Toggle sidebar

Around the NHL 11 - 2023/24

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
  • We're expeting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.
Status
Not open for further replies.
MardyBum said:
Yikes



Behind a paywall because they're dummies
Click to expand...

2k8jjv (1).gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: macmaroon
MardyBum said:
Saw this on twitter

Click to expand...

Well this certainly throws a jerry can of kerosine onto the embers of speculation over a couple players from that team suddenly taking leaves of absence with zero explanation or elaboration. Time will tell if this is why -- although they're not name yet, they will be once charges are laid, or should be.

There will probably be a publication ban to protect the identity of the complainant. It would depend on the details of the case whether it is thought that identifying any of the accused in media could somehow reveal her identity (as far as I know, she's only ever been referred to as "E.M."). That said, it will be easy to figure out who they are, because the court dockets are still published and you can always check Home - Daily Court Lists to see who's up in any given courthouse on any given day (even if they have legal counsel appearing for them, the accused's name will still appear). One could simply check the lists for London court every day until he starts seeing recognizable NHL names. I wouldn't recommend reporting those names on here as that could run afoul of the publication ban, but private conversations are not "publication".

Also, worth reiterating are some things that came up in discussion on this heated topic earlier. These men are still innocent until proven guilty. We have no idea what the actual evidence is. The fact that charges have been laid means nothing, especially in sex assault cases. Since the advent of #MeToo and #BelieveWomen my observation is that police use no discernment or discretion anymore and just lay charges regardless of evidence, if they have a female complainant alleging sexual assault. As a result of this, conviction rates for these sorts of charges have become abysmal. I am a criminal defence attorney and I've seen an absolute explosion in sex assault cases over the past five years or so, and the conviction rate is nonexistent. Almost all of my clients are acquitted because the evidence is simply "he said/she said" in the vast majority of cases with is almost impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt unless the accused is a complete douchebag or screws himself by giving an incriminating statement to police. Long way of saying that this case could have almost no evidence, just one young lady's say so with no corroborating evidence and a mountain of contradictory evidence. Or it could be a strong case. Only time will tell but don't be surprised if these guys are acquitted and it won't be because they hired fancy lawyers (although I assume they'll all hire flashy $500/hour guys from Toronto; yet it would be hilarious if one of them hired me as I sometimes practice in London).
 
  • Like
Reactions: FonRiesen, kanadalainen, Jets 31 and 8 others
Gabe Kupari said:
f*** Lindholm. He’s not the answer. Sorry but he turned down 8 years 72 million from Calgary. He don’t wanna be there so he certainly don’t wanna be here. U bring a guy in who doesn’t wanna be here and things will go downhill fast. Cmon Chevy grab an overrated player who probably doesn’t wanna be here. Screw the chemistry. Grab a guy who said no to Calgary already. Honestly some of you just what time is it? U sure u don’t want konecny still? Or mittlestadt no wait granlund no wait who the guy a random podcaster mentioned today. Why would u wanna bring a guy in from an apparently toxic room to our room which appears to be no longer toxic. If he wants to be here, sure bring him in but he probably doesn’t so why would u want a guy who don’t wanna be here. I don’t think Lindholm would make much difference here. Let someone else overpay for him and grab a guy with value instead of a guy who is being seriously over rated.
Click to expand...
Watched some Flames highlights and while I don't watch as many Flames games as you, its hard to see how Lindholm is the problem - he's still winning face-offs and seems to be one of the few Flames back checking. Kadri and Huberdeau are garbage, Weever plays like Tylers Myers and Markstrom has zero confidence still... the whole team sags if they get down a goal.

Lindholm isn't a 1C but he's a solid 2C and he seems to go to the net on the power play... not my first choice but he's still a good choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flair Hay, Jets 31, Moon Man and 1 other person
ERYX said:
Well this certainly throws a jerry can of kerosine onto the embers of speculation over a couple players from that team suddenly taking leaves of absence with zero explanation or elaboration. Time will tell if this is why -- although they're not name yet, they will be once charges are laid, or should be.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to give a shoutout to you and the police officer member for your posts over on the Main Board about the legal system. Very helpful!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RabidOne, blueandgoldguy, Jets 31 and 3 others
MardyBum said:


Not going to speculate, but fwiw.

Just happy we dont have any of the 2018 WJC in our org.
Click to expand...


I believe we do but he wasn’t involved. Vilardi was on that team no. Formenton tho must be John Doe 1 since he was banished to Europe already.

Edit. No vilArdi wasn’t on that team.
 
Last edited:
Gabe Kupari said:
I believe we do but he wasn’t involved. Vilardi was on that team no. Formenton tho must be John Doe 1 since he was banished to Europe already.
Click to expand...

Think he was injured funny enough :laugh:.

Or maybe I'm thinking of the following year. Maybe he just didnt make the team? He's never been listed on the reports with the roster.
 
Gabe Kupari said:
I believe we do but he wasn’t involved. Vilardi was on that team no. Formenton tho must be John Doe 1 since he was banished to Europe already.

Edit. No vilArdi wasn’t on that team.
Click to expand...
There were no Jets or Jets prospects, past or present, on the 2018 team. The 5 names had been floating around for awhile and the rash of LOA's pretty much confirm who had been on the list.

Hey remember when some had wondered it acquiring Carter Hart would be a possible move for the Jets if we had lost Hellebuyck to UFA? :oops:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flair Hay and Jets 31
ERYX said:
Well this certainly throws a jerry can of kerosine onto the embers of speculation over a couple players from that team suddenly taking leaves of absence with zero explanation or elaboration. Time will tell if this is why -- although they're not name yet, they will be once charges are laid, or should be.

There will probably be a publication ban to protect the identity of the complainant. It would depend on the details of the case whether it is thought that identifying any of the accused in media could somehow reveal her identity (as far as I know, she's only ever been referred to as "E.M."). That said, it will be easy to figure out who they are, because the court dockets are still published and you can always check Home - Daily Court Lists to see who's up in any given courthouse on any given day (even if they have legal counsel appearing for them, the accused's name will still appear). One could simply check the lists for London court every day until he starts seeing recognizable NHL names. I wouldn't recommend reporting those names on here as that could run afoul of the publication ban, but private conversations are not "publication".

Also, worth reiterating are some things that came up in discussion on this heated topic earlier. These men are still innocent until proven guilty. We have no idea what the actual evidence is. The fact that charges have been laid means nothing, especially in sex assault cases. Since the advent of #MeToo and #BelieveWomen my observation is that police use no discernment or discretion anymore and just lay charges regardless of evidence, if they have a female complainant alleging sexual assault. As a result of this, conviction rates for these sorts of charges have become abysmal. I am a criminal defence attorney and I've seen an absolute explosion in sex assault cases over the past five years or so, and the conviction rate is nonexistent. Almost all of my clients are acquitted because the evidence is simply "he said/she said" in the vast majority of cases with is almost impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt unless the accused is a complete douchebag or screws himself by giving an incriminating statement to police. Long way of saying that this case could have almost no evidence, just one young lady's say so with no corroborating evidence and a mountain of contradictory evidence. Or it could be a strong case. Only time will tell but don't be surprised if these guys are acquitted and it won't be because they hired fancy lawyers (although I assume they'll all hire flashy $500/hour guys from Toronto; yet it would be hilarious if one of them hired me as I sometimes practice in London).
Click to expand...

Excuse me with the off topic question: is your practice exclusively in criminal defense, or do you also do other types of legal work? Just curious.
 
GeorgeJETson said:
Excuse me with the off topic question: is your practice exclusively in criminal defense, or do you also do other types of legal work? Just curious.
Click to expand...
About 95% of what I do is criminal defence work. I am licensed to do other stuff, and have done a little but here-and-there in stuff that's technically not criminal work but similar, like some human rights work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeorgeJETson and Buffdog
ERYX said:
About 95% of what I do is criminal defence work. I am licensed to do other stuff, and have done a little but here-and-there in stuff that's technically not criminal work but similar, like some human rights work.
Click to expand...
Would some of the players not be able to be named if they were 17 at the time and they would thus be tried as juveniles? I haven't looked at what the exact ages were of the alleged accused, just curious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ERYX
LucianoBorsato said:
Would some of the players not be able to be named if they were 17 at the time and they would thus be tried as juveniles? I haven't looked at what the exact ages were of the alleged accused, just curious.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, excellent point. If they were under 18 at the time of the allegations, their names could not be reported by operation of the Youth Criminal Justice Act. I hadn't considered this factor. This would explain why no one is naming them and teams are saying "we will not comment further".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jets 31
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom