Tim Graham is an award-winning journalist for the Buffalo News and considered the lead media source in the Patrick Kane investigation. He has reported a lot of facts on the case while other news outlets seem to have very little information surrounding the investigation. Every single thing you’ve heard about the Kane allegations has come from Graham or his team, he was first to report the rape investigation and remains the primary source for information through his Twitter account.
If you carefully read everything Graham has put out, it’s clear he either thinks Kane is guilty or has motive to make people believe it. This thought doesn’t come from too much speculation, if you look at exactly what Graham has said throughout the course of this investigation it shows motive to publicly discredit anyone that backs Kane.
Let’s rewind.
August 6, 2015 – Graham’s tweet confirms Kane investigation is for rape allegations, it received over 1,900 retweets. Most of the people discredited Graham’s statement and said he “doesn’t know anything” because there were no charges filed.
Shortly after that tweet, and the response from fans, Graham clarified. He had to point out no charges had been filed because many presumed his information was speculative for that same reason, “innocent until proven guilty” was said countless times by Kane supporters. Therefore, Graham was getting discredited and had to respond with this tweet.
“A law-enforcement source” is identified as the person feeding information to Graham. But there’s only one problem with that, it was also reported that the Hamburg Police Department issued a ‘gag order’ for all their officers specifically telling them not to speak about the Kane allegations. Graham even discussed this on the radio the next day.
“A report came out officially that he was being investigated by the Hamburg Police Department,” Graham said. “Hamburg – and it should be noted – is (a) suburb in Buffalo. It’s right next to Orchard Park, where the Bills play. So it’s a place where a lot of Bills players live, and this is a police department that’s used to dealing with famous people. Millionaires, celebrities – local celebrities, in particular. So they’ve dealt with this type of thing before. We find out that the chief of police has sent an email to everyone in the department saying that nobody speaks about Patrick Kane – or else. So information was tough to find. Finally I was able to get some confirmation that Patrick Kane was being investigated for rape for an incident that allegedly occurred over the weekend. From there, things turned into a mushroom cloud.”
The Chief of the Hamburg Police Department sent an email to all the officers warning them not to talk to the media, yet some unnamed “law enforcement official” confirmed for Graham it was a rape investigation? So that person risked their job to give information to Graham?
Who was the person that revealed this information? Not important yet, could’ve been anyone, let’s move on.
Upon finding this information nobody else seemingly could, Graham was invited on the Kap & Haugh show in Chicago to discuss it further. If you listen to the interview, Graham reveals his position on the Kane allegations several times.
The first thing he says is he has to be careful because of “lawyers” and he has a “lot more information” he hasn’t reported yet. Not only did he get confirmation it was a rape investigation during a ‘gag order,’ he also received “a lot of other information” he cannot report yet? Ok.
Then he confirms Patrick Kane is getting investigated for rape, no charges have been filed and “it doesn’t look good for Kane” based on his sources. He then immediately references different degrees of sexual assault and a settlement. One minute and fifteen seconds into his interview, Graham had already used the term “settlement.” He also referenced the girl “being out for Kane’s money” again less than two minutes into the interview. It’s was very clear he was defending her.
Haugh then references “the deliberate nature” in which Graham is speaking and questions why the Buffalo News ran the story with so many facts, and more importantly charges, missing from the equation.
Graham goes on to say if he had to name “three people in sports” that would be investigated for rape, Patrick Kane would be on the top of his list. He then tells listeners to go to Deadspin and check out Kane’s past. (4:00 minute mark)
That’s all you need to know from this interview. Kane has had one arrest in his past, over five years ago in 2009, and he pleaded guilty for non-criminal assault. Kane was also rumored to have choked at a girl at a frat party while drunk in 2012, no charges or arrests though. Apparently, that information would be enough for an award-winning journalist to immediately name Kane as a rape suspect due to his sketchy past? That doesn’t make sense.
At this point you can already notice Graham positioning himself to go all-in on Kane’s guilt… either that, or the more likely scenario, he’s trying to convince you Kane’s guilty.
Why exactly would Graham want to do that? Instead of asking why, let’s look at what he has done.
Up to this point, Graham has revealed Kane is under investigation for rape and he’s not surprised what so ever due to his past run-ins with the law. He also received information about a case that nobody else in the media could get, and claims to have more of it.
What follows next from Graham? Bite marks and scratches on the victim. Just another little piece of information including the bodily injuries suffered by the alleged victim, she was reportedly “overpowered and raped.” Another report to paint Kane as a villain, “he bit and scratched her.”
When that was reported, almost everyone began to really question Graham’s sources. Not necessarily indicating it’s not true, just noticing Graham is obviously backing the victim.
So what does Graham do?
The next report released by the Buffalo News was the owner of SkyBar’s comments. Those comments from Mark Croce indicated the alleged victim was drunk, hanging all over Kane at the bar and guarding him from other girls. Most people immediately took this as a “pro-Kane” story and dismissed the thoughts of Graham only backing the victim, but the alternate motive was missed by almost everybody.
News outlets blasted the Buffalo News for being insensitive to the victim and painting her as a drunken whore.
The part about this that was missed is Graham immediately discrediting Croce. Yes, the Buffalo News wrote those comments and it made the victim look bad, but it made the credibility from Kane’s witnesses look even worse.
Graham immediately highlighted Croce’s personal interest in making “pro-Kane” comments.
This displayed personal interest for Croce to defend Kane, making his statements less powerful. Graham made sure to get that point across.
Graham has also retweeted and posted other stories that make sure to convince the audience Kane isn’t a role model. His motive was becoming clear to everyone, so of course, he responded.
Graham also released information that the alleged victim “didn’t want to go to Kane’s house, she was supporting a friend who wanted to go.” Graham claims to have three different sources on that which obviously paints a picture that the woman didn’t even want to be in Kane’s house and directly contradicts what the SkyBar owner said. Again, discrediting Kane’s only public supporter up to this point.
The inevitable question becomes, why would Tim Graham want to push so hard on Kane’s guilt? Is it because of the information he knows but hasn’t revealed yet? Or, is it because somebody is using him to get public support for the victim?
If you still have doubt in Graham’s motives, maybe you didn’t notice him doing the exact same thing to Kane’s driver.
The off-duty police officer who drove Kane and the alleged victim to the house said the victim definitely wanted to go to the house. The statement from the cop also filled in a few holes Graham’s reporting hadn’t included yet, like the presence of another male. When analyzing the original story from the victim, Graham reported, everyone questioned what the friend was doing during the alleged rape? However, the cop’s statement puts another male at the house who obviously distracted the friend.
Why was that left out until now? Why wouldn’t have Graham told us that already, especially when people asked numerous times..Sports Mockery told you there was another person there days ago.
The reason is clear, because if that part of the story was introduced any earlier it would not have been discredited as fast. Graham did the exact same thing to the off-duty cop that he did to the SkyBar owner, publicly discredited him right after his “pro-Kane” statement was released. Graham pointed out that the off-duty cop was under internal investigation for possibly going to the bar during work hours, and he also referenced a photo from 2010 of Thomas English drinking from the Stanley Cup in uniform.
Graham’s tweet to discredit Kane’s chauffeur was sent at 9:25am. His original report of the off-duty cop’s statement was posted at 8:52am, Graham discredited him in less than an hour. Damaging information regarding the internal investigation and past ties to Kane were also included in the report.
If you’re keeping score at home … there’s only two public statements backing Patrick Kane on the night of the alleged incident (the bar owner and the driver) and both people who gave those statements have been publicly discredited by Graham.
Still think Graham has no motive? You might, and that’s because you probably feel confused like we were before speaking to a private investigator about it.
Here are the possible reasons why Graham has motive to post information that discredits Kane and his supporters.
His credibility is in jeopardy. As we said, Graham was the original source of the Kane rape investigation and damn near pushed all his chips in the middle of the table during the follow-up radio interviews. If Kane never gets charged, who will remember Tim Graham for false info…?
His sources. Graham seems to be the ONLY media person in the country with inside information on the Kane investigation. Most presume his source is coming from law enforcement, but who is risking their job to talk to him? We think we know.
He needs information. Graham is apparently getting fed information from somebody, and that keeps him as the lead media source on the case. What if that person is backing the victim? What if that person is her high-priced defense attorney she just hired?
Did you catch that last part? The victim hired a high-priced defense attorney to represent her in this case, Thomas J. Eoannou one of the best defense attorneys in New York.
Isn’t that odd? Why would a victim have a DEFENSE attorney? The district attorney would normally serve as the prosecutor in this case and represent the victim accordingly. Rape advocate firms also supply additional services to victims.
There are really only two reasons why the victim would hire a high-priced defense attorney.
Add help to the prosecution. Hell, 97 of every 100 rapes receive no punishment, why not get extra help for the DA if you can afford it?
To control the press during the fact finding process. When a charge as sensitive as rape comes to the table it often comes down to “he said vs. she said,” if he is a high-profile athlete and she is some regular girl, her chances of prosecution are very small. To counterbalance that, you can hired a high-priced defense attorney to discredit the defendant’s witnesses during the fact finding process. If he’s good, he have a connection at the newspaper and will be able to slowly shift public opinion through the news … using a reporter who needs information.
Think about it.
If the police had any evidence against Patrick Kane he would be in jail.
If the alleged victim and her friend had matching stories, the bodily injuries would be enough to arrest Kane now.
If the police found anything at Kane’s house during the search, such as a home security tape that revealed something, Kane would be in jail.
Why hasn’t Kane been arrested yet?
Here’s our guess … (with some fantastic help from a private investigator) … the stories about the night in question from Kane, alleged victim, alleged victim’s friend and other male involved don’t match. If that’s the case it immediately becomes a “he said vs. she said.” In addition to that, if the Buffalo News continues to discredit every person that comes forward for Kane, it makes the alleged victim’s version of the story more believable … for the public and potential jurors in the case.
Notice how everyone seemingly knows who the victim is, but nobody knows the friend? That’s because the friend is hiding, maybe because her story doesn’t match the victims?
If the District Attorney wanted to prosecute Kane, based on forensic evidence and presumably more about that night than we know of, jury selection would become incredibly important. Often times, the members of the jury are already swayed in their belief, from the news outlets, that it makes the case much more likely to end in settlement rather than actual prosecution.
That’s motive for Graham.
What if Graham is getting all his information from the victim’s attorney? The one who “cannot confirm or deny” he’s representing the victim.
If that was the case, Graham’s motive for painting Kane as a villain is what’s allowing him to obtain the information nobody else has about the investigation. This would also explain how the victim knew to delete her social media accounts so fast, the high-priced defense attorney has been representing her since the start. Why else do you think nobody knew about the allegations until the Thursday after the weekend? It’s because the victim was finally ready to move forward without social media accounts for the public to find.
You might think that’s the end of the coincidences but it’s not. Graham has also publicly discredited Kane’s attorney, Paul Cambria. Cambria’s wife posted a picture of the Stanley Cup on Saturday night at SkyBar, meaning they were in attendance. That makes them possible witnesses which could present a conflict of interest representing Kane.
Posted in Buffalo News report:
Paula Cambria, the wife of Kane’s lawyer, posted a photo of herself, her husband and another couple at SkyBar on the same night.
“Hey, Pat Kane in da house,” Paula Cambria wrote.
Granted, Cambria’s wife posting the picture is a fact nobody can ignore. However, Cambria now becomes the third person Graham has publicly discredit that was backing Kane.
So let’s add this up… three people have publicly defended Kane and all three have been discredited by Graham. There’s reports of bar employees giving statements, friends and other family members to vouch for both people’s character, but why haven’t we heard any of those?
The reason is clear, Graham has inside information that presents motive to see Patrick Kane get locked away. Due to that inside information, Graham’s credibility is now on the line if Kane skates free. If he’s receiving his information from the victim’s attorney, then the process of discrediting anyone that supports Kane must be retribution for having access to such information.
Every single media report you’ve read on Kane from Graham has been slanted the same way, hopefully you can see now see the possibilities why.
If Graham is truly non-biased, and wants to report fairly, then maybe he will tell everyone who drove the victim to the hospital because that’s a huge hole in his most recent version of the story. If that person happens to also be a Kane supporter, then it’s clear their identity won’t be released until it can be discredited at the same time.
If that person isn’t a Kane supporter, their version of the story probably doesn’t match the victim’s hence why Graham hasn’t reported it.
No alternate motive my ass. If a tie between Graham and the alleged victim’s attorney surfaces, imagine what that would do to the jury selection process… no unbiased jury, no trial. The presence of evidence and no trial normally ends in settlement.
Interesting Note: The victim’s attorney and Kane’s attorney have worked together previously in a multi-million dollar case. The case involved defending a husband and wife who were part of a scam selling illegal cigarettes. Cambria, Kane’s attorney represented the husband who got off. Thomas Eoannou, alleged victim’s attorney, defended the wife who ended up getting found guilty and sent to jail.
http://sportsmockery.com/2015/08/bu...o-convince-the-public-patrick-kane-is-guilty/
bamainatlantaYou wake him up, you keep him up