask Canzano why he thinks sitting and hiding in the dugout is easier than going out and facing the music/public shame.
Yes, it did. That’s why it was a wise thing for him to do. Remove all distractions you can, then mitigate the ones you can’t.
Btw, what’s this virtue signalling (with two Ls) you guys are talking about. It sounds like a really dumb term made up by someone who forgot what a high horse was.
Sorry… was that intelligence signalling?
Interesting…
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/i-invented-virtue-signalling-now-its-taking-over-the-world/
I guess it was meant to be like someone who puts a yellow ribbon on their car when they have no family serving in a foreign war… or the “thank you for your service” crowd (we can call these sacrifice signalling). But it just ran away, much to his amusement.
D) Moran isn’t your enemy. He’s a great reporter who did great work. As he’s indicated, he was in the process of reporting and writing a profile of Heimlich when he ran a routine background check. …We’re in an era where media is castigated for rushing to judgment and publishing without the facts. …
“Moran isn’t your enemy. He’s a great reporter who did great work. As he’s indicated, he was in the process of reporting and writing a profile of Heimlich when he ran a routine background check.”
It’s not just about Danny but the O and Canzano and Katches.
-There’s some speculation that he did not run a background check and he was tipped off. There are comments about whether the O does this as a routine which might not be the case.
-Should Danny Moran now recuse himself from the OSU beat. He has done irreparable damage to the team, it’s athletes, fans, Luke and the victim? Hasn’t he just ruined a lot of relationships he would count on for sources?
“We’re in an era where media is castigated for rushing to judgment and publishing without the facts.”
Two of the comments that I find interesting on the O article on why the published the story in the first place:
http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2017//why_we_published_the_story_abo.html#incart_river_index
One commenter linked to the DUI convictions of the author.
One commenter pointed out that the former editor died in the arms of a prostitute while married with children and that the O tried to cover it up.
-The O has no credibility for timely reporting vs sitting on a story.
And finally, For Canzano to suggest the best way out- I thought that a better idea would be for Luke to announce that he would set up an endowment fund for the little girl and donate to child abuse with a significant amount of his future earnings.
Better link:
http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2017/06/why_we_published_the_story_abo.html#incart_river_index
That justification article by the O is terrible. All they did was dredge up
an article on the public record at a time that was convenient for them to get exposure. Who is helped by this story being told?
I understand the victim’s mother gave the go ahead, but what exactly does the O hope comes out of this? Other than Canzano’s bizarre list piece, they haven’t attempted to stage a broader conversation about the issue.
Why didn’t Canzano call for Riley’s firing after the Brenda Tracy story?
Riley let those guys play, just a 1 game suspension if I remember right.
I’m trying to find a pattern to his articles. It seems whatever makes him look like a good guy is the stance he takes, thus my claim of virtue signaling. But I’m not sure. He is all over the map.
The only “pattern” he has is to sell newspapers…
I’m also very curious about the Oregonian’s hiring practices. Background checks? Someone above mentioning they covered up a DUI. Do we have proof of that? Proof of anything else over there?
Here he gets on Thomas/Harris for that speeding/drug incident:
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2011/08/canzano_sorry_but_oregons_darr.html
He is all over the map.
Here’s a few of his opinions on notable crimes, I haven’t read this through yet.
From a quick scan of this article, it doesn’t look like he’s calling for these two’s heads:
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2011/01/canzano_its_too_soon_for_pedes.html
“The argument goes that both men have served their time, and paid their debts. And as functioning, tax-paying citizens, I’ll buy some of that.”
“I need a more time with both of these guys. Time to see them as people. Time to let them demonstrate who they really are, especially when they believe nobody is looking. Because simply winning some games and being talented isn’t enough.”
Very different tune he’s singing with Rapistburger and Vick ^
Here’s another very interesting comments over at the Oregonian (http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2017/06/why_we_published_the_story_abo.html)
leahyfan
Routine background check is a lie. Heimlich’s estranged mother tipped them off the night before the most important start of her son’s career. Background checks are not SOP and most Oregonian reporters questioned said they had never run one on an athlete in 20+ years of beat reporting.
If The Oregonian is lying about having run a “routine background check” — if this is actually not routine at all — that changes everything about this story.
If you have any decent sources at the Oregonian (e.g., past or present reporters), this is a tip that should be checked out asap, in my opinion. It would not be hard to do so. Just find out whether background checks are routine before publishing profiles of local athletes. If the answer is “no, that’s not routine”, then why was it done here? And down the rabbit hole we go……
I have Buker. I’ll ask him. We haven’t spoken in a few years, but he was always helpful back then.
edit: I actually only have Buker’s email at the Oregonian and we last spoke in 2011…I doubt that email still works. I’ll see if I can find him on twitter.
Edit: found him on twitter, but no way to PM. Asked him to write me. We’ll see.
Oh man, looking through my folder I found Schnell’s email, and it’s gmail not her Oregonian one. I can give that a shot. Haha
You’ll want someone who is no longer loyal to the Oregonian. I’m guessing Buker is more likely than Schnell to be helpful and truthful in this matter. Of course, if you took Schnell out and paid for a (large) dinner, that might be different…..
Buker would help, I think. I just have to get contact with him. His twitter has no direct PM button, and the email I have for him is his Oregonian address, which likely doesn’t work anymore.
Edit: never mind, on double check he sent me his personal in one of the emails, maybe for this exact reason. I am going to write him and ask.
The reason I found leahyfan’s comment worth considering is because the “routine background check” explanation always sounded odd to me. Why would it be “routine” to run background checks for fluff-piece profiles on local athletes?
If this is a lie — if such background checks are not routine — then why did the Oregonian lie about this? That will be harder to investigate. But not impossible.
The place to start would be with disgruntled ex-employees of the Oregonian, especially any such employees who went to OSU, or are Beaver fans. I believe the Oregonian has laid off quite a few people over the past year or two or three. That’s usually a productive starting point for such an investigation.
And, just to put a sharper point on all this, if the Oregonian is lying about the “routine background check”, and instead was “tipped off” by someone with an axe to grind against Luke and/or the Beavers, that converts Danny Moran’s “great journalism” effort into a hit-and-smear job by the Oregonian against Luke and OSU. And THAT could turn into a much bigger story than Luke’s 5-year-old juvenile sex offense.
That’s very interesting and does suggest that it was more a hit piece than anything else.
A hit piece, made worse by a cover-up (the lie about the “routine background check”).
[Of course, this particular chain of argument falls apart if background checks are in fact routine at the Oregonian before publishing profiles of local athletes. So I’m eager to hear what Angry or anyone else discovers about that — whether from Buker or from other sources. If it is confirmed that such background checks are rare — rather than routine — we may be on to something significant here….]
I’m not sure it would be a bigger story outside of this blog and OSU fans, but it would definitely expose them for what they are doing and possibly make them (partially) accountable if something tragic happens with any of the parties down the road.
The “tipped off/hit piece” thing might not be a bigger story, but if provable, it SHOULD be a bigger story. Worth a shot.
The Meggs-Snub thing did have some legs, this likely much more.
Also, it’s been confirmed that Canzano locked comments on his piece last night. Did this happen AFTER that person said routine background checks are not routine?
Can anyone get the person who wrote that comment to write me? i.e. does their username have any link to their email, etc.
Also, Moran is not responding to emails. I’ve sent him 3 (so far). All of them civil, but still calling him out.
He has responded to my past emails almost religiously.
Does whatever office in Benton county that has the information keep track of who comes in to look at it? I can’t imagine that a book is lying on a counter to thumb through or that if you need to access by computer, there isn’t a record of it.
Posted this in a previous thread and not sure how to tie it to Canzano’s rant, but..
” The ultimate resolution (it seems to me) of this whole mess can probably come only when both Luke and the victim, as two adults, can sit down together and reach whatever degree of closure they can. And they certainly don’t need the Oregonian’s assistance when that time comes.”
At this point I have what I plan to write about Canzano. I’ll do it tonight, probably, and run it by you guys before posting it on twitter. All I can write about Moran is that some users online have written in the comment sections that routine background checks are not routine. I’d like to be able to confirm that so ask around.
Double check my logic on all points.
Also, if you have relatives/connections who work at the Oregonian, ask around if the routine background check is a real thing. Retweet me on twitter so people might see the post about that, etc.
I have sent direct tweets to Steve Gress and to Kevin Hampton at the Corvallis Gazette-Times, asking whether it is standard operating procedure at the G-T to run criminal background checks before publishing articles about local athletes. Perhaps the G-T is different from the Oregonian in this respect, but I think their answers will be interesting nonetheless (if either actually answers….I’ll let you know)
I had two more contacts as well, just wrote those. Not on the best terms with them, but we’ll see if they’re willing to step up.
Angry: I just got a response from Steve Gress at the Gazette Times. He says the G-T has not to date had a policy of running background checks before publishing articles on local athletes. He said it might be a good idea “moving forward”, but this has not been the policy or practice at the G-T.
Steve Gress added that he assumes that “there are many (publishers) that have that as a policy”. I have responded by asking Steve whether he happens to know the policies and practices at the Oregonian re such background checks. If Steve responds with more information, I’ll let you know.
Hello gentlemen (and BeavGirl)
I have been a 7 year reader on this site and never posted. I have laughed, marveled and many times disagreed with the posts but always recognize the humor behind them. I am commenting here because this situation has really bothered me to a point where I tried to post on that Canzano article yesterday but my post was kicked back due to comments being closed. Here was my post and I hope you will find it relevant:
Please just stop the 3 times daily articles about Luke Heimlich and his sexual molestation victim. The Oregonian, Danny Moran and yes you Mr. canzano have done nothing but a disservice to this victim. You, a bunch of men, have decided what is best for her and that HER story needs you to tell it. All you have succeeded in doing is turning this girl into a target for bullying and humiliation. Heimlich is a very uncommon name and in a small town like puyallup it would not be hard to find a family connection and readily identify the victim. I have read over and over where you gentlemen feel sorry for the victim and send your prayers to her but I have to think that you gave her no thought beyond wanting to get a sensational story out. What you have done is lazy, irresponsible and reprehensible. Did you think for a moment how she would feel being subjected to the shame and humiliation? And do not tell me that she should not feel the shame because we all know that is not how life works. You journalists hide behind the fact that you asked her mom about the story and her mom thought it would be good…give her a voice. But I wonder did you take the time to really let the family explore what your story could do To their daughter? Did you inform them that you were planning to release during a time where national outlets would pick this up? Did you let them know that she could be a trending story on twitter and Facebook? Did you possibly tell the family to take some time and talk with a therapist about what reopening these wounds (mostly forgotten by now) could do? Or did you take the lazy angle and simply ask once and move forward? Did that feel like it was in the girls best interests to you? I can only assume that Danny and Mr. canzano have never been female victims of molestation as children. Well, having been a member of that club I can tell you the one thing we crave as former victims; to never have to talk about the incident again. We are not weak individuals. We put it behind us, we heal and we move on. The worst thing that can happen to us is having to re-live the molestation 2 years or 5 years or 10 years after it is over. You are 2 ignorant men who assume you know how we feel. It does not have to haunt us for the rest of our lives unless someone decides to keep bringing it to the forefront and forcing us to live it over and over again. How dare you assume that is your right to do. If the objective of the story was to question if sexual offenders should be allowed in colleges or given scholarships then that point would have been more fairly served without naming identities. All you have done is turn a former victim into a victim again because you decided that was best for her. That should be a crime in and of itself. You both owe this child an apology for the pain you have brought and will surely bring to her. Stop hiding behind the flimsy excuse that her mother thought it would be okay and man up and admit that you didn’t really care at all how it affected this girl. Your only focus was to get a story out at a time that was best for you. Hop off your high horse and stop preaching about your sorrow for the victim. It rings hollow in the ears of this former victim of child molestation.
As a side note I have seen canzano and others ask if I would want my daughter going to school with Heimlich. Don’t be ridiculous…of course I would. I am much more afraid of entitled frat boys and athletes who think a sigh from a passed out girl constitutes a yes then I am of a former child molester. Even a lazy journalist can figure out which of these is more dangerous.
Thanks for reading. I have always hesitated to post because opinions and assholes…you know how that goes
Thank you for deciding to comment, you have added a lot to this discussion.
Great comment. Welcome.
Outstanding comments, I mentioned in a previous thread that I was molested as a 10 year old boy by a babysitter, but I am a man, so I don’t think my story carries the same impact and poignancy as yours, but I did not need therapy, it did not define me in any way. I actually kept being the fun loving 10 year old I wanted to be, but I also did not want to rehash it, discuss or anything else. Canzano should be ashamed of his inane pontifications on a subject he knows nothing about on the research level or the emotional level.
Exactly mckalk. We can’t be the only 2 who were not defined by this and did not allow this to set the tone for our lives. Although I can only imagine if my local paper wrote a story 6 years later and then everyone knew. THAT might have changed things for me. And I think that is why this bothers me so. It is indefensible that The Oregonian allowed this. Cheers to you!
Yes, if the situation I was in had somehow become public knowledge when I was 16 it would have had a much different and negative effect on me. Kind of makes me grimace to even think about it now.
You could always send this as a “Letter to the Editor” — if they would print it.
https://d1baseball.com/news/heimlich-sit-sex-crime-revelation/….read the comment from Wes
Who is Wes Porter? Can we confirm he even knows Luke? I don’t have FB, but if any of you do give him a write and ask him: https://www.facebook.com/wesley.porter.391
Anyway, this is the comment:
While I can’t stand here and write that I know for a fact that Heimlich didnt do anything innaopriately, I do know from inside sources that he was caught up in a nasty divorce battle between his older brother and his now, ex-wife. Luke got used as a way to gain custody and put in a position to where almost had to settle like he did. Anyone who has any knowledge of how strict domestic and sexual violence laws are, knows that one can easily get caught up in a really messed up situation. As humans, it is not for us to decide Luke’s ultimate fate. It is our job to observe and move on. Luke should get that chance again; as long as he continues to keep his nose clean and be a good citizen. This is a sad situation in that Danny Moran had this info for a couple of months and waited until the weekend before the draft to bring it all out. No one deserves the power to completely defame someone of their character long term.
contact:Raju Woodward
BeaverBlitz Staff Writer/Columnist….he knows Wes
I have no idea how to contact him, but by all means do so.
https://twitter.com/rwoodward12?lang=en
i dont use twitter
I’ve had the same concerns regarding the O’s “routine ” background check. How were they able to identify the victim to get ahold of her mom for a comment? Does the court docs have the victims name? I don’t support felon athletes but I support OSU and I hope in the future they will consider back ground checks for incoming athletes, but that’s not my decision. There are privacy laws that oSU employees must abide by, hence why Casey can’t comment. If luke was already in the program when Casey found out and hadn’t broken any laws while at OSU, Casey can’t just out him. Back to my point of the victims mother, I heard the victim is LH niece, his brothers daughter & is no longer with the mother and could have been some alterier motives and why the family backs Luke. My ex family did the same to me and my daughter, it’s rare after a divorce or break up that the in laws are not supportive of their own child vs the daughter in law. I can’t verify this but maybe someone can since the O was able to track down who the victim mother was it seems fairly easy to verify if you have a disgruntal daughter in law. There’s more to this story, like Luke pleading guilty possibly because the family couldn’t afford a good attorney & the public defender talked them into taking the plea with fear he could get years in juvie or tried as an adult scare tactic? Sometimes in pleas written guilt is required hence the “admission” of guilt.. Yes I’ve considered why would anyone plead guilty to something they didn’t do especially something like this, what if they said it was highly likely you would be found guilty no matter what bc courts rather error on the side of caution & would you rather have 2 hrs probation or 5-7 yrs in juvie? Some public defenders scare clients bc they don’t want to go to trial. If you’re not previe to the court system it can be scare & intimidating. Just some thoughts for someone to possible dig deeper on O’s defending their story. There’s more & if O’s is the publication about just reporting the facts then let’s get more facts. If Casey stands by Luke there is more, Casey is respectable, religious man, if he believes in Luke there’s a reason and this should be the story. IMO
“There’s more to this story, like Luke pleading guilty possibly because the family couldn’t afford a good attorney & the public defender talked them into taking the plea with fear he could get years in juvie or tried as an adult scare tactic? Sometimes in pleas written guilt is required hence the “admission” of guilt.. Yes I’ve considered why would anyone plead guilty to something they didn’t do especially something like this, what if they said it was highly likely you would be found guilty no matter what bc courts rather error on the side of caution & would you rather have 2 hrs probation or 5-7 yrs in juvie?”
So much this. I can tell you that pool of money for public defenders is about 1/10th of what the attorney generals office provides for DA’s. Which is why most public defenders don’t want to spend time on those cases. Since most of them work outside of the public defense realm with either their own practice or another office practicing law, they’d rather spend time on those cases because well, they get paid.
Which is where plea deals come in to play. Most people accused and arrested are over charged for this reason. The police and DA’s office knows some of those charges wouldn’t hold up in court. But they’re willing to bet that you don’t have the money to fight the charges and will accept a plea deal to a lesser charge. DA’s conviction rate goes up, he/she gets promoted to judge.
It’s the dirty part of the criminal justice system that many folks probably don’t know about that was explained to me by a prominent attorney in the Salem area about 10 years ago.
I have zero respect for the criminal justice system in this country. I am not saying that is the case here but many people are convicted of crimes or agree to plea to lesser crimes they did not commit because they lacked the resources to fight the charges.
I have zero respect for the criminal justice system in this country. I am not saying that is the case here but many people are convicted of crimes or agree to plea to lesser crimes they did not commit because they lacked the resources to fight the charges.
Yes. I just went to trial over a civil issue, and I can speak first-hand that it’s definitely not a “justice” system. Our side had resources and good representation, just less than the other side, and the other side bullied their way to a verdict. What is most amazing is some of the best evidence doesn’t even make it into court due to technicalities. Evidence that would change a jurors mind for sure. So a jury might not even see the truth/all evidence in many cases. Jurors also tend to vote toward the more authoritarian side, which is odd since that side is much less their peers.
I can’t find Canzano saying playing Blount in the CW was a good move. Some here said that he said that. Where?
Also, any links to his take on LeMichael James?
Here’s a quick timeline that shows how Canzano handled the situation with LeGarrette Blount:
3 Sept 09 (right after Blount assaulted multiple people on national TV): Canzano says Blount must go. Immediately. For good.
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2009/09/canzano_legarrette_blount_has.html
4 Nov 09 (right after Ducks announce they are considering bringing back Blount): Canzano says Ducks should do what’s best for Oregon football, and not bring back Blount yet.
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2009/11/canzano_this_should_be_an_oreg.html
9 Nov 09: (right after Ducks reinstate Blount, enabling Blount to play against the Beavers in the Civil War for the Roses): Canzano warns Blount to make the most of the second chance so generously granted to him by the Ducks
30 Aug 2011: Canzano portrait of Blount as a feel good redemption story.
The question is why Canzano would want to preclude Luke Heimlich’s story from following the same arc as Blount’s (second chance, leading to redemption)?
Sorry — here are the two missing links:
9 Nov 09: (right after Ducks reinstate Blount, enabling Blount to play against the Beavers in the Civil War for the Roses): Canzano warns Blount to make the most of the second chance so generously granted to him by the Ducks
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2009/11/legarrette_blount_could_learn.html
30 Aug 2011: Canzano portrait of Blount as a feel good redemption story.
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2011/08/canzano_two_years_after_the_pu.html
Any idea what he wrote about L. James? I couldn’t find much. It looks like originally he wanted him off the team. At least he’s somewhat consistent, except when he’s randomly not and/or back tracks.
I received a response from one of my sources.
I can’t say everything, but the short of it is that Moran will only do a background check when doing deep-dive stories. Danny also worked with multiple investigative reporters on this case.
Edit: I’m told a deep-dive doesn’t necessarily mean they have been tipped off or are looking for dirt, just that it’s an in-depth look at the player, something like this: http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2016/05/bryce_fehmel_thrust_into_start.html
In that light, it’s possible Moran did just come across it. I have a query to Moran himself.
Moran had to have been tipped off. As the commenter mentioned above, how else would he have gotten into contact with the victim’s mother? Nothing he turned up in his background check or records request would have identified the victim or her family. I think that’s worth looking into a bit more.
That’s exactly what I was thinking. They’re not going to put the victim’s name in the public court documents.
Anyone have that quote from the mother? I can’t find it now. She was appalled Luke was allowed to pitch, etc.
It was in Morgan’s original piece:
http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2017/06/luke_heimlich_sex_crime_surfac.html#incart_river_mobileshort_index
The victim’s mother said she doesn’t understand why Heimlich has been allowed to play baseball at Oregon State. The Oregonian/OregonLive does not name the victims of sexual abuse and is not naming the girl’s mother to protect the identity of the child, now 11 years old.
“I’m appalled that the college he’s going to would even have him on their team,” she said.
Edit: *Moran’s* not Morgan’s.
And again, why now? He’s been playing baseball at OSU for three years! Time for payback?
Yes, I think this is the big missing link in the Danny side of this puzzle. How did he get the mother/family? The obvious answer is they’re the ones who told him about Luke. Especially since the mother is so upset (still can’t find her quote — anyone?). But, it’s possible he was doing a routine check, found this info, hired investigative journalists (see my edit above), and THEY found it for him.
If Danny’s side of it turns out to be okay, there is still Canzano to call out. He does not care about victims and all the crap he spewed, and he will be called out on it.
Don’t you have that quote highlighted in you first Heimlich thread, which was titled like a Dragnet episode! Tonight’s episode…….Luke Heimlich, Sex Offender.
Probably. I have read too many articles and talked to too many people today…totally forgot where I saw that quote.
I might delete that entire thread. I’m not sure I agree with it anymore…I gave Oregonian props at first. I’ll address that in the piece I’m writing.
But doesn’t Danny also have the responsibility to not be naive to the motivations of others no matter how heartbreaking or sensitive a situation might be? He should be asking why the Mother is upset about LH playing baseball now. LH obviously never stopped playing baseball, was she upset that he played for his high school team his junior and senior years? Or is she upset that he has achieved acclaim this season and might be on the verge of a decent paycheck as a professional?
I think Heimlich was home-schooled until what would be his junior year in high school when he then attended Puyallup high school. I think he spent what would have been his senior year at OSU. I wonder if part of the rush (in addition to his ability) was to get him out-of-town – which, until now was in his best interest.
But one could still question the journalistic purpose of releasing this information since it was accessible in Washington and five or six years old and in my mind only pertinent if you want to question OSU’s admission policies regarding convicted felons, which could also be done in the off season.
“Hey, everyone, just FYI- I know it’s the eve of the Super Regionals, but Luke Heimlich is a convicted sex offender. No current crimes and he served his sentence when he was a minor. Thought you would like to know. Love, Danny
That’s one way to look at it, but what I am being told is he wanted to write an in-depth piece about the best pitcher in college baseball, and before doing “deep dive” pieces he does background checks. Then he found this, had to report it, etc. It makes sense. The part that doesn’t is how he got to the mom, but as I said above, he had investigative journalists on this (probably once it broke), and they might have had ways. The timing was bad out of coincidence, I’m told — he was writing this piece for the CWS and that’s when he found all this out.
The other way to look at it is much simpler. The mom tipped him off. They sat on it and released at a time with the most impact.
I am talking with some people and don’t know yet either way. Moran has my questions, so hopefully he responds and just says what happened.
“Moran has my questions…”
Good. Just as Moran said he had given Casey, Luke, and other a chance to respond, I think your finished product should point out that Moran had a chance to weigh in on the matter.
Exactly. If he doesn’t respond, I will stick to my opinions of what’s going on here.
I doubt very much if he responds to your inquiry. The O has shut everything down.
Possible, but I doubt they will even print letters to the editor over this.
While you’re at it with Clownzano; since he’s an expert on moral authority. Quiz him on how he feels about adultery. Since he was fucking around with his current wife while still married to his ex-wife. I know that’s not a crime but something about glass houses comes to mind.
Haha.
I had to research that because I wasn’t sure. Adultery is actually a criminal offense in 16 States (23 States according to some sites). Oregon isn’t one of them.
Cap’n obvious here, but as much as the glass house thing rings true, there are at least three more productive avenues which could contribute to angry’s response to Canzano:
1) Wannabeavs info below about the judicial system
2) Canzano’s inconsistent application of his “moral standards”
3) The question of Moran’s truthfulness about the background check “routine” and his contact with the mom
I’m not a lawyer but I’ve discussed this issue with a good friend who is one and who has defended on each side of the equation, that is victims and perpetrators. What follows are my words but his insights.
Juvenile offenders in the state of Washington, which is what LH was, are not convicted of “crimes” and therefore have no criminal history. This is important because the Oregonian and stories derived from their reporting refer to Heimlich’s “criminal past” and his being convicted of felonious conduct. Under Washington law, as a juvenile, Heimlich was “adjudicated” (that is, a judge decided) that he had committed an offense; strictly speaking, not a crime. He was “adjudicated” under Washington’s Special Sex Defendant Disposition Alternative (SSDDA) in lieu of detention. As a condition he had to undergo extensive psycho-sexual treatment and counseling, in addition to his location filing.
Moran’s greatest fault in dealing with this story, my attorney friend continues, was not having consulted with an offender/victim professional counselor before publishing his story. Had he done so he might have had a greater sensitivity to the consequences of such publicity to both victim and perpetrator.
The bottom line from my source is this: Juvenile law is intended to both rehabilitate AND punish, ,whereas the situation involving adults (for example the Brenda Tracy story) punishment is the only outcome sought by the law. Juvenile law, on the other hand, is, by its very nature, intended to obviate the life long consequences of a criminal record in order that the perpetrator might salvage the balance of his or her life. If juvenile offenses are to precipitate adult level consequences (which the Moran/Canzano thesis argues) then why have juvenile adjudication at all? Treat every one as an adult. In my source’s opinion, the Heimlich scenario is, seemingly, a textbook case of the system working exactly as it should have (we have a young man is has re-set his course and is on a productive course in life) but it was cut short by yellow journalism of the worst sort.
I love AB sometimes.
Great insight. Mind if I use this in the piece I’m writing about/to Canzano?
Dear Angry: By all means, if you can use the information I provided, feel free to pursue. I can add this: I’ve known the source for over 20 years; quiet, mild mannered attorney. He was in such a state of agitation about this violation of established juvenile law procedure that he almost seemed like a different person. He brought his perspective to my attention precisely because he thought a grave injustice had been done: not by Luke Heimlich, mind you, but by the Oregonian. I’m going to show him my post on Monday or Tuesday and if I can get him to expand or amplify on it I will, and share accordingly.
I’ll close with this: if you can lead the charge in the re-direct it just might be this site’s greatest hour.
It did strike me as an affront to the victim, who obviously is still a juvenile, as well as to how the legal system treats juvenile offenders. In the sex offender treatment world, Luke would be seen as a huge success story. The ongoing registration being something that would always be lingering, but not necessarily there to destroy any progress made.
Canzano is even worse because in his last diatribe I don’t think he bothered with the juvenile/adult distinction at all, which is what your excellent post clearly defines and is the crux of this story in my mind.
Fascinating info Wannabeav. That is the crux for me. Why was no regard given to the 11 year old? I think we know why…Danny needed his story to drop now. He couldn’t be concerned with the health of the minor child and wait to make sure this angle wouldn’t harm her. I mean, what if the counselor didn’t issue a recommendation until July? Besides, in Danny’s mind LH is the one who really harmed her. Danny is just reporting a story. Not sure how that is legal but I know it is morally wrong.
Just wrote Brad Schmidt at the Oregonian about this. Apparently he is in charge of handling investigative stories, and might have the answer as to how they found the mother.
Per a source:
The Oregonian employs investigative reporters so Danny didn’t hire anyone. It was a group effort–thus the dual byline. They collaborated because Brad Schmidt knows how to better maneuver through investigative stories, like getting court documents or getting in touch with the right people.
“The Oregonian employs investigative reporters so Danny didn’t hire anyone. It was a group effort–thus the dual byline. They collaborated because Brad Schmidt knows how to better maneuver through investigative stories, like getting court documents or getting in touch with the right people.”
According to the Oregonian’s own published account, Brad Schmidt was brought into the process AFTER Danny Moran did an initial background check and found out, on his own, about Luke’s sex offender adjudication.
This is clearly stated in the article published by the Oregonian editor (Mark Katches) that purports to explain how the Oregonian first discovered Luke’s sex offender adjudication.
http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2017/06/why_we_published_the_story_abo.html
Here are the key parts of Katches’ article:
“Danny Moran, who covers the Oregon State baseball team for The Oregonian/OregonLive, didn’t set out to tell this story when he began interviewing Heimlich in March for a profile about his success as a pitcher. He interviewed Heimlich on three separate occasions about his baseball background and his emergence as one of the Beavers’ biggest stars.”
“After those initial interviews had been conducted, Moran performed a routine background check – something we do on profile subjects. He ran Heimlich’s name through the Oregon courts database and came up with this: Heimlich had been cited in April for failing to update his sex offender registration in Benton County. Moran requested court documents in Washington state, where the molestation occurred. The public records reveal what happened and include a short admission of guilt written in Heimlich’s own hand.”
“Moran first uncovered the Benton County citation on May 18. The court records that form the backbone of the story arrived only last week. Moran teamed with investigative reporter Brad Schmidt to review the documents, to interview Oregon State officials and coaches and to attempt to reach Heimlich and his family.”
“The publication timetable was driven solely by our knowledge of the events. We finished the reporting and editing late last night. And we set the publication time for this morning.”
So, according to the Oregonian’s complete account, the timeline is as follows.
March: Moran starts the process of interviewing Heimlich, over three separate sessions.
May 18: Moran himself discovers the Benton County citation by running Heimlich’s name through the Oregon courts database. Moran requests court documents from Washington state.
Week of May 29: The requested documents arrive from Washington state. Brad Schmidt helps Moran “to review the documents”, to interview OSU officials, and “to attempt to reach Heimlich and his family”.
June 7 (“late” at night): Reporting and editing of the article completed
June 8 (early morning): Danny Moran’s initial article is published, disclosing Luke’s sex offender adjudication; a few minutes later Mark Katches article is published, to try to justify the timing of the publication of Moran’s hit piece, one day before the start of the super regionals.
Key questions suggested by this timeline:
1. Why did Moran decide to run Heimlich’s name through the Oregon courts database on or about May 18? Is this something Moran always does before he publishes an in-depth profile of an athlete? If not, why did Moran run such a search here?
2. Who initiated contact between the victim’s mother and the Oregonian? Was it the mother who reached out to the Oregonian in the first instance? Was it Moran who reached out to the mother? Or was it Brad Schmidt who first found the victim’s mother and made the initial contact with her?
3. When was the first contact made with the victim’s mother? Was there any contact with the mother before the week of May 29, when the requested documents arrived from Washington state? Was there any contact with the mother before Brad Schmidt started helping Moran “to review the documents” and “to attempt to reach Heimlich and his family”?
If this was indeed a hit job by the Oregonian on Luke and OSU, initiated by the victim’s mother for her own reasons, the above questions will be difficult ones for anyone at the Oregonian to answer honestly.
Maybe that’s why they’re not answering. I asked some very simple and direct questions.
Wow…so from March to Mid May (2 months) Danny couldn’t finish writing a fluff piece about LH. But he was able to complete a story to alter (potentially destroy) the life of a child in a week? Yeah…keep moving…nothing to see here……
good catch!
Sorry, but I call bullshit on that response. A background check on a amateur college athlete who from outward appearances appeared to be the all American boy? No history of problems at OSU, early HS grad,, and had been a high performer academically during his college career. Newspapers can’t even pay to have articles checked for basic grammar and one is expected to believe this is SOP. No way. I stand by what I posted right from the jump, Moran was tipped by a vindictive relative, who appears to be his ex sister in law. Revisionist history to cover their ass.
Background checks cost money. In my industry, we have to run them on all new hires, but I’m skeptical that it’s SOP at a newspaper.. Seems like it’s not usually necessary and would be an added expense in a business where layoffs and shut downs are the norm.
beenverified.com more than likely. And even that is not 100% accurate.
When you run a background check on a new hire, do you typically alert an applicant that the check is part of the process? I feel like my past employers give a courtesy heads up. Also, they typically ask “have you been convicted of a felony?”
Just seems strange to get three interviews deep into the process and then perform a check, without the subjects knowledge.
Who in their right mind would grant 3 interviews to the O if this was standard procedure?
Also, would be curious to know which other athletes they done a “deep dive” story on before, and did those all include a background check as well?
Felony conviction question is part of the application, though I hear in some states that is starting to go away. Candidates do have to sign a form indicating that they understand a BG is going to be run.
Another good point. If LH KNEW ahead of time they were going to do a background check on him, I seriously doubt he would have ever agreed to be interviewed. SOP my ass. Just out of morbid curiosity I wonder what could be dug up if the entire football team had background checks done on them.
And we request a drivers license to start the process. It’s the quickest way to get information. Did LH give them his DL or are they just using some cheap online site?
OT: Small sample, but Eggers is being complimented for his appropriate passing reference to Luke in his story about the Super Regional.
Lundeberg at the GT has also avoided the detailed repetition and emphasis which has marked the coverage by the big O
I doubt Eggers would go the editorial route, but his take on the situation would be interesting. He’s such a good “straight ahead” sports journalist.
Should I delete the old post about LH? I no longer see things that way, regarding the Oregonian or other issues. Not sure if it’s classy to delete it or just leave and it note opinion changed.
Edit: I wound up changing the main post and the title but leaving the comments for posterity.
Leave the old post up, note opinion changed, and point to this thread.
You do realize that we’re all doing EXACTLY what they wanted to accomplish, right? They got clicks, they got publicity and people talking about it. Mission accomplished. You think Moron or Canzano give two shits about victims? Or credibility?
Newsflash, they don’t.
Has Canzano given any logical reasoning for wanting LH to be out of baseball completely (besides “because it’s the right thing to do”)? I’m speculating but my hunch is because that’s the easiest path in life for LH due to his talent. I’m guessing Canzano doesn’t want LH to have an easy path in life and he should have to take an alternate path that would be much more difficult. That’s the only reason that makes any sense to me. But if that’s his reason, why not just say that? They have to stop hiding behind the veil of victim support, and admit that they’re trying to pile on additional and continued vengeance against LH in the name of justice.
Man, there is some great thought provoking stuff here. I wonder if the writers at the Oregonian read this blog?
Nor sure on the prevailing thought here as to whether LH should have a professional career, but it looks like for at least the short term that may be a challenge. He has been removed from Baseball America’s Top 500 list.
http://www.gazettetimes.com/sports/beavers-sports/baseball/osu-baseball-multiple-beavers-expected-to-go-early-in-mlb/article_31c9ca18-b57a-509f-9d91-d329deeeec13.html
Sad. I’m a bit worried he’s going to kill himself. Worried about the victim, too, with all this media. Wonder what the Oregonian would write if either happened.
IMO Luke has a potential defamation lawsuit as-is. As Wannabeav pointed out, saying he has a “criminal past” when he was adjudicated is a real problem for them, especially now that he’s lost future earnings potential.
WannaBeav, ask your friend about that. To me it screams lawsuit.
It is sad, but I’m sure MLB teams have a very ardent background process, so I kind of think LH was headed for some serious bumps in the road anyway. I wonder what type of support system the girl has, depending on whether the mother kept reminding her of what happened, it could be almost like this is happening again. I would guess a very tough situation for her and not fair. The Oregonian needs to pay a price for this. I hope the information collected here has the potential to do that.
I will pose that question. In the meantime, I can report that this morning I showed him my post from 5:45 on the 11th in this thread and he concurred with my interpretation of his views. Consistent with that point, I would add and/or repeat that the constant use of “felony conviction” is wrong on the merits of the law. LH was adjudicated as an juvenile offender.
Another question. Where is the fluff piece on Jake Thompson? If there was one printed I must’ve missed it. He had just as great of a year and maybe even more of a success story this being his final year. How’d his background check work out?
Another reason I call horseshit on Moran, Canzano, Boregonian and their little back story. Timing is everything. Despite what LH is or isn’t guilty of, something stinks here.
So, to deconstruct that entire piece of garbage..
A. Duh…so stupid I can’t believe he even wrote that.
B. The law is pretty black and white but I wonder if the star baseball player has consentual sex with a 14 year old (who looks18) and her Daddy turns him in are we equally outraged? What about if she is 17…still a minor by definition. So Canzano thinks all of these situations should be viewed the same sexual predator no sports?
C. Wrong…Casey is excused. Or maybe only recruit kids where juvenile records are sealed…problem solved.
D. I think we have covered ad nauseum that Danny is not our friend
E. Back to Casey…no idea why? Cause people like him better than john??
F. You guys have covered…his attorney had addressed
G. Only 70? That makes me feel safe
H. Whatever….idiot forgets that LH has already had public humiliation…I guess john is just jealous that he didn’t get to see it
I. He has not always been in control of his future. His parents and older siblings had some control of his future and some shaping of it…just dumb
J. Again…nothing here…just wasting letters
K. Another wasted letter
L. Same as B…
M. Yeah…yeah human life matters…some more than others…agreed?
N. Almost everyone has a story of some form of abuse we just don’t all share. Surprised this surprised john
O. Proves point that victims heal and move on
P. Reports from people actually there say it was not at all like this so maybe john doesn’t know what it is all about…
Q. Okay…isnt that what the registry is for. You are free to check it when you like to see who is living near you.
R. Sorry…I covered as did others…her childhood is not stolen, her life is not over but Danny and John are sure trying to destroy it….possibly even her mother if she leaked this story at the expense of her daughter.
S. Pray for the 11 year old sacrificed for a story…sure will John
T thru Z….not sure where they went…must have been a sale at shoe mill
When I write it down it really shows why that article pissed me off so much. I hate people standing on soap boxes telling me how I should feel.
On the subject of abuse, I have never seen the alphabet violated in such a manner.
P) The warm ovation for Heimlich from the crowd of 4,000 before Oregon State’s game on Friday night was troubling. It’s the kind of stuff I’d expect from fans at Baylor or Penn State. Maybe I’m missing what that ovation was about. But I don’t think so.
I was at the game Friday and disagree with John’s account. Here’s why. 1 – the stands were about 2/3 full during introductions. 2- OSU fans were standing and applauding the introduction of all Beaver back-ups being introduced. 3- When Heimlich was introduced there was a brief “crescendo” in some cheers. It was not from everyone and it wasn’t for significant. This wasn’t an ovation and, yes, Canzano is missing what it was about.
Nice, so he’s trying to compare this situation to Baylor or Penn State, 2 places where the institution was actively covering up ongoing criminal activity.
The isn’t remotely comparable to those 2 situations. Also, John wasn’t at the game. Yes, he’s missing what the ovation was about. Just trying to dig into more emotional arguments.
How are teams supposed to perform background checks on every athlete they recruit? Aren’t most juvenile cases sealed? What would even be available to find? I suppose it would have uncovered Luke’s situation, since he’s from Washington, but if Luke had been from Oregon, it wouldn’t have been information Casey or anybody else would have had access to.
A comment I lifted from the oregonlive comments in Canzano’s A-Z piece…I thought it was well put. Actually, overwhelmingly, the comments in this piece are speaking against John.
Gordy
1 day ago
“Absolutely no one has taken Luke Heimlich’s side and found any fault with the innocent victim. What you seem to miss, Mr. Canzano, is that this is not a binary issue; you don’t have to be against one to be for the other. What you espouse is that a juvenile offender continue to be punished long after he has fully complied with his sentence and every aspect of his probation. And don’t tell me that he broke his probation because he was unaware of the law in Oregon that he reregister within ten days of his 21st birthday; that matter went before a judge and the charge was dismissed. Oregon State fans politely applauded because they, unlike you, see a young man that made a terrible mistake as a juvenile, between the age of 13 and 15, and has now turned his life around and has made a positive contribution to society. Their polite applause did not mean that they took Luke’s side and did not have sympathy for the victim. They, unlike you, understand that rehabilitation is part of the criminal justice system and is to be encouraged, not disdained. It’s a pity that you can’t find it in your heart to do the same. “
I finished about half the article I’m writing. It’s hard to get everything in without it being so long…might be the longest article in AB history.
I’ll try to finish it up tomorrow, but might take until Tuesday as a lot of new takes keep coming in that need considering. I want to give the Oregonian reasonable time to respond to my questions.
I don’t necessarily want to put this in my article because it will go off tangent via ad hominem, but that bit about Canzano cheating on his wife — was that public knowledge? I might throw in a jab if it was just to knock him off his high horse.
I seem to recall reading something about it awhile back. Probably over 10 years ago. Do a background check. I’m sure that his divorce paperwork is public knowledge and can easily be had.
Maybe background checks should be mandatory on journalists and reporters. That way they can easily be identified as hypocrites when necessary
“I don’t necessarily want to put this in my article because it will go off tangent via ad hominem, but that bit about Canzano cheating on his wife — was that public knowledge? I might throw in a jab if it was just to knock him off his high horse.”
Canzano may use the inclusion of such an ad hominem as a way to divert the focus, to play the victim himself, and to avoid discussion of the important issues. Canzano may have mistreated his wife, but the focus right now should remain on Canzano’s mistreatment of Oregon State and Luke Heimlich, or so it seems to me.
Spot on!
Seems that way to me too.
Still looking for a former oregonlive employee with an axe to grind?
Look no further….
Jason Quick would be a great resource. Covered the Blazers for years, but then stopped to cover beaver baseball, then duck football. Now he covers blazers again for CSN. He was contemporaries with Canzano at oregonlive, and has beem known to be critical of camzano, as evidenced by the below tweet…
https://twitter.com/jwquick/status/856966525630136320
”
FWIW: A column on culture from someone who spent – no exaggeration — zero seconds in Blazers locker room or practices this season. https://t.co/BQJR8mFbGV“
Unfortunately no way to contact him privately.
How convenient…..for him!
I just sent a direct tweet (actually a couple of tweets) to Jason Quick, asking him whether it was standard operating procedure at the Oregonian, when Quick worked there, to run criminal background checks before publishing profiles of college athletes. If he responds, I’ll let you know….
Hello, I have been reading this site for years but have never posted, however I feel like I can add a different perspective to this topic. I am a father of a boy who was sexually abused by a family member when he was 5 years old., he is now 10. My son is a warrior and a survivor, he is not a victim. I cannot begin to tell you how proud I am of him and how courageous he was when he had to be interviewed by the police, a therapist, a forensic therapist, the DA, and a grand jury. The case went public a month after the incident occurred. I can tell you that it was awful, and having it in the public view made it worse. It was in almost every newspaper in the state of Oregon and on the local news channels. Although, our names were not mentioned, it didn’t take much to figure it out and piece it together. My five year old son lost friends because of this…other parents were afraid to have their kids play with him.
Your first instinct as a parent is to protect your kid, and that is what we did. You have no idea how you will react until you are in that situation. I felt it all…rage, embarrassment, humility, the need for revenge, confusion, hopelessness..everything. But, through it all, the one thing that remained constant was to protect him. We still deal with it, from time to time he will ask about it and thanks to Danny Moran and John Canzano, we got to deal with it again when my son asked why isn’t Luke pitching.
The moral high horse that these guys are riding are insulting. They have no clue what families go through when things like this happen. The wounds and scars are still there and we are still dealing with the aftermath involving other family members. I cannot believe that it was ok with the mom to bring this up, in a fashion like this after 6 years. That is not how you protect your child. If it was “ok” with the mom then something else is going on there. As far as giving the victim a voice….that is not Danny and John’s decision to make…it is the now 11 year old girls decision to make when she is good and ready to make that decision on her terms.
I asked my son…would you want your story in the papers and in the news? His answer…”no”. I asked him if he forgave the person that did this to him…”yes”. Does the person deserve a second chance…”yes, but not with this family.”
The most powerful thing that we have done is to forgive…I was going to see the abuser at a court hearing for the first time since it happened and I was scared. But, I forgave the abuser, and that gave me the power. However, that does not mean that the actions he did were okay, they never will be. But for me, the fear was gone and I was in control of my emotions and I started to move on. I cannot and will not speak for my son, but I know he has forgiven his abuser. I know it makes him sad when he thinks about it. I know he wishes it didn’t happen. But he is not angry and he is not scared, he just doesn’t understand why and someday he will and maybe he will share his story with the public…but that will be on his terms, not some reporter trying to tell society how to behave.
Thank you. A message many are trying to convey. It’s similar to a non-smoker giving advice to a smoker on quitting. You have no clue until you’ve walked in someone else’s shoes. Have any of those nitwits that covered the story been victims of abuse? Or falsely accused (not saying that is the case here)?
I have sons too and we’ve been thru some rough shit that is completely different than yours but much like you we have each other. And I get really irritated when some teacher, counselor, or other parent tries to tell me what they think is best for my sons. I always ask. You raising a family on your own? No? So, you’re divorced? But your kids still have another parent, right? Shut the fuck up. It’s not even close to being the same. You still get every other weekend off to do as you wish. I am a parent 24/7/365. And I work full time.
Until you’ve walked in someone else’s shoes and know what they’ve been thru or overcome? Your opinion is shit. I have never abused anyone or been abused. Therefore I have no idea what anyone who has been has gone thru. But I still stand by my original statement that Danny Moron, Canzano and the Boregonian did this shit for clickbait, are soul less liars and couldn’t care less about any of the parties involved.
Best of luck to you and your family RXBeav. Stay strong and stay together for each other.
Thank you for sharing, RxBeav.
Agree, thanks for sharing. Fascinating stuff.
Thank you, RxBeav.
You’ve reminded me of the truth about forgiveness; that carrying hatred for the one who has wronged you is like you drinking poison hoping it kills them.
You are liberated now, I believe, and wiser.
There seem to be a lot of us that were lurking in the shadows and this story has brought us out. You sound like an excellent father who is raising a fine young man. Thank you for that.
And yes, something is rotten in regards to this mother if she is leading this charge or supporting it.
Angry,
Don’t really want to dive to much into this, but canzano is a catholic. I have it on good authority that he receives communion (verifies he identifies as catholic). The whole religion is based on foregiveness. Forgiveness of sin is literally the main pillar of the church.
Definition of a hypocrite is not being able to practice what you preach or supposedly believe in. This is what makes me believe canzano is pushing a agenda/ the whole getting clicks thing. I usually lie what the guy says, but he tries way too hard to be a Jim Rome on steroids in these situations.
So in other words, he’s a hypocrite. In related news, water is wet.
Not a dig on you, but that assclown deserves some harsh criticism.
None taken. Just bought I would provide further confirmation on the fact.
Ha!
Catholics don’t divorce. They certainly don’t don’t have a second wife while their first is still alive.
Something to do with promises or vows or honor or something.
Catholicism is not based on forgiveness. Forgiveness is bunk. Guilt is the currency of the church. You can be forgiven, but you’ll always have guilt.
Just a logistical question:
How does one send prayers to someone? Is there an ether grapevine?
Text or Facebook…just depends on how much attention you want for yourself while you’re thinking of someone else….
Ah yes… piety signalling.
I am sending them your way now! Its magic. Al Gore invented it.
Luther Campbell approves this message.
I don’t know that Danny is in the wrong. He hasn’t wrongly opined. The original article created more questions than it answered. But I chalk that up to him finding out about Luke in whatever way and just being Bambi.
Canzano is just all sorts of wrong.
And why do you print an article to defend another article?
Insecure much?
It’s interesting that the O has closed shop on this. I think their legal geeks know they’re the only people ripe for litigation on this one.
Have they closed shop?
They’ve closed comments, but I don’t think they’re finished. Canzano also has a few hours of radio air time to fill each day this week.
The more he speaks/writes, the more I think Luke earns.
Moran has a defense of just reporting the facts… sort of.
The Oregonian is taking letters to the editor on the subject, but I find it interesting that although this one asks for LH to be given a second chance, I don’t find it particularly well written and seems very basic in it’s sentiment when considering all of the questions out there now. Of course, the paper is picking the letters to publish. It does appear to have an open comments section also.
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/06/dont_punish_heimlich_for_life.html
Bambi could have at least questioned why the Mother is outraged now at Luke playing college baseball. She could have turned the sirens on when he received the initial scholarship offer and it would have received a lot of local press and may have derailed or at least complicated LH’s baseball career.
You’re right, there are many more questions then answers. Seems like The Oregonian’s position is that LH is a sex offender, there cannot be any nuances, we did our journalistic duty by “outing him”, others can sweep up the ashes, lets pat ourselves on the back for saving society and go have a beer.
A thoughtful view on LH’s situation. From the Tacoma paper.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/john-mcgrath/article155522919.html
Also, a couple of things I find interesting. Apparently, one can still comment on Katches’ “defense of printing the story” article, but comments have been shut down on the Canzano article? Many people have posted comments to Canzano on Katches as it appears to be the only outlet.
And just a minor thing, Canzano’s Wikipedia page makes no mention of his first marriage or divorce and makes it sound like the children are all from his current marriage (that may be true, I don’t know). Is Canzano editing his own page?
Bald Faced Truth, indeed!
A few minutes ago, I sent a direct tweet to Jason Quick. He just responded.
silverstream055? @silverstream055
@jwquick Q: When you worked at Oregonian, was it standard operating procedure to run criminal background checks on athletes you profiled?
Jason Quick?Verified account @jwquick
No.
Jason Quick’s response provides more reason to question the Oregonian’s claim that Danny Moran discovered Luke’s sex offender adjudication while doing a routine criminal background check. That always sounded fishy. Now it seems even fishier.
More likely, it seems to me, is that the victim’s mother reached out to the Oregonian to hurt Luke and Oregon State. After hearing from the victim’s mother, Danny Moran ran the criminal background check, Brad Schmidt was assigned to help young Danny, and the Oregonian rushed to publish the hit piece at 6:30 am the day before the start of the super-regionals. Of course this is largely based on speculation, not hard evidence, but it makes more sense — at least to me — than what the Oregonian itself has been saying.
That was the part that jumped out at me from the very start. It didn’t seem right that a criminal background check should be SOP for interviewing a college athlete with no known criminal past.
Definitely fishy, and I suspect the Oregonian of being less than truthful and forthcoming here. Something is up. Luke isn’t the only one I’ve lost a lot of respect for in this whole mess.
Just checked the P-T. It appears Eggers has been pretty silent on the topic of Luke. He often seems to have insight and details other media lac, and I find it interesting he has yet to write about this issue.
Is it true that Canzano wanted LeMichael James off the team and never wavered on that? I found an article where he says to ditch him and that’s all.
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2010/12/canzano_lamichael_james_should.html
Here’s a snippet:
James hasn’t had it easy. The running back’s father was murdered before he was born. Also, his grandmother, who had taken care of him since a young age, passed away when James was in high school. The running back has a half-brother he barely knows who tries to trade on his brother’s celebrity. He has a cousin in Texas who James sends part of his stipend home to help support. And there are friends and sycophants, who all want something from a kid who doesn’t trust easily and mostly just wants to be left alone to play football.
James needs the Ducks, as much, or maybe even more than they need him. The structure that college football provides, the accountability, the long line of positive influences that are surrounding him are all vital to his development. It’s why I believe he should come back for another season, and get his degree.
I don’t have time right now to do more searching. But the article I just referenced may suffice. Once again, Canzano approves of second chances for adults who have committed violent offenses against women — but not for Luke Heimlich and his juvenile child molestation adjudication.
I’m having a hard time finding all the articles I need now. I looked under the ones Moran has written, but I can’t find where he says this came up during a routine background check. Anyone have it?
http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2017/06/why_we_published_the_story_abo.html
It’s the Mark Katches (editor) article that tries to justify the timing of the publication of Moran’s hit piece (a day before super regionals).
Here’s the relevant snippet:
Danny Moran, who covers the Oregon State baseball team for The Oregonian/OregonLive, didn’t set out to tell this story when he began interviewing Heimlich in March for a profile about his success as a pitcher.
He interviewed Heimlich on three separate occasions about his baseball background and his emergence as one of the Beavers’ biggest stars.
But journalists must always follow the story where the facts lead us.
After those initial interviews had been conducted, Moran performed a routine background check – something we do on profile subjects. He ran Heimlich’s name through the Oregon courts database and came up with this: Heimlich had been cited in April for failing to update his sex offender registration in Benton County.
Moran requested court documents in Washington state, where the molestation occurred. The public records reveal what happened and include a short admission of guilt written in Heimlich’s own hand.
I’ve finished my rough draft.
It’s very long. Yet, I still left so much out just to keep length down. I fear I missed some key points.
Silver and NiceBeav, mind if I email it to you guys for a glance? Let me know if I missed key issues. I couldn’t touch on all of them.
Send it over
Yes, happy to give it a quick look.
Law of Unintended Consequences — might Luke Heimlich return to the Beavers next season?
There are rumors that more MLB teams are treating Luke Heimlich as “toxic” and will refuse to draft him. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/draft/2017/06/12/mlb-draft-five-storylines-watch-two-way-stars-take-center-stage/102774796/
If Luke doesn’t get drafted, or gets drafted in a late round, might he consider returning to OSU next season? Would OSU take him back for next season and let him pitch again? This might be the best alternative for Luke at the moment, and also for OSU — converting this into a story of second chances and redemption, and letting the current hysteria dissipate. Just a thought….
Would allow JC to write his redemption piece and get even more site traffic. It’s all coming together…
Another former Oregonlive employee worth following up with might be Dwight Jaynes. Here’s his recent commentary on the topic, which I think is much more accurate than Canzano’s white knight stance.
http://www.csnnw.com/oregon-state-beavers/heimlich-its-not-about-baseball-its-about-punishment-and-rehabilitation
What is the sound of two low bars hitting each other?
I think Steve Duin of the Oregonian -a former sports columnist – would be more likely to write commentary that acknowledges the complexity of this issue more than would Canzano or Jaynes.
Here is Canzano’s position on forgiveness:
“I’m all for forgiveness. As long as it’s earned, genuine, and combined with sincere regret, appropriate time and restitution.” Where does Luke’s situation fail to meet his criteria?
Of course, that was in regard to Ben Roethlisberger and Michael Vick. And that was back in 2011, about the time Luke was before a judge.
So, is Canzano really “all for forgiveness”?
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2011/01/canzano_its_too_soon_for_pedes.html
I know, I saw the vick/ben articles and thought the same. I didn’t incorporate it b/c the article is already so long, but it’s so contradictory that I probably should.
Might be wise to leave it out, avoid giving Canzano the opportunity to accuse you of equating dog fighting with child molestation. The discussion could then become sidetracked.
Exactly. Trying to leave out opportunity for strawmen. I probably didn’t b/c that’s always a tactic when being attacked. Maybe I can quote it and not mention it was in the Vick article.
Angry, another thing that would be interesting to know is if Luke’s brothers divorce happened after or was in progress when the abuse took place.
I’m leery to get into too much circumstantial stuff or draw likely conclusions in a situation like this, because it would not surprise me if the O gets sued, and I don’t want to be a part of that. I tried to stick to facts or be clear when I’m stating opinions. I know nothing about the family dynamic so it’s hard to comment other than speculation or hearsay from people who claim to know the family. If those people go on record and tell me in writing what they know as fact I’d go with it.
Sticking to facts and being clear when stating opinions certainly is smart.
How about simply asking questions? That seems to be a way of introducing a topic, ie: “was there a link between the brothers divorce and the LH incident?
This mess reminds me of the old saw, “for want of a nail the shoe was lost” and so forth.
I don’t believe Heimlich intentionally failed to re-register – there had to have been a misunderstanding. So, for want of a re-register, etc.
Is Moran going to Omaha? Do the beat writers usually travel with the team?
Are we going to be allowed to read the password protected article?
Yes, it’s like that for now b/c I am having a few members here do a review to see if I covered everything. 1st draft. once it’s done it will go public.
Cool. Thanks for writing this up. Hopefully it gains some tractoin.
Wouldn’t most newspapers print it as an op-ed?
Eggers up with a “no egos on this team” piece in which he says“The Beavers will go to Omaha without the services of Heimlich…”
http://portlandtribune.com/pt/12-sports/362797-242948-osu-baseball-the-team-to-beat-in-omaha
I don’t think Pat Casey has closed the door yet on Heimlich pitching in Omaha. Here’s the full quote from Casey:
The Beavers will go to Omaha without the services of Heimlich, removed from the team before the Super Regional after OregonLive’s revelation last Thursday that he was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor when he was 15 years old.
“People may think now we don’t need Luke, who is one of the best pitchers in the country,” Casey says. “The Super Regional was two games. There are a tremendous amount of games to play back there in Omaha.”
At 11:30 am today, Danny Moran will be talking about “how Luke Heimlich’s past came to light”:
http://kval.com/sports/after-the-whistle/after-the-whistle-reporter-who-broke-luke-heimlich-story-joins-the-show
Watch After the Whistle LIVE at 11:30 a.m. PDT
EUGENE, Ore. – The Oregonian reporter who broke the story about a star Oregon State pitcher’s sex crime conviction joins After the Whistle live on Monday, June 12.
Danny Moran joins the show to discuss how Luke Heimlich’s past came to light.
Does “After the Whistle” take questions from viewers/listeners?
I hope Luke makes the trip even if he doesn’t pitch.
Very interested in where this story leads.
If his future falls apart, so might his recovery.
“There is NO WAY
To defend this. None.
I cannot respect anyone who could read the facts and justify his continued participation on our team.
Posted by Gr8WhiteHunter on Jun 8, 2017 | 3:32 PM”
You’re right, I said that.
I was/am disgusted by what happened, and I can’t defend him, or his actions. I cannot get over the 15/6 age gap and just chalk it up as a mistake.
I don’t think he should pitch, and I cringe about the asterisk that it would put on this season if he does. I guess it does seem contradictory, but if this team is his support structure I wouldn’t be opposed to him being there.
I’ve admittedly experienced a wide range of emotions over this whole thing…being a father myself, I cannot imagine seeing my daughter’s molester gaining national acclaim on TV.
Fake news!
FAAAAKE!!
I’ve said similar things on this blog too, if you’d like to search here as well.
What I haven’t said, and I’ll say it here, I don’t think the Oregonian’s campaign in productive manner for the victim or the respondent in the case. This is a tragic event, the least of which is related to athletics.
^was handled
Angry: I spoke with my source and he quickly averred that he is not an expert in defamation, libel, etc. There are attorneys who specialize in that area and he is not one of them. However, he did add, or repeat, actually, that to refer to Heimlich as “guilty of a felony conviction” or having a “criminal background” is a misreading of Washington state law and would seem to give such a legal specialist some room for maneuver. Furthermore, he pointed me to the Revised Code of Washington (13.40.020) (the section on definitions) where I found:
paragraph (21) “‘Offense’ means an act designated a violation or crime IF committed by an adult . . . .”) [emphasis added]; and
paragraphs (25) “‘Respondent’ means a juvenile who is alleged or proven to have committed an offense.” In other words, a juvenile offender in state law is not even referred to as a “defendant”, as this latter term is reserved for adult perpetrators.
Thanks for asking him. Wonder if there will be a lawsuit over that.
Moran just confirmed they asked for court records after all the work was done to make sure they didn’t miss anything. Very odd…
Why would you write an entire article about the guy, then look at court records as a final step?
On After the Whistle, Moran also just confirmed that he has been talking with the victim’s mother, and that she continues to support what the Oregonian is doing. This is consistent with the mother working hand-in-hand with the Oregonian to push this story and hurt Luke and OSU.
You may have noticed, right after Danny Moran left the interview, that Travis Teich, the lead guy on the After the Whistle show, was looking down at his computer and reading something. He was reading a couple of tweets I sent him during the interview, suggesting that Travis ask Moran about whether the mother initiated contact with the Oregonian. Travis then looked up, mentioned the tweets, and said Moran had already explained this adequately (which is not true, of course….but whatever). Too bad Travis didn’t look at his computer a few minutes earlier — I think he might have asked the question to Moran directly. But perhaps not….
What’s with the password on the new topic?
Explained above. The password will be removed when the draft has been reviewed by a few ab’s who have been paying close attention over the last few days.
I’m not sure why we’re hung up on the mother doing anything to let people know about an offense a respondent performed against her daughter. If it were my kid, I would be passing out court documents like flyers for everyone in Corvallis to read.
Because I think it’s a little messed up considering the mother says her daughter doesn’t even really remember what happened to her and (we can assume) she is no longer dealing with these issues. It’s wrong getting vengeance so late and to reopen wounds for the daughter putting further embarrassment and exposure to her.
Sometimes revenge is not always the best thing. As a parent I understand, but when something happens to you personally we are often blinded and can’t see objectively. Again, I don’t fault her, but it’s not right.
I have to admit I’m thrown by the ease with which people are allowed to speak and gain documents about a juvenile case. You can argue abut the timing, but I wouldn’t call it revenge. This is not what revenge looks like when you hurt one of my children. I would be on the other side of the earth if I chose revenge instead of public spectacle. I would need to establish an alibi.
And would you wait 5 or so years to do so?
Hell no!
But I’m guessing I would have to wait until he was 18.
I wonder, as a parent of a victim involved, if you are allowed to speak openly about a finished case involving minors in this way?
Could this be why the Oregonian is implying that this was “discovered” information from a routine check rather than information that was sent to them?
Danny does say the only reason this popped when he did the check was because Luke had the issue come up about not registering in a timely manner in Oregon. Do you think the mom would have been alerted to this, which gave her the reason to have Danny follow up? Otherwise, this case wouldn’t have been visible in the oregon court system. The standard procedure part just doesnt make sense, but i could see danny finding out about the registration puece while interviewing family, and then following up.
Either way he came across it, I dont blame him for reporting it, but i do not think he’s being geniune about the circumstances that led to him reporting it.
How would that benefit anyone? What good would that do for the victim?
^^ sorry, meant as a reply to Jack and his fliers
It does absolutely no good. Unfortunately lots of parents like to be martyrs and like attention…they don’t care so much about their kids. Something about this just does not feel right. Wonder what the father thinks? No one talks about him. Was he on board with daughter re-living everything or not consulted? Seems to me it went something like…
Danny: We are going to run this story..it will be good for your daughter to have a voice. We will keep her identity secret and help you through it…trust us Luke will never pitch again…
Mom: ok
If he wants a second chance, that period began on Thursday for most of us, not six years ago. Him not pitching right now is a matter of him not being open about this from the beginning. He had a chance to do that, but he chose to let someone else tell his story first.
I’m still weirded out that juvenile cases are this open in Washington. You can see with this discussion how the states who seal those records might have it right.
“Something about this does not feel right.” Spot on. If you were starting to write – in March – a “high profile” article on someone – why wait until May to do the “routine” background check? If anyone believes that DM just happened to find the information – which was more about failing to register than the actual transgression – they’ll believe anything. The mom must be really dumb. She should have waited until Luke got his big paycheck and blackmailed him.
What good is provided the victim by having the law mete punishment after the fact?
Maybe the only good to the victim is when it is needed to keep this individual away? I honestly don’t know.
Again, goes back to why this whole thing stinks so bad. How many of you would have the first call be the police if you found out your nephew or cousin were molesting you daughter? A stranger, sure. But a family member? Like many of you have said before and with my husband, a alibi would definitely be needed, but the police would never be called.
It’s like Christmas, O-live keeps on giving and giving and giving..
http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2017/06/pac-12_network_memo_avoid_luke.html
Haha! They are starting to delete comments now, especially this one guy who keeps posting:
“Questions asked could also be directed back to Oregonian Editor Mark Katches to share with us about his 1998 DUI. We all made mistakes when we were young…heck, Katches was only, what 35? “Mark, what have you done to overcome your drinking problem? What can you offer that might save lives to keep a drunk from behind the wheel? Isn’t this a learning opportunity?”
I only have two things here but aid to the story and angle that would have made a difference.
– Luke should have (and perhaps still should) do a press conference and state his position, like it or not, he needs to now speak for himself.
– Oregonian should have created this story not to shame OSU, or LH, but shine a spotlight on the NCAA. The NCAA does not care about allowing “felon’s” to play. NCAA should prohibit this, THEN AND ONLY THEN should we apply the rule to anyone currently enrolled or planning to enroll. Oregonian had a chance to go after BIG fish (NCAA) and instead chose to single out the actors to sensationalize an old crime, as disgusting as it was, it’s still old news and served no other purpose. That is why Oregonian should be ashamed of HOW they went about the story. Rookies.
New piece is up. Let me know if you find typos, etc.
It was a lot to digest, and I might have missed some stuff.
Tacoma is county seat of Pierce county which includes Puyallup. I wonder if there is an ab in the vicinity who wants to and has time to peruse the court records. Anything that was open to DM should be available to any citizen.