Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Big Green Machine]

Rufus has come forward in a Province newspaper article. Should not be long now before the assailants are identified and charged. I was unable to post up the link. Hopefully someone’s else on here can do it. Thanks

See 10 posts before yours.

[Lunk Louie]

I bet these goons would undoutedly all be laughing about it and giving each other high fives as they recall how tough they were if it had not been witnessed or captured on video  .....100% 

Anyone really think they would  have any genuine remorse!?

Once a meathead always a meathead .... bullies through and through.... probably always have been

Yup....If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....we ALL know where their fate lies.....never mind the cautionary stuff, the video don't lie that's what the judge will see.

[Johnny Canuck]

I find it so strange that the video even exists. Was the video edited at all? I bet there's another video of the boat traveling upstream when the rock was tossed......

I've also seen screen shots on social media of comments made by Rufus in the past saying he'd scream at and threaten an angler. I've also seen screen shots of the "victim" standing on the Fraser amongst jet boats. Therefore he knows the sound of a jet boat, which he'd hear many minutes before it came to his location. There's no way he was in shock or scared of what was happening when the boat came up river. He knew full well that a boat was coming. It's something that he's actually angrily posted about in the past, so strange that those comments are gone now..........

In my mind he's playing the victim card. Should the boat operator have put Rufus in his place like he did? Probably not, a good shove would have been sufficient, although still assault  If Rufus wasn't throwing rocks at passing boats none of this would have occured, the instigator here is Rufus.

[FlyFishin Magician]

Victim card? I think the video and pictures of the "victim's" face speak for themselves. Regardless of whether any rocks were thrown beforehand, the guys on the jet boat did not have the right to assault him. Period.

I found it particularly distasteful that more than one guy was involved in the assault, and the third "gentleman" seemed to intimidate and prevent other anglers from intervening. This was a intimidation and bullying tactic. That much is clear. What these guys did was illegal. Period. What they did was cowardly. Period.

Should the "victim" have thrown a rock(s)? Of course not. Could a rock have caused damage to the boat or injury to a person on board. Yes. But there is absolutely no evidence that there was any damage to the boat or injury to the operators. To speculate and assume the "victim" got what he deserved is absurd. To conclude that the "victim" learned his lesson is absurd.

Rodney, you have approached this issue very reasonably and I know you reached out to the "victim" out of concern for his well being. You've also updated us and provided a forum for the members to express their thoughts. Thanks for your professional approach to representing all interested parties, and sport fishers in particular. Keep up the good work!

[Johnny Canuck]

Victim card? I think the video and pictures of the "victim's" face speak for themselves. Regardless of whether any rocks were thrown beforehand, the guys on the jet boat did not have the right to assault him. Period.

I found it particularly distasteful that more than one guy was involved in the assault, and the third "gentleman" seemed to intimidate and prevent other anglers from intervening. This was a intimidation and bullying tactic. That much is clear. What these guys did was illegal. Period. What they did was cowardly. Period.

Should the "victim" have thrown a rock(s)? Of course not. Could a rock have caused damage to the boat or injury to a person on board. Yes. But there is absolutely no evidence that there was any damage to the boat or injury to the operators. To speculate and assume the "victim" got what he deserved is absurd. To conclude that the "victim" learned his lesson is absurd.

Rodney, you have approached this issue very reasonably and I know you reached out to the "victim" out of concern for his well being. You've also updated us and provided a forum for the members to express their thoughts. Thanks for your professional approach to representing all interested parties, and sport fishers in particular. Keep up the good work!

What was said when the operator went to shore? Did Rufus say "yeah let's go"? If so no charges can happen, it was a consensual fight. Rufus did provoke the fight by throwing rocks though. If you don't agree with that then I guess it's ok to fish closed waters as long as you don't catch anything! It's ok to shoot towards people while hunting as long as you don't hit anyone! I guess it's ok to swerve at pedestrians and other vehicles on the road as long as you don't hit anyone! He got tuned up for his actions of trying to cause harm and damage.
I suppose it would be ok to throw rocks at loud vehicles on the road?? Oh, what do you mean no?! Remember this is the same "victim" who said he would scream at and THREATEN an angler for killing a fish........... This same individual that was scared by the noise of a jet boat that you'd hear for many minutes BEFORE it got to the pool he was fishing! The same noise he's been around MANY TIMES! Yes, this is playing the role of a victim! Read the article again and think of him playing the role of a victim, MAYBE you might see it then.....

I find it soooooo funny that everyone is literally shˇtting on this supposive guy involved and he could sue people for libel if no charges are actually brought forth. You're all being Karen's and jumping the gun!




By the way, where did the FWR profile for Rufus go?...... 

[dennisK]

What was said when the operator went to shore? Did Rufus say "yeah let's go"? If so no charges can happen, it was a consensual fight. Rufus did provoke the fight by throwing rocks though. If you don't agree with that then I guess it's ok to fish closed waters as long as you don't catch anything! It's ok to shoot towards people while hunting as long as you don't hit anyone! I guess it's ok to swerve at pedestrians and other vehicles on the road as long as you don't hit anyone! He got tuned up for his actions of trying to cause harm and damage.
I suppose it would be ok to throw rocks at loud vehicles on the road?? Oh, what do you mean no?! Remember this is the same "victim" who said he would scream at and THREATEN an angler for killing a fish........... This same individual that was scared by the noise of a jet boat that you'd hear for many minutes BEFORE it got to the pool he was fishing! The same noise he's been around MANY TIMES! Yes, this is playing the role of a victim! Read the article again and think of him playing the role of a victim, MAYBE you might see it then.....

I find it soooooo funny that everyone is literally shˇtting on this supposive guy involved and he could sue people for libel if no charges are actually brought forth. You're all being Karen's and jumping the gun!




By the way, where did the FWR profile for Rufus go?...... 

3 guys beat one guy and you blame the VICTIM based on the facts we have seen? huh??

You use "what ifs" as justification for violence. That's fantasy world Johnny. Our society doesn't work like that. And sure as cupcakes or courts don't.

All a judge looks at is if excessive force was used. Even the police when arresting a man cannot beat the cupcakes of him because of an alleged crime. But here we have 3 guys beat up one guy and put him in a hospital. We also have a jet boat operator who delivered in a crazy unsafe maneuver 3 guys to the shore (people on the boat visibly hit the steel deck). Why?

Facts. (reread it a few times to sink in). No boat was damaged. No one on boat was hit by rock. It's not illegal to throw a rock in the water in frustration. 3 guys pound 1 guy. No threats were uttered by the victim. And the 3 attackers and jetboat operator are hiding under the deepest the darkest hole in the valley refusing to defend their names.

But somehow in your world Johnny it's ok for 3 guys to beat  1 guy up based on those facts. If you stick with only what happened (not all the "what ifs" that are floating around) the crown will have no choice but lay charges against the guys who beat up the fisherman.

I'm just disappointed that some people actually have your irrational point of view Johnny. Do you own a jetboat by the way?

[RalphH]

There isn't just video evidence but several witness on both sides of the river and in the boat.

If this goes to court and trial it will be a complicated case. Potentially race is an issue as will be that one of the parties directly involved is apparently an individual with special needs.

Judges don't usually say a lot in court. They do absolutely listen to the evidence and testimony presented by both the prosecution and defense. If the the defense raises the issue of provocation (provided the alleged victim doesn't also get charged with assault which I think unlikely). The judge will listen to it and consider it.  They also make  assessments on the character and reliability of witnesses. They will also judge how reasonable were various actions within the circumstances of the case.

[Blood_Orange]

I wonder what role race played in this incident. Would the guy have turned his boat around if the angler had been white? Maybe, maybe not.

Would the encounter have ended with shouting and a shove, instead of more serious physical assault? Would multiple people still have ganged up to beat the angler unconscious? Would the angler have been kicked while on the ground? Would the other anglers in the vicinity have been more willing to step in to deescalate the situation? Would the angler have hesitated to talk to the authorities out of fear of retribution?

Some of you will say that I'm bringing up race when there's nothing to indicate that it was a factor, but to me there are some uncomfortable elements to this story.

[santefe]

There is really no need for a jet boat or any powered boat above say the #1 Hwy bridge on the Vedder/Chwk river.
I don't know what ministry would be responsible but surely whatever department it is should step up and address this issue.
This might eliminate a similar incident in the future.

[Lunk Louie]

Victim card? I think the video and pictures of the "victim's" face speak for themselves. Regardless of whether any rocks were thrown beforehand, the guys on the jet boat did not have the right to assault him. Period.

I found it particularly distasteful that more than one guy was involved in the assault, and the third "gentleman" seemed to intimidate and prevent other anglers from intervening. This was a intimidation and bullying tactic. That much is clear. What these guys did was illegal. Period. What they did was cowardly. Period.

Should the "victim" have thrown a rock(s)? Of course not. Could a rock have caused damage to the boat or injury to a person on board. Yes. But there is absolutely no evidence that there was any damage to the boat or injury to the operators. To speculate and assume the "victim" got what he deserved is absurd. To conclude that the "victim" learned his lesson is absurd.

Rodney, you have approached this issue very reasonably and I know you reached out to the "victim" out of concern for his well being. You've also updated us and provided a forum for the members to express their thoughts. Thanks for your professional approach to representing all interested parties, and sport fishers in particular. Keep up the good work!

Good post....pretty much what I implied

Some very logical posts showing up here.....plus one silly one

[Lunk Louie]

There is really no need for a jet boat or any powered boat above say the #1 Hwy bridge on the Vedder/Chwk river.
I don't know what ministry would be responsible but surely whatever department it is should step up and address this issue.
This might eliminate a similar incident in the future.

EXACTLY....

[RalphH]

I think the Canada Shipping Act is clear that boat operators have a special duty avoid areas where people are in or may be in the water. It's not up to wading anglers, swimmers or tubers to get out of the way. It's up to the boat operator and the law is they have to stay out of areas where people are or may be in the water. If this case goes to court I hope this issue is discussed. There is more than a simple if egregious assault. It is about public safety.

[Rodney]

Rodney, you have approached this issue very reasonably and I know you reached out to the "victim" out of concern for his well being. You've also updated us and provided a forum for the members to express their thoughts. Thanks for your professional approach to representing all interested parties, and sport fishers in particular. Keep up the good work!

Thanks FFM.

We are getting closer to that 10km/hr speed restriction on the river this week. The city is just trying to work out all the logistics on enforcing it with the RCMP.

[Blood_Orange]

We are getting closer to that 10km/hr speed restriction on the river this week. The city is just trying to work out all the logistics on enforcing it with the RCMP.

Amazing news! Thanks for all of your efforts behind the scenes

[wildmanyeah]

Thanks FFM.

We are getting closer to that 10km/hr speed restriction on the river this week. The city is just trying to work out all the logistics on enforcing it with the RCMP.

So is the speed restriction their or not?