Blues 2024 Off-Season Trade Proposals Thread

[Brian39]

Interesting. You are right, it doesn't change my opinion, but I concede you are more well versed in criminal law than I. I didn't realize it required that type of intent. I did say it was light research. That does seems like a big oversight in the law. They could have put mens rea requirement without it needing intent for revenge or blackmail, then added those as escalators.

Either way, it should be illegal. It is should require registration. And it should ruin his life as he ran the risk of ruining hers.

They easily could have just made it a 'knowingly' mens rea or even the more demanding 'purposefully' mens rea to ensure that the state had to prove it was more than just an accident. No clue why they used the 'with intent to harrass/threaten/coerce' requirement that is generally only used when otherwise acceptable behavior crosses a line. (for example, calling someone several times to reach them regarding something time sensitive vs calling someone repeatedly to piss them off with a ringing phone).

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

And that quote is fully the author's opinion. That is not attributed to his source, who is not presented as a team source or a source from McGroarty's camp (although 'league source' could theoretically be an agent). That is the author's summary of the situation, not a report of what either party has said. It is a hell of a leap to get from that writer's opinion statement to 'the player has obviously requested a trade even though the lone source in the article didn't say that.'

Look, I'm not going to argue with you about this. The Jets have been shopping him. Jets beat writer has reason to believe that he wants out. Most everyone else sees it that way too. You can believe what you want.

 

[Xerloris]

The Missouri statute you are referring to is 573.110 (Nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images). A conviction under that statute is a Class D Felony as you stated, but is not a sex offense that requires registration.

That said, the authors of the statute fully botched it and (in my opinion unintentionally) made it extremely difficult to prosecute cases where the image shared wasn't shared specifically for revenge. In order to gain a conviction, the state must prove that the person shared the image with the intent to harass, threaten or coerce the person depicted in the image. Unfortunately, the intent element would not necessarily be met in the scenario where a person confesses "I sent this graphic, private sex tape to my buddy without the girl's consent because I thought my buddy would like it and I didn't think she would ever find out." They marketed this bill as a response to revenge porn where people were posting stuff online to get even with exes (or scammers who used the threat of leaking nudes to get money out of people). But in doing so, they didn't craft it to include secretly filming another in the act and then passing it around to your buddies for clout. I know several prosecutors who are extremely frustrated with this statute. It is ridiculous that "she didn't even know I was filming and I never thought she'd find out I sent it to my friend" is an actual defense to this statute.

If he had done exactly what was alleged/admitted in Missouri, I don't believe that he would have violated a criminal law. He'd be subject to a civil suit, but I do not believe that he would be convicted under the statute you are talking about. I think the state may have been able to make a harassment case for his communications with her after the fact, but those details are murkier and it would have been very tough. Realistically, if Missouri tried to go at him as hard at they could, he definitely wouldn't have gotten prison, he might have gotten probation, and he very likely would have gotten an opportunity to keep a conviction off his record.

None of that changes my opinion of his conduct and I'm not trying to change your opinion on his conduct.

But in a large number of areas (including the state the Blues play in) what he did is not a sex offense, does not require registration, would almost never result in prison time for a 1st offender, and in many areas is not even a criminal offense.

Correct me if I'm wrong but if the girl was under 18 in the state of MO wouldn't what he did be considered distribution of child pornography? I believe MO is one of the few state that does not differentiate between adults and teens when it comes to distribution of images like that.

Yes, your thought process is. Leaked videos can ruin a woman's life. People will hold that against her if it gets out, even if she in no way intentionally participated in it. There is literally scientific research to show people hold the victim accountable in revenge porn. She did not know or consent to that. He knowingly did what he did with callous disregard for the rest of her life to score some cool points with his friends. So I have no regard for the rest of his.

If someone raped your sister, mom, wife, or whatever woman in your life you hold dear,would you be ok with them going about their life like nothing happened? I hope not. You'd probably want them to suffer consequences for that heinous action. So there are stupid decisions that should cause people to have their live's ruined. We can disagree on where to draw the line. I think it is on the other side of this one.

If anyone is being soft here, it is those who forgive. "Oh, he just made a mistake, we should fowgive him and all dance in the daisies and be happy". f*** that. I feel some crimes deserve to get biblical. That aint soft.

So, you've now turned something that was consensual into a what if about rape? You're off the deep end.

 

[Memento]

Correct me if I'm wrong but if the girl was under 18 in the state of MO wouldn't what he did be considered distribution of child pornography? I believe MO is one of the few state that does not differentiate between adults and teens when it comes to distribution of images like that.


So, you've now turned something that was consensual into a what if about rape? You're off the deep end.

The sex was consensual. Filming it, sending the footage to his friends as bragging rights, and posting her identity everywhere was not, and he was rightfully raked over the coals for it.

 

[Xerloris]

Watching sports becomes easier when you have actually good people to root for on your team. Imagine having to be a fan of the Edmonton Oilers, for example. On the other end, don't criticize people for not wanting root for Mailloux, who made a conscious decision to be a toxic asshole. He never had to send the footage to his buddies as bragging rights. He never had to plaster her name everywhere on his social media. A stupid decision? He nearly ruined a young woman's life with his actions, and he'll still get to play professional hockey, even though he showed little remorse over it. He's gotten plenty of chances for redemption (including Montreal drafting him in the first round); he doesn't need you white-knighting for him when he's not even a Blue and quite possibly never will be.



The sex was consensual. Filming it, sending the footage to his friends as bragging rights, and posting her identity everywhere was not, and he was rightfully raked over the coals for it.

Yes, he was also punished according to the laws of where this happened. Probably should have been worse but nothing we can do about it.

 

[Memento]

Yes, he was also punished according to the laws of where this happened. Probably should have been worse but nothing we can do about it.

It doesn't mean shit in the court of public opinion; Mailloux has expressed little, if any, remorse over what he did. Yes, he was punished according to Swedish law, but that doesn't mean that others are wrong to not want him anywhere near their team.

 

[Xerloris]

It doesn't mean shit in the court of public opinion; Mailloux has expressed little, if any, remorse over what he did. Yes, he was punished according to Swedish law, but that doesn't mean that others are wrong to not want him anywhere near their team.

See that's where I have issue, I know people have different opinions but we've literally had someone on our team that killed someone and IMO drunk driving leading to the death of someone is far worse than showing your friends a sex tape. Also, might I add the drunk driver was an adult where as this person was a kid. It's fine to not want him on the team but things need to be looked at in perspective.

 

[Memento]

See that's where I have issue, I know people have different opinions but we've literally had someone on our team that killed someone and IMO drunk driving leading to the death of someone is far worse than showing your friends a sex tape. Also, might I add the drunk driver was an adult where as this person was a kid. It's fine to not want him on the team but things need to be looked at in perspective.

I never agreed with having Craig MacTavish (I'm assuming that's whom you're talking about?) on our team ever, and you can look up my posts on that if you feel like it.

I feel, as a woman, that spreading your name on social media on a sex tape where you never agreed to film or publicize any of it, where a bunch of older men are "rating" you and calling you "whore", "slut" and all other sorts of vile terms, where your friends and family can see it and judge you...no, it's not worse than drunk driving leading to death, but it's far from a mere walk in the park for anyone who has had their consent destroyed. Even at Mailloux's age, I understood consent. He was a kid, but there are so many other kids who don't do what he did. Youth is not an excuse. It may be a reasoning, but it's far from an excuse for the actions he did.

Personally, I don't want to have to root for scumbags like MacTavish, McLeod, Mailloux, Miller, etc. Just my honest opinion.

 

[Frenzy31]

A couple of quick notes on Mailloux - First he was 17 and she was 18. He did take her photo when they were engaged in oral. He shared it with his teammates - clearly not revenge porn, but bragging. I don't think it was done out of malice. His teammates recognized her and she found out. She claims to not have been aware of the photo being taken - but it doesn't sound like it was some hidden camera (hello American Pie). Nor was it reported as a video.

He has completed all of the required recompense. Per media sources - (The Gazette) he has completed counseling, education, and shows real remorse. Logan Mailloux cleared to play in NHL: reports

Let me put it to you another way. I know a lot of us are Gen Xers. A different time - where there was no social media and no cell phones when we were 17. And unless you are dragging along a 35mm film, you weren't able to do things that are done today. If things were recorded then the same way they are today, how many of us would have had issues? I lived in a fraternity house in the 90s. We didn't have cell phones - only 35mm cameras.......

Clearly I am more lenient on this issues than other posters, but I do believe in 2nd chances - almost across the board - there are few hot button issues for me.... The stuff you do when you are stupid and young - there is a reason cases are sealed. I don't think this would have been in the media if he were not a hockey player from a foreign country who was likely a 1st round pick.

Bottom line. To me he made a mistake. He has paid for it.... move on. At some point everyone needs a 2nd chance. While she was humiliated- he has also been dragged through the mud.

Would I trade Snugg for him? Maybe. I think it is a position of need and I think Snuggs could be replaced internally. I don't know how much about Mailloux and his year in the AHL.

 

[Majorityof1]

Bottom line. To me he made a mistake. He has paid for it.... move on. At some point everyone needs a 2nd chance. While she was humiliated- he has also been dragged through the mud.

He didn't make a mistake. He made an intentional decision to put his clout over her well being. He didn't try to open his phone to check messages during a sex act, and oopsie, I hit the wrong button 6 times and mistakenly took a picture of her and accidentally sent it. He intentionally, not mistakenly, took a picture trying to hide it from her. Why hide it unless he knew or suspected she would not approve? She was humiliated, and she did nothing to deserve humiliation. He paid as little as possible for his actions, but it was his intentional actions that caused it. Do not equate her unearned humiliation with his completely earned consequences, which was a slap on the wrist. It was only a mistake to him because he was caught and it suddenly effected HIM negatively.

The its a different time excuse is bull shit. Wrong is wrong independent of the technology available to commit the wrong act. Is murder suddenly ok because we have much easier ways to kill people now? Sure when "Thou shalt not kill" was written, they didn't have guns. But you can still blame people who use them to kill people. So what if it was your friend behind a fake wall taking pictures with a 35mm camera or the ease of a cell phone, wrong is wrong.

As for paying his dues, the article you linked said he paid less than $2K fine, issued a statement, went to a therapist (not said how many times), and took a class. Is that really paying for his actions? As for his sincere regret, the victim does not feel he regrets it:

"The woman said she asked that Mailloux send her a sincere apology in written form because she did not want to meet with him in person. She said she received “a text that was no longer than three sentences.”​

​

“All I wanted was a heartfelt apology for his behavior,” the woman wrote to The Athletic.​

​

The woman felt that Mailloux’s subsequent attempts to apologize were done at the behest of team officials and the court. -Katie Stran, Corey Pronman, Athletic​

​

So who says he legitimately regrets it? His agent who has a financial incentive. His Junior team who has a reputational incentive as they get a boost for having players from their program in the NHL. Montreal who has an incentive to draft a good player later by ignoring his issues is trying to cover over the bad PR hit. They are now reportedly rumored to be trying to trade him. To me, it does not sound like he has suffered hardly at all and I see zero credible evidence he is genuinely sincere in his regret. A bunch of people with a vested interest in this blowing over are saying it should blow over. Color me convinced.

I too believe in 2nd chances, but they are earned. Not by meeting the absolute minimum required by broken judicial systems or fans that don't care about women and just want hockey. You need to earn 2nd chances by going above and beyond, doing things that aren't required but are the right thing. There is no credible evidence he has done that at all.

 

[Memento]

So I guess the only way we'll ever know if he actually regrets what he did is if you, the arbiter of internet virtue dictates so? You're so full of shit.

Did you not read the middle three paragraphs that stated that his victim feels like he doesn't regret anything? That's the only person's opinion who actually matters in this, not you, not me, not anyone else but her. She felt that he only apologized because the court and team officials forced him to. She asked for a heartfelt written note and got a three-sentence text instead.

Judging by his actions thus far? I personally think Mailloux doesn't regret a single thing: only that he got caught. But again, my opinion doesn't matter, and it doesn't make someone an "arbiter of internet virtue" to not want someone who did what he did and seemingly not have any real remorse over it on our team.

 

[BlueDream]

He didn't make a mistake. He made an intentional decision to put his clout over her well being. He didn't try to open his phone to check messages during a sex act, and oopsie, I hit the wrong button 6 times and mistakenly took a picture of her and accidentally sent it. He intentionally, not mistakenly, took a picture trying to hide it from her. Why hide it unless he knew or suspected she would not approve? She was humiliated, and she did nothing to deserve humiliation. He paid as little as possible for his actions, but it was his intentional actions that caused it. Do not equate her unearned humiliation with his completely earned consequences, which was a slap on the wrist. It was only a mistake to him because he was caught and it suddenly effected HIM negatively.

The its a different time excuse is bull shit. Wrong is wrong independent of the technology available to commit the wrong act. Is murder suddenly ok because we have much easier ways to kill people now? Sure when "Thou shalt not kill" was written, they didn't have guns. But you can still blame people who use them to kill people. So what if it was your friend behind a fake wall taking pictures with a 35mm camera or the ease of a cell phone, wrong is wrong.

As for paying his dues, the article you linked said he paid less than $2K fine, issued a statement, went to a therapist (not said how many times), and took a class. Is that really paying for his actions? As for his sincere regret, the victim does not feel he regrets it:

"The woman said she asked that Mailloux send her a sincere apology in written form because she did not want to meet with him in person. She said she received “a text that was no longer than three sentences.”​

​

“All I wanted was a heartfelt apology for his behavior,” the woman wrote to The Athletic.​

​

The woman felt that Mailloux’s subsequent attempts to apologize were done at the behest of team officials and the court. -Katie Stran, Corey Pronman, Athletic​

​

So who says he legitimately regrets it? His agent who has a financial incentive. His Junior team who has a reputational incentive as they get a boost for having players from their program in the NHL. Montreal who has an incentive to draft a good player later by ignoring his issues is trying to cover over the bad PR hit. They are now reportedly rumored to be trying to trade him. To me, it does not sound like he has suffered hardly at all and I see zero credible evidence he is genuinely sincere in his regret. A bunch of people with a vested interest in this blowing over are saying it should blow over. Color me convinced.

I too believe in 2nd chances, but they are earned. Not by meeting the absolute minimum required by broken judicial systems or fans that don't care about women and just want hockey. You need to earn 2nd chances by going above and beyond, doing things that aren't required but are the right thing. There is no credible evidence he has done that at all.

Quit splitting hairs over a “mistake” vs. an “intentional decision.” They can be and are the same thing. Definition of mistake: “an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong.” He made a mistake no matter how much you don’t want to admit it, as most teenagers and young people do before their brains are fully developed.

Next, Mailloux literally asked teams to not draft him. He told them not to do it because he didn’t feel he deserved it. But you, who doesn’t know him and has never met him at all, can sit online and say he hasn’t shown remorse. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Mailloux is a admitted sex offender. He should still be in prison. In Missouri according to my light research, what he admitted to but was not charged with is a Class D Felony punishable by up to 7 years in jail (there is a chance for probation) and I would assume being added to the sex offender registry. But Sweden went light on him for whatever reason. He is the type of player that would signal to me a front office is morally corrupt if they signed him. My tenure as a Blues fan would end effective immediately.

Sweden probably “went light on him” because he was a kid and they are a more civilized society that understands that they don’t need to ruin his life over it.

Unlike here in America where we have blood thirsty losers that just want to throw people in prison forever. How’s that working out for us? We have the worst recidivism rate in the world. Our prisons and justice system are absolutely f***ed, and the stats show that our super long sentences literally do nothing to help anything. So your opinion is objectively wrong. Maybe we should learn things from places like Sweden and many other countries around the world who actually understand how to handle young people making mistakes, sorry if that offends your blood thirst mindset.

 

[Majorityof1]

Unlike here in America where we have blood thirsty losers that just want to throw people in prison forever. How’s that working out for us? We have the worst recidivism rate in the world. Our prisons and justice system are absolutely f***ed, and the stats show that our super long sentences literally do nothing to help anything. So your opinion is objectively wrong. Maybe we should learn things from places like Sweden and many other countries around the world who actually understand how to handle young people making mistakes, sorry if that offends your blood thirst mindset.

I agree with you that our prisons and justice system are awful. Its a business, and we criminalize the wrong things. We make no attempt at rehabilitation, and instead just use inmates as cheap labor for for-profit companies. However, that does not mean people should not be punished for doing wrong, nor that respectable businesses shouldn't avoid hiring them.

Mallioux told teams not to draft him one-hour after the Athletic article I posted above went out. "Multiple sources told the Athletic that in interviews with some NHL teams, Mailloux has portrayed the woman as vindictive" .One hour after that went out, he asked not to be drafted. Because he thought teams weren't going to draft him, because he was a non-remorseful prick in his interviews. It wasn't remorse, it was a ploy. It worked, a team drafted him. Did he say no thank you. I need to do the work first. No, he went back to playing hockey and has done nothing else to atone since. Because why would he? He got what he wanted.

 

[BleedBlue14]

I don’t mean to come off as non-sympathetic to the victim, because she is a victim. But Mailloux was certainly a kid at the point of the issue. Whether he was remorseful or not is up for debate - but he was also still a kid at that point in time.

Looking completely at on ice play. Why would Montreal want to trade him? They were aware of the issue at the time and made the decision to draft him.

If they’re now looking to move him for a premium we should ask, why? They are not a strong defensive team. They have good prospects. But they should not be in a position to move off a player like that. We however, have Faulk and Parayko signed. I could see why we would move off a player like that. There’s a very good chance that he hasn’t matured much. And if that’s the case, I would avoid. I however, wouldn’t avoid for what his issues were pre-draft. I can guarantee you he wasn’t the only player in the class that did a similar thing. I’m not trying to say it’s right. But it’s a juvenile thing that isn’t extremely uncommon. You would hope he would heavily mature from the situation. If he’s being moved, I would imagine he has not.

 

[Xerloris]

Did you not read the middle three paragraphs that stated that his victim feels like he doesn't regret anything? That's the only person's opinion who actually matters in this, not you, not me, not anyone else but her. She felt that he only apologized because the court and team officials forced him to. She asked for a heartfelt written note and got a three-sentence text instead.

Judging by his actions thus far? I personally think Mailloux doesn't regret a single thing: only that he got caught. But again, my opinion doesn't matter, and it doesn't make someone an "arbiter of internet virtue" to not want someone who did what he did and seemingly not have any real remorse over it on our team.

Yes, the article from f***ing 2021 sure is proof that in the 3+ years since he's shown no remorse.

 

[Frenzy31]

I don’t mean to come off as non-sympathetic to the victim, because she is a victim. But Mailloux was certainly a kid at the point of the issue. Whether he was remorseful or not is up for debate - but he was also still a kid at that point in time.

Looking completely at on ice play. Why would Montreal want to trade him? They were aware of the issue at the time and made the decision to draft him.

If they’re now looking to move him for a premium we should ask, why? They are not a strong defensive team. They have good prospects. But they should not be in a position to move off a player like that. We however, have Faulk and Parayko signed. I could see why we would move off a player like that. There’s a very good chance that he hasn’t matured much. And if that’s the case, I would avoid. I however, wouldn’t avoid for what his issues were pre-draft. I can guarantee you he wasn’t the only player in the class that did a similar thing. I’m not trying to say it’s right. But it’s a juvenile thing that isn’t extremely uncommon. You would hope he would heavily mature from the situation. If he’s being moved, I would imagine he has not.

Actually. The strength of their system is their D depth. Trading him for a similar offensive player makes sense. Kind of how trading Snugs for a solid upside D makes sense for us.

To get a quality prospect; you need to offer one. But we also need to do due diligence as we would for any trade.

 

[Frenzy31]

Did you not read the middle three paragraphs that stated that his victim feels like he doesn't regret anything? That's the only person's opinion who actually matters in this, not you, not me, not anyone else but her. She felt that he only apologized because the court and team officials forced him to. She asked for a heartfelt written note and got a three-sentence text instead.

Judging by his actions thus far? I personally think Mailloux doesn't regret a single thing: only that he got caught. But again, my opinion doesn't matter, and it doesn't make someone an "arbiter of internet virtue" to not want someone who did what he did and seemingly not have any real remorse over it on our team.

What actions has he taken since to make you think he hasn’t learned his lesson? He hasn’t been in trouble since. Is he a choir boy? I don’t know, but….

The victim may never forgive him, no matter what he does. We don’t know anything about her. And frankly we don’t know anything about him.

When I deal with my staff, when they make a mistake, I am far more concerned about them not doing it again, than I am about my perceived level of their remorse.

That is the only way to judge.

Finally, if a person has served his sentence, how Narcissistic must you be to feel that he has to prove his remorse to you. (Not aimed specifically at you Memento but the thought process that he has to prove anything to us fans).

 

[ChicagoBlues]

You’ve made several good points in this discussion regarding Mailloux, @Frenzy31

Thank you.

 

[Majorityof1]

What actions has he taken since to make you think he hasn’t learned his lesson? He hasn’t been in trouble since. Is he a choir boy? I don’t know, but….

The victim may never forgive him, no matter what he does. We don’t know anything about her. And frankly we don’t know anything about him.

When I deal with my staff, when they make a mistake, I am far more concerned about them not doing it again, than I am about my perceived level of their remorse.

That is the only way to judge.

Finally, if a person has served his sentence, how Narcissistic must you be to feel that he has to prove his remorse to you. (Not aimed specifically at you Memento but the thought process that he has to prove anything to us fans).

Its not narcissistic at all. It's capitalism. I have limited time and resources. I have to make decisions on how I allocate that time and money. I do not want to spend my time and money supporting an organization who would knowingly hire a person who would do what he did. That is MY decision, or Memento's or yours to make for ourselves individually. It is not yours to make for me or vice versa..

The narcissism is everyone else saying I should make a different decision. Its others putting their decision making process, their beliefs onto others. The narcissism is you telling people to move on because you think it is time to move on. It's acting like you are the arbiter of what I do with my time and money, and what my morality and conscious tells me to feel about this.

Edit: One more thing, if your staff made a mistake and sexual harassed a co-worker, would you fire them? Or would you just take their word they would not do it again? Would you hire someone who was fired from their last job for sexual harassment? They are your decisions, but I would not want to work at a place that hired sexual harassers because they hadn't been caught again in the last 3 years.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I don’t mean to come off as non-sympathetic to the victim, because she is a victim. But Mailloux was certainly a kid at the point of the issue. Whether he was remorseful or not is up for debate - but he was also still a kid at that point in time.

Looking completely at on ice play. Why would Montreal want to trade him? They were aware of the issue at the time and made the decision to draft him.

If they’re now looking to move him for a premium we should ask, why? They are not a strong defensive team. They have good prospects. But they should not be in a position to move off a player like that. We however, have Faulk and Parayko signed. I could see why we would move off a player like that. There’s a very good chance that he hasn’t matured much. And if that’s the case, I would avoid. I however, wouldn’t avoid for what his issues were pre-draft. I can guarantee you he wasn’t the only player in the class that did a similar thing. I’m not trying to say it’s right. But it’s a juvenile thing that isn’t extremely uncommon. You would hope he would heavily mature from the situation. If he’s being moved, I would imagine he has not.

What is the timeline around this stuff and his draft relative to the more recent developments in the Team Canada allegations? It’s conceivable that Montreal leadership changed their mind about being willing to take criticism for this acquisition even if the player didn’t do anything further negative.

 

[Majorityof1]

What is the timeline around this stuff and his draft relative to the more recent developments in the Team Canada allegations? It’s conceivable that Montreal leadership changed their mind about being willing to take criticism for this acquisition even if the player didn’t do anything further negative.

2018 - World Juniors Sexual Assault
2019 - World Juniors Investigation Closed by London Onatario police with no charges
2020 - Mallioux incident
2021 - Mallioux draft
2022 - World Juniors Assault- Woman Sues Team Canada, settlement reached, and NHL launches its investigation
2024 - World Juniors Assault- Charges brought against players in Canadian Criminal Court

So the timeline kind of bears out your supposition. I'd also add the Aldrich and Blackhawks incident was first reported before the 2021 draft but blew up after. So the World Junior Assault and the Aldrich assaults were two incidents of sexual impropriety (not saying they are the same level) being covered over in hockey before the Mallioux draft pick and blowing up after it.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I guess my point is that I don't see anything here that strongly implies any bad behavior from Mallioux since the draft, but a lot of other circumstances that bring undesired scrutiny on Montreal's leadership. I think its more likely they're just trying to extricate themselves from the association in the current climate.

(So...we should expect him to end up in Vegas, right? I'm only partly joking.)

 

[bleedblue1223]

Feel like this discussion went down a pointless rabbit hole. Mallioux isn't available, so there really isn't any point in getting in any sort of heated discussion here. We aren't trading for a Krug replacement, and while Montreal technically has an excess of defensemen and they want to make a trade, it's just a bunch of 3rd pair guys that prospects like Reinbacher and Mallioux will soon beat out for jobs. When bad teams have an excess at a position and they need to make a trade from that group, it's usually not because they are all very good players, it's usually they are all kinda meh and there isn't much interest in them.

 

[stl76]

Feel like this discussion went down a pointless rabbit hole. Mallioux isn't available, so there really isn't any point in getting in any sort of heated discussion here.

Yep.

 

[Brian39]

Correct me if I'm wrong but if the girl was under 18 in the state of MO wouldn't what he did be considered distribution of child pornography? I believe MO is one of the few state that does not differentiate between adults and teens when it comes to distribution of images like that.

I don't believe that the ID of the victim has been released publicly, but every article I've read on the topic describes her as a woman and not a minor.

But yes, if she were 17 or under that would fall under child pornography laws. Mallieaux was a minor at the time of the offense and it is pretty rare for a prosecutor to go after almost-adult minors for child pornography involving their own consensual sexual acts with other almost-adult minors. Not unheard of, but certainly not common. If the victim was under 18 in this scenario (which again, is unknown), then it could be a potential avenue to get a charge to stick when the totality of the circumstances suggests criminality despite the imperfect statutes on the books.