Toggle sidebar

Canadian Government Freezing Hockey Canada Funding- (2018 Canada World Jr Team Alleged Sexual Assault) PART 2

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
pcruz said:
While I don't disagree with the sentiment as a whole, I do disagree in a way:

The punishment for sexual assault (rape being an extreme case of such) shouldn't be a monetary one.
If we were to associate criminal punishment (or even civil punishment) with monetary values, then we would indeed create a culture where the rich feel, and essentially act, above the law.

The punishment for these types of cases should be that after conviction, the defendant is named and forever associated with having committed the crime.

Settling a case out of court, whether it be the defendant paying, or anyone else, doesn't do enough justice.

In my opinion, at least.

Is it a punishment, sure. Is it appropriate for the severity, no. Not in my mind at least.

Sure, there is the criminal route where the punishment is potential jail time, but the threshold for criminal conviction is much higher than in a civil suit, so in cases of sexual assault, the likelyhood of getting a conviction are much smaller than the same trial in a civil suit.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with anything you said. Nothing. I just wanted to point out the punishment dynamic. Ultimately out of court settlements are a joke in my mind as they give a leg up to the wealthy, which is wholly inequitable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deuce22 and I am toxic
The Marquis said:
I just wanted to point out the punishment dynamic. Ultimately out of court settlements are a joke in my mind as they give a leg up to the wealthy, which is wholly inequitable.
Click to expand...

I suppose the counterbalance, if there is one, is that poor people probably aren't sued as often.

You can decide whether it's a function of available assets to lose in a settlement, the conduct of rich people, or the propensity of people to target the rich in civil litigation.

I'm not sure you will see a civil trial follow a criminal one in cases where there are no assets to be gained.
 
Rodgerwilco said:
I'm not the one who made that initial statement so I can't say why he chose that word 're-raped', I was pointing out what I think anyone reasonable would glean from that statement of being 're-raped'. I don't like using that specific term outside of its express meaning of force-able sex, so that's not up to me.

I'm not sure if you don't quite understand the idea of being re-traumatized by a court case or if you're just pretending you don't understand why female victims of rape or other sexual crimes may not want to participate in a court case (or may not have the strength or courage to do so).

Just as much as a certain crowd is hounding people for jumping to condemn Virtanen, you can see others shouting just as loud that points out exactly why victims do not come forward. Imagine, if just for a moment, that this woman WAS abused, but wasnt able to gather enough evidence. Now you've got people proclaiming that she was just in it for the money or saying she should be sued for defamation and forced to pay her abuser for the rest of her life, and even worse.
Click to expand...
1)

Ahh, see I was put in a potentially life-ending situation several years ago by the stupidity of another person and their disregard to the safety of others.
The legal process is still on-going.
I have been made to re-live the event dozens and dozens of times, and each one is just as crappy as the previous one.

However, because I want that person to be punished for their actions that day, I have always just looked at this as part of getting justice done.



2) This is a very common occurrence - that actual victims can't produce enough evidence to convince a jury that the defendant is guilty.
This is the reason, not just a reason, but the reason, why the judicial system's entire goal is to produce a verdict on guilt and not on innocence.
The defendant may not be found guilty, but they are also not declared innocent.
There is a way to get to the point where the innocence of the defendant is proven, but that requires that after being declared "not guilty", there is a counter-suit brought forth and the original accusation be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have been malicious and with intent to defame the person.

As I've stated several times, that's not going to happen with the Virtanen case, and not with the Hockey Canada case, and it wouldn't be possible in the overwhelming majority of cases.



Now, before some people jump down my throat for this, I'm not equating what happened to me with rape.
I know that some people will that specious and stupid equivalency argument, but that's not at all the case.

It was a life-altering event that could very easily been life-ending.
Traumatizing at the time and ever since? Yes.
Not rape.
 
canucksfan said:
Hazing still happens

Click to expand...

Of course hazing happens.

It's a human thing where people will introduce new members into a group with some sort of special treatment.

Pro players introduce rookie call-ups by making them skate around in warm-ups alone.

Hazing where the safety of others is put into question should be punished the same way that same action would be punished if it were not in a hazing environment. For example, forcing someone to go for a hike naked in the winter, dive to the bottom of the deep end of a pool fully clothed, cross a freeway at night, etc.

Hazing where rookies are made to pay for luxurious dinners for the older players is just as despicable.

Hazing in itself is not a bad thing, as it can be a quirky and funny way to break the ice with new members of a social group.
There should be some sort of leadership group in place to not allow hazing incidents to get out of hand or to put the targets in any sort of trouble or danger.
 
pcruz said:
Of course hazing happens.

It's a human thing where people will introduce new members into a group with some sort of special treatment.

Pro players introduce rookie call-ups by making them skate around in warm-ups alone.

Hazing where the safety of others is put into question should be punished the same way that same action would be punished if it were not in a hazing environment. For example, forcing someone to go for a hike naked in the winter, dive to the bottom of the deep end of a pool fully clothed, cross a freeway at night, etc.

Hazing where rookies are made to pay for luxurious dinners for the older players is just as despicable.

Hazing in itself is not a bad thing, as it can be a quirky and funny way to break the ice with new members of a social group.
There should be some sort of leadership group in place to not allow hazing incidents to get out of hand or to put the targets in any sort of trouble or danger.
Click to expand...

Any form of hazing shouldn't occur. Its sheer intent is to belittle and humiliate others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTotalPackage, apparentlyclueless, Btas and 4 others
pcruz said:
1)

Ahh, see I was put in a potentially life-ending situation several years ago by the stupidity of another person and their disregard to the safety of others.
The legal process is still on-going.
I have been made to re-live the event dozens and dozens of times, and each one is just as crappy as the previous one.

However, because I want that person to be punished for their actions that day, I have always just looked at this as part of getting justice done.



2) This is a very common occurrence - that actual victims can't produce enough evidence to convince a jury that the defendant is guilty.
This is the reason, not just a reason, but the reason, why the judicial system's entire goal is to produce a verdict on guilt and not on innocence.
The defendant may not be found guilty, but they are also not declared innocent.
There is a way to get to the point where the innocence of the defendant is proven, but that requires that after being declared "not guilty", there is a counter-suit brought forth and the original accusation be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have been malicious and with intent to defame the person.

As I've stated several times, that's not going to happen with the Virtanen case, and not with the Hockey Canada case, and it wouldn't be possible in the overwhelming majority of cases.



Now, before some people jump down my throat for this, I'm not equating what happened to me with rape.
I know that some people will that specious and stupid equivalency argument, but that's not at all the case.

It was a life-altering event that could very easily been life-ending.
Traumatizing at the time and ever since? Yes.
Not rape.
Click to expand...
1) The fact you've been through a relatively similar situation (even saying 'each one is just as crappy as the last' and are still criticizing the potential victim for not having enough 'strength and courage' is kind of disturbing, if I'm being honest... It sounds as though you may be referencing something that was an act of recklessness, like DUI or a car accident. Not an active of direct malice or assault perpetrated against you as an individual. It's difficult to really compare any type of situation like that to actually being raped. Rape and other forms of sexual assault are really their own beast. It's hardly even comparable. You may feel like you're "courageous" enough to go through the situation each time, however it's not reasonable to expect everyone, especially a young girl who may actually have been abused, to have that same level of fortitude in the face of a possible abuser.

2) you entirely skirted my whole point. The point of my statement there was to say that there seems to be an equal and just as loud, if not louder, sentiment now that because Virt was found "not guilty" that he did nothing wrong and the woman lied. If it is true that the woman was assaulted, that is pretty reprehensible. Yes, if he was accused based on nothing this is also reprehensible. It seems that a lot of people are pretty hasty to put themselves in a position where they're saying really shitty things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nut Upstrom, apparentlyclueless, Btas and 3 others
pcruz said:
Of course hazing happens.

It's a human thing where people will introduce new members into a group with some sort of special treatment.

Pro players introduce rookie call-ups by making them skate around in warm-ups alone.

Hazing where the safety of others is put into question should be punished the same way that same action would be punished if it were not in a hazing environment. For example, forcing someone to go for a hike naked in the winter, dive to the bottom of the deep end of a pool fully clothed, cross a freeway at night, etc.

Hazing where rookies are made to pay for luxurious dinners for the older players is just as despicable.

Hazing in itself is not a bad thing, as it can be a quirky and funny way to break the ice with new members of a social group.
There should be some sort of leadership group in place to not allow hazing incidents to get out of hand or to put the targets in any sort of trouble or danger.
Click to expand...
Hazing is in and of itself a bad thing. If it's just kooky and silly (telling the rookie to lead the team on the ice and nobody following him so he skates a lap alone) then it's basically harmless, but there is nothing inherently good about it. That's why you don't see hazing in let's say "civilized" areas (i.e., you won't see new employees have to participate in some odd ritual in an office space in order to prove their entry into the "group") and it pretty much inherently fosters a toxic environment where it goes too far. Since we can't just trust young and impressionable people to not behave like idiots, the best way to eliminate the harmful forms of hazing are to just eliminate all hazing all together even if it means we inadvertently get rid of the silly stuff that most wouldn't see as a big deal alongside it, rather than create an environment where we say "some hazing is OK, just try not to take it too far...".
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTotalPackage, apparentlyclueless, AzHawk and 7 others
Rodgerwilco said:
1) The fact you've been through a relatively similar situation (even saying 'each one is just as crappy as the last' and are still criticizing the potential victim for not having enough 'strength and courage' is kind of disturbing, if I'm being honest... It sounds as though you may be referencing something that was an act of recklessness, like DUI or a car accident. Not an active of direct malice or assault perpetrated against you as an individual. It's difficult to really compare any type of situation like that to actually being raped. Rape and other forms of sexual assault are really their own beast. It's hardly even comparable. You may feel like you're "courageous" enough to go through the situation each time, however it's not reasonable to expect everyone, especially a young girl who may actually have been abused, to have that same level of fortitude in the face of a possible abuser.

2) you entirely skirted my whole point. The point of my statement there was to say that there seems to be an equal and just as loud, if not louder, sentiment now that because Virt was found "not guilty" that he did nothing wrong and the woman lied. If it is true that the woman was assaulted, that is pretty reprehensible. Yes, if he was accused based on nothing this is also reprehensible. It seems that a lot of people are pretty hasty to put themselves in a position where they're saying really shitty things.
Click to expand...

Trauma is trauma, yes?

Is there some ranking of what kinds of trauma are better or worse than others?

Does it make a difference if I say that it directly led to surgical procedures and permanently altered not only lifestyle, but interactions with people?

Don't presume to lecture people on whether their experiences are to be brushed aside.
 
pcruz said:
Of course hazing happens.

It's a human thing where people will introduce new members into a group with some sort of special treatment.

Pro players introduce rookie call-ups by making them skate around in warm-ups alone.

Hazing where the safety of others is put into question should be punished the same way that same action would be punished if it were not in a hazing environment. For example, forcing someone to go for a hike naked in the winter, dive to the bottom of the deep end of a pool fully clothed, cross a freeway at night, etc.

Hazing where rookies are made to pay for luxurious dinners for the older players is just as despicable.

Hazing in itself is not a bad thing, as it can be a quirky and funny way to break the ice with new members of a social group.
There should be some sort of leadership group in place to not allow hazing incidents to get out of hand or to put the targets in any sort of trouble or danger.
Click to expand...
I had a friend who played for a WHL team.

One of the hazing rituals was to see how far they could stick an anal sex toy. My friend could not walk properly for a week, the entire team laughed at him when he walked. It was brutal. The coach was complicit in it. The one person you should trust
 
Last edited:
  • Wow
Reactions: TheTotalPackage and Tad Mikowsky
pcruz said:
Trauma is trauma, yes?

Is there some ranking of what kinds of trauma are better or worse than others?

Does it make a difference if I say that it directly led to surgical procedures and permanently altered not only lifestyle, but interactions with people?

Don't presume to lecture people on whether their experiences are to be brushed aside.
Click to expand...
No, "trauma is trauma" is not accurate. There are absolutely varying types and levels of trauma based on the cause and how they affect individuals. There is a reason why sexual trauma is not treated in the same way as trauma from something like an accident.

Yet again, you latched onto the least meaningful part of the comment and proceeded to disregard everything else. You're basically saying 'if I'm courageous enough to go through court trials as a result from an accident that happened to me, then women who have possibly been raped should be able to do the same".

pcruz said:
Hazing in itself is not a bad thing, as it can be a quirky and funny way to break the ice with new members of a social group.
Click to expand...
uhhh WHAT??? By definition, Hazing is in itself a bad thing. It is literally a crime with many states having anti-hazing laws. For someone who was so intent on telling me earlier "those words have meanings" you don't seem to be paying much attention to the ones you're using in almost any of your comments.

After trying to admonish me, you go on saying hazing isn't a bad thing and that a rookie having to foot the bill for dinner is 'just as despicable' as kids being sexually assaulted or forced into situations where it's reasonably likely they could die...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nut Upstrom, apparentlyclueless, Btas and 5 others
ellja3 said:
I am saying that currently these junior leagues have zero incentives, moral ones aside, to reveal any incidents. They stay silent and get money. It's beneficial for them to not report anything. Therefore, I don't believe anything will change here. Not that it SHOULDN'T.
Click to expand...
I agree, just have a different take on one aspect of this whole thing.

Without some added level of transparency, nothing changes.

That does not necessarily mean any names need to be named by anyone outside of the legal process, should charges be filed.

What that does mean, they should have to disclose to the public when are making settlements concerning sexual assaults.

They here admitted to there being 12 such settlements since 1989 (4 attributed to one person)

If they were required to disclose those settlements to the public as they happened, the first one they admitted to would have been a cause for scrutiny. Each subsequent one would be cause for more scrutiny.

Without that public scrutiny, without the possible bad optics, without any legal repercussions, or even any individual repercussions other than retiring, or moving on, there is no reason for an entity to change how it handles these type of incidences given they have plenty of funding to handle them as they did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wraithsonwings, Nut Upstrom, AzHawk and 1 other person
I heard another one on bus trips, rookies had to do the same down the aisle while players thru loonies in to weigh the bottles down

A 15-year-old hockey player in Manitoba was forced to parade around the dressing room with water bottles tied to his genitals, the teen's parents alleged Wednesday in an effort to end hazing rituals in minor hockey.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Angry Little Elf
Rodgerwilco said:
No, "trauma is trauma" is not accurate. There are absolutely varying types and levels of trauma based on the cause and how they affect individuals. There is a reason why sexual trauma is not treated in the same way as trauma from something like an accident.

Yet again, you latched onto the least meaningful part of the comment and proceeded to disregard everything else. You're basically saying 'if I'm courageous enough to go through court trials as a result from an accident that happened to me, then women who have possibly been raped should be able to do the same".


uhhh WHAT??? By definition, Hazing is in itself a bad thing. It is literally a crime with many states having anti-hazing laws. For someone who was so intent on telling me earlier "those words have meanings" you don't seem to be paying much attention to the ones you're using in almost any of your comments.

After trying to admonish me, you go on saying hazing isn't a bad thing and that a rookie having to foot the bill for dinner is 'just as despicable' as kids being sexually assaulted or forced into situations where it's reasonably likely they could die...
Click to expand...

Where in the f*** did you read this?

Please show me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom