1327 replies to this topic

[todd]

If you print the message out and stick it under you mattress it still exists.

 

Good tip, I do that with my regular posts, but not my private messages currently.

[Bingo]

Good tip, I do that with my regular posts, but not my private messages currently.

 

How do you know that the person you are messaging isn't printing out the message and sticking it in a drawer?

[todd]

How do you know that the person you are messaging isn't printing out the message and sticking it in a drawer?

 

Oh I know.

[North Shore]

Perhaps the husband found the tweets, and had a 'WTF, Over!' moment, and complained up the line somewhere. Id imagine, that if you had a complaint about your boss, you'd go over their head, and isnt that the police board?

[spanky123]

So there wasn't a formal complaint, therefore, how could there have been an investigation if a complaint is required to launch one, according to VHF?

 

Desjardins is quoted in the TC as stating a "concern was raised". How thinly does she want to split hairs?

[spanky123]

With so little detail made public it makes you wonder, was the exchange more benign than we imagine, or worse than we imagine? There are no real hints except the outcome of the investigation, which means little.

It's not hard to imagine he was having an affair with his officer's wife, and the twitter messages (the paper trail) were discovered and found to be slightly inappropriate, but not incriminating.

Also not hard to imagine a benign conversation where an off-colour meme or joke or suggestive comment was made, and that's the extent of it.

Either scenario could lead to the outcome of the investigation we have here.

 

I'll bet that you get a few of them. Desjardins made the comment yesterday that she hopes that "the Chief and his officers can pull together". Sounds like there are a few people that might be happy to see him go.

[johnk]

Elsner's antics made the National Post today.

[VicHockeyFan]

Rob Shaw was on CFAX this morning, good interview.  He went over how hard it was for him to get anyone to talk, on Friday and Saturday.

[VicHockeyFan]

Elsner's antics made the National Post today.

 

http://news.national...bordinates-wife

 

Married Victoria police chief ‘humiliated beyond words’ about inappropriate Twitter messages to subordinate’s wife

 

[Mike K.]

It's nice to see Shaw covering Victoria news. I was getting a little annoyed with Tristan Hopper's "Victoria sucks" angle to every piece.

[VicHockeyFan]

It's nice to see Shaw covering Victoria news. I was getting a little annoyed with Tristan Hopper's "Victoria sucks" angle to every piece.

 

He said that he was tipped off by locals, that knew of his coverage when he worked for the TC.  I'll link the CFAX podcast when it's up shortly, it's worth listening to.

[RoadRunner]

Elsner's antics made the National Post today.

 

And the Globe...

http://www.theglobea...rticle27628118/

[VicHockeyFan]

CFAX audio, where Rob Shaw, explains how he got the story and how he was stonewalled by the board (Desjardins) and police staff on Friday and Saturday when asking them about it.

 

CBC with 140 comments.

[Mike K.]

Stonewalled is a very strong term.

It's too bad Desjardin made the statements that she did. I mean, she lied, no?

[VicHockeyFan]

Stonewalled is a very strong term.

It's too bad Desjardin made the statements that she did. I mean, she lied, no?

 

I think she tried to keep a personnel issue a personnel issue, that is not commented on in the public.  But that was probably a mistake in this case. 

[Rob Randall]

You can't disclose an employee's personal investigation info just because a reporter stumbled across some leaked info. The only correct answer for the employer (in this case Desjardin) is to say to the press that "you have asked me a personnel question and as you know, nobody is allowed to confirm, deny or discuss internal matters regarding personnel." It's a more honest answer than straight out lying but yes, these things put politicians in a difficult spot.

[Mike K.]

Can't they say "no comment?"

 

I know the media loves to hypothesize when "no comment" is used, but that's a simple out leaving no trail to pick up on.

[VicHockeyFan]

You can't disclose an employee's personal investigation info just because a reporter stumbled across some leaked info. The only correct answer for the employer (in this case Desjardin) is to say to the press that "you have asked me a personnel question and as you know, nobody is allowed to confirm, deny or discuss internal matters regarding personnel." It's a more honest answer than straight out lying but yes, these things put politicians in a difficult spot.

 

Well, rumblings were getting around (Desjardins even admitted that), and as Rob Shaw said on CFAX this morning, a story was coming out, based on what he knew, no matter what.  It just would have had less details than we now have.

[spanky123]

You can't disclose an employee's personal investigation info just because a reporter stumbled across some leaked info. The only correct answer for the employer (in this case Desjardin) is to say to the press that "you have asked me a personnel question and as you know, nobody is allowed to confirm, deny or discuss internal matters regarding personnel." It's a more honest answer than straight out lying but yes, these things put politicians in a difficult spot.

 

Hogwash. She had no problems disclosing the information after it became apparent that the reporter had it. It simply looks like Desjardins figured she could blow the reporter off and it backfired.

[todd]

Stonewalled is a very strong term.

It's too bad Desjardin made the statements that she did. I mean, she lied, no?

 

Intentionally misleading and a lie are the same thing in my books.