FQE suspends arbiter for cheating?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FQE suspends arbiter for cheating?

    Kevin Spraggett reports here: http://www.spraggettonchess.com/cana...ught-cheating/

    Claude Lessard is a popular and well respected arbiter, organizer and promoter in the Quebec City area chess community. Earlier in the month the Quebec Chess Federation (FQE) took the unprecedented step to ban him for 2 years following an investigation into multiple longtime allegations of cheating using a cellphone chess app during his games.
    Apparently the FQE information on their website was taken down shortly after it was posted... anyone know the story here?

    Edited to add: it seems the FQE lawyers advised them to take down the posting; it also seems that the information is alleged to be correct but once lawyers get involved anything can happen...

    KS also alleges that cheating is widespread - even present with players > 2700. Of course, we are still waiting for KS to publish his huge expose of the CFC, so one has to take everything he posts with at least a grain of salt?

    edited to add this: there is a thread here about this... http://www.quebecechecs.com/phpBB3/v...php?f=1&t=8898
    (still struggling with my horrible knowledge of French to digest this - even with Google translate! :) )
    Last edited by Kerry Liles; Sunday, 23rd September, 2018, 10:26 PM.

  • #2
    This has been discussed on the French Chesstalk for a while.

    https://forum.chesstalk.com/forum/pa...site-de-la-fqe

    And another thread on the quebecechecs site:

    http://www.quebecechecs.com/phpBB3/v...php?f=1&t=8900

    Another thread was removed from the quebecechecs site about 10 days ago.

    He is still listed as a member of the FQE, and as the TD of a local Quebec City weekly club tournament.

    Canbase has hundreds of his games (most recent in February) - the reader can judge for themselves whether or not cheating is involved. Going as far back as the 1990's, I don't see any spectacular changes in his rating. He played mostly in club tournaments, and I don't see any abnormal results when he played higher-rated players.

    http://canbase.fqechecs.qc.ca/canbaseii.htm

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Kerry Liles View Post

      Apparently the FQE information on their website was taken down shortly after it was posted... anyone know the story here?
      In Quebec, unlike the rest of Canada (due to the different justice system) you can lose a defamation case and be forced to pay significant damages even if the allegations that you are making are true.

      The rest of Canada has a court system rooted in British common law whereas the Quebec courts are based on French law.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post

        In Quebec, unlike the rest of Canada (due to the different justice system) you can lose a defamation case and be forced to pay significant damages even if the allegations that you are making are true.

        The rest of Canada has a court system rooted in British common law whereas the Quebec courts are based on French law.
        The UK has its own problems. "Libel tourism" to England, like medical tourism to Cuba, takes advantage of a different domestic set-up and is so well known that the US government passed laws relating to it; it hampers free speech like SLAPP lawsuits do. [Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation intimidate and silence critics with the odious threat of expensive, if worthless, litigation]

        English defamation law puts the burden of proving the truth of allegedly defamatory statements on the defendant, rather than the plaintiff, and has been considered an impediment to free speech in much of the developed world. In many cases of libel tourism, plaintiffs sued in England to censor critical works when their home countries would reject the case outright. In the United States, the 2010 SPEECH Act makes foreign libel judgements unenforceable and unrecognizable by U.S. courts if they don't comply with U.S. protections for freedom of speech and due process, and was made largely in response to the English laws.[4]
        The way I read the Wikipedia entry, exactly the same result is possible in England, given the burden of proof on the defendant.

        Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post

          In Quebec, unlike the rest of Canada (due to the different justice system) you can lose a defamation case and be forced to pay significant damages even if the allegations that you are making are true.

          The rest of Canada has a court system rooted in British common law whereas the Quebec courts are based on French law.
          In Quebec, there are three cases of defamations. John Doe says something or write something that is detrimental to the Honor or the Reputation of someone and

          a) the facts are false and John Doe is aware that they are false or
          b) the facts are false and John Doe should have been aware that they are false or
          c) the facts are true but there is no public interest to their publication.

          It is this notion of public interest that is open to determination by the judge. It is highly variable, it depends on whether the victim is a private person or a public person and on the time and place. It is the delicate balance of the victim expectation to private life and the public interest, between freedom of expression and protection of the private life. There is no hierarchical relationship between the fundamental human rights guaranteed by the Charter. Which one is more important is judged on a case by case basis.

          Bad faith is not required to loose a defamation case.

          Contrary to Common Law, there is nothing specific on defamation: the Plaintif must prove the Defamation, a damage and that the defamation is the cause of the damage.

          Comment

          Working...
          X