Breaking: Tina Kraal Pleads Guilty

That's just weak. I'm so bothered by that I almost don't even know how to respond. This is how lawyers get the slimy, snake-in-the grass reputation that they have.

Come on. You have to hand it to Mr. Peters, he was obviously annoyed by Cam's unearthing of Mr. Kraal's letter to city council, so took it upon himself to discredit media outlets such as Cam's by baiting them into reporting false facts. He pulled it off too.

Throw the book at Ms. Kraal as far as I'm concerned. She's now had two opportunities to apologize and move on and turned them down. If she continues to think that her actions were reasonable she deserves all that's coming to her.

Thanks, big-ted. Good reminder of Cam's excellent sleuthing. Both he and the bikers that invested so much time setting up the cameras deserve all the kudos they get.

I have no problem with her name being published. Nor do I have a problem with an appropriate sentence. What she did was wrong and I hope she gets the message.

What I'm saying is that there's a journalistic choice whether to make it personal by putting her name in the headline. For contrast, here's how other media handled this and similar cases.

Vancouver Sun: North Vancouver woman accused of trail sabotage intends to plead guilty

North Shore News: Charges approved for North Vancouver woman accused of setting trail traps

Mail Tribune: Guilty plea expected today in forest trail sabotage case

That last one is for a different case, but you get the idea. Media makes a choice about how to handle it. My preference is to lay low on this until the sentencing is complete.

Here's my comment on this issue from below the article.

Thanks for the feedback Nat. While I set a high standard for what we do, I clearly didn't live up to that standard here.

When this part of the story was unfolding I was in California for Sea Otter. I was talking to a source who was very close to the case and I asked him to double check his facts. He did, but unfortunately he got it wrong - and I didn't take it any further. I have given my word not to reveal this source but I may be able to eventually. I think at that point you'll understand why I considered this information trustworthy. His information has been iron clad otherwise. At the same time, given another chance, I would find another source to corroborate.

Once again I have learned something the hard way, while having to report on a serious matter that I didn't anticipate. At this point all I can do is take responsibility for my failings and ensure that I don't make the same mistake again. I spent much of today on the phone, at North Van Provincial Court, ordering documents and doing research wherever I could to ensure I had the story correct. And much of that time was deciphering how I got it wrong last time so I could share that here. White-washing it never crossed my mind.

We have done our best to attract an audience that won't stand for second rate work - and I'm proud that we have accomplished that. Thanks for holding us to it. We'll continue to work our asses off to live up to your expectations. We won't always make it there, but we won't stop trying.

I wouldn't take it hard Cam. I have seen "seasoned" crime reporters make this error plus many far more egregious. Because the accused has to be present to enter a guilty plea - the court will schedule a subsequent hearing and list it as IGP (intention to enter guilty plea) so that the appropriate time is allotted and everyone knows what is going to occur. It doesn't necessarily mean that is what is going to happen.

On another note - an early guilty plea is a mitigating factor when it comes to sentencing. A complete lack of remorse is an aggravating factor. I had some sympathy for Ms. Kraal when I thought she was taking responsibility for her actions - I have close to none now. I would have thought diversion would be available for the lesser offence (basically she is law abiding, remorseful, willing to try and make amends - she can be diverted out of the criminal justice system without a criminal record). I wouldn't think that would be on the table anymore.

Thanks for the support gents!

Can the other charges be reinstated if the crown desires?

You should update the headlines about this news item on the site. I initially just read the headlines and assumed the case was done and left it at that. But it isn't. It gives the impression to those who casually peruse the board that the case is basically settled and Ms Kraal is remorseful. In fact it seems the opposite has occurred.

Can the other charges be reinstated if the crown desires?

The other charges were rejected by the crown. Nothing relating to that has changed as far as I know.

Tina Kraal deserves to have her name shamed. This shouldn't be forgotten, what she did was ridiculous.