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

[Uncle Rotter]

You jumped on a poorly worded sentence on my part. I know the details of the lawsuit. My argument is, vicarious liability does not apply here, because junior players are not under the employ of Hockey Canada (nor are they under the employ of their junior clubs). So Hockey Canada settled the lawsuit against them because they wanted to protect their own reputation? Their programs reputation?

It happened at a Hockey Canada function. If not for that function, it doesn't happen. There is liability.

 

[PostBradMalone]

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that settling a lawsuit is in no way "hush money". It's the opposite. It's out in the open and the complaint is in the public record.

So any time money is used to settle a lawsuit it's not hush money? This dog doesn't hunt.

The focus shouldn't be on the fact that Hockey Canada settled the lawsuit.

Why exactly? That's a pretty damn big deal.

Do you think it would have been better if Hockey Canada used their financial power to take the complainant to court to try and discredit her version of events?

Because beyond settling, that was the only other option.

They had a third option: conduct an actual, professional investigation into what occurred that didn't involve a firm well-known to engage in hatchet law, and then punish anyone found to have broken the HC CoC if not Criminal Code. Instead, they paid the victim to shut them up, and then forgot it ever happened.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I was reading on twitter that it may not just be 8 players off of the 2018 canadian team. I was trying to sleuth out who the 8 might be based on who came out with a denial. But I was told that some may be European CHL players that were on other WJC teams.
Does anyone know if this is true?

No idea, but it has been said that there was CHL player or players involved, so yes there could be an import player, European or American player involved.

 

[Pink Mist]

No idea, but it has been said that there was CHL player or players involved, so yes there could be an import player, European or American player involved.

Very unlikely they would be in London after the OHL season and even less unlikely Hockey Canada would settle for them

 

[Uncle Rotter]

They had a third option: conduct an actual, professional investigation into what occurred that didn't involve a firm well-known to engage in hatchet law, and then punish anyone found to have broken the HC CoC. Instead, they paid the victim to shut them up, and then forgot it ever happened.

In 2022? So is there any settlement at all?

 

[SniperHF]

I'd prefer to keep this thread open because of the gravity of it so we need to stop the amateur sleuthing.

Such and such player didn't make a statement isn't good enough. Random twitter speculation isn't good enough.

Media reports, legal documents, reporters, players, or officials speaking on the record - Yes.

 

[Golden_Jet]

So any time money is used to settle a lawsuit it's not hush money? This dog doesn't hunt.



Why exactly? That's a pretty damn big deal.



They had a third option: conduct an actual, professional investigation into what occurred that didn't involve a firm well-known to engage in hatchet law, and then punish anyone found to have broken the HC CoC if not Criminal Code. Instead, they paid the victim to shut them up, and then forgot it ever happened.

I’m assuming what poster is saying if it’s in a publicly available document , is it really hush money, as opposed to money.
I get what your saying though.

 

[Uncle Rotter]

Here's an article I suppose is similar to the Globe one, but not behind a paywall:

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/hockey-canada-abuse-claim-reserve-fund-1.6524124

The detail is included in a July 2021 affidavit sworn by Glen McCurdie, who was then Hockey Canada's vice-president of insurance and risk management, as part of a lawsuit launched by an injured player in Ontario.

"Hockey Canada maintains a reserve in a segregated account to pay for any such uninsured liabilities as they arise," McCurdie's affidavit said. It goes on to say that "uninsured liabilities include potential claims for historical sexual abuse."

...

Hockey Canada did not respond to an email from The Canadian Press requesting comment on McCurdie's affidavit Monday, but confirmed in a statement Tuesday that it maintains a "National Equity Fund" that covers a "broad range of expenses related to safety, wellness and equity initiatives across our organization."

"The fund is also used to pay for the organization's insurance premiums and to cover any claims not otherwise covered by insurance policies, including those related to physical injury, harassment, and sexual misconduct," the statement read.

Hockey Canada added the fund was "established in a manner consistent with reserve funds maintained by other large national organizations."

 

[DaveMatthew]

So any time money is used to settle a lawsuit it's not hush money? This dog doesn't hunt.

No. If there had been a payment made to prevent a victim from filing a civil suit in the first place, that would have been hush money.

A settlement is a payment to resolve a lawsuit that's already in the public record. Anyone could have accessed the original complaint and its details. It wasn't hushed.

And hey, maybe the victim actually wanted to get this done as quickly and quietly as possible? Maybe she didn't want to relive the trauma every day when she turned on the news.

Like I said, being outraged over the actions, or lack of action, by Hockey Canada after the complaint was made is perfectly fair. Being outraged over the fact that there was a mutually agreed upon settlement to a suit? That's missing the point.

 

[PostBradMalone]

No. If there had been a payment made to prevent a victim from filing a civil suit in the first place, that would have been hush money.

You really don't know how this works, do you?

 

[Akrapovince]

No. If there had been a payment made to prevent a victim from filing a civil suit in the first place, that would have been hush money.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if the cost for attorney fees, time, effort and abundance of other things outweigh the settlement, wouldn’t it just be logical to settle?

I’m not speaking in absolutes either way or implying that this is the case, but I would much rather just pay my 105$ speeding fine than to hire a 500$ lawyer to fight it.

At the topic though, settlements should not be seen as admission of guilt in the eyes of the law. Completely different however in the court of public opinion, and sometimes that it is warranted. In this situation, I think that it is.

 

[Bevans]

No. If there had been a payment made to prevent a victim from filing a civil suit in the first place, that would have been hush money.

A settlement is a payment to resolve a lawsuit that's already in the public record. Anyone could have accessed the original complaint. It wasn't hushed.

And hey, maybe the victim actually wanted to get this done as quickly and quietly as possible? Maybe she didn't want to relive the trauma every day when she turned on the news.

You're still going? I really hope you're not a lawyer.

The settlement ENDED the lawsuit without requiring anyone to ADMIT liability in exchange for MONEY

This is commonly referred to as hush money.

Quit quibbling over nothing and inventing laws and constitutional rights.

 

[DaveMatthew]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if the cost for attorney fees, time, effort and abundance of other things outweigh the settlement, wouldn’t it just be logical to settle?

I’m not speaking in absolutes either way or implying that this is the case, but I would much rather just pay my 105$ speeding fine than to hire a 500$ lawyer to fight it.

Yes, that's why settlements are so common, and why settlements aren't admissions of guilt.

A settlement was almost certainly the desired outcome for the victim and the accused (Hockey Canada). That's why it happened.

 

[1specter]

Formenton has disabled comments on his Instagram.

 

[DaveMatthew]

You're still going? I really hope you're not a lawyer.

The settlement ENDED the lawsuit without requiring anyone to ADMIT liability in exchange for MONEY

This is commonly referred to as hush money.

Quit quibbling over nothing and inventing laws and constitutional rights.

In Canada, over 90% of civil cases are settled before heading to trial. It is usually the desired outcome of the complainant and the accused. I guess everyone is just out there paying hush money.

Hockey Canada didn't have to admit liability, yes. And the victim didn't have to relive the trauma she went through and was compensated financially.

 

[Jeune Poulet]

No need to punish others because some guys from one of the many HC teams did something they shouldn't have. Why should a kid looking for exposure in the U18s be punished and potentially have his career prospects hurt as a result.

Sorry but women's rights and basic human decency trumps the short-term first problems of a handful of priviledged kids who "need a bit of exposure".

The best way to make impactful changes on the long term is for Hockey Canada to suffer consequences. You're not going to see durable, significant changes without indisposing some people, though.

At this point, we should be focused on what is wrong and how HC is enabling an environment that shelters sexual abusers and rapists. Not on whether a few athletes will miss a tournament or two.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Formenton has disabled comments on his Instagram.

Is this supposed to be evidence of guilt or something?

 

[BadgerBruce]

Hockey Canada settled the lawsuit because a lawsuit was filed against them and they had to resolve it. The only way to resolve it was to either settle or fight.

Usually, organizations settle because: they don't believe they can win and a settlement is lower than the damages would be if they lost, or the cost of a prolonged legal fight would be higher than a settlement.

Settling this suit is in no way a cover-up of any kind.

Perhaps you are right.

But don’t lose sight of this: Hockey Canada settled the suit on behalf of 9 other parties (CHL and 8 John Does), apparently without informing them. To my mind, that’s significant because one defendant (Hockey Canada) claims to have liquidated investments to fund the settlement, and the other 9 defendants paid zip.

 

[CanHeDoIt99]

In Canada, over 90% of civil cases are settled before heading to trial. It is usually the desired outcome of the complainant and the accused. I guess everyone is just out there paying hush money.

Hockey Canada didn't have to admit liability, yes. And the victim didn't have to relive the trauma she went through and was compensated financially.

The speed in which a settlement was made sort of supports the idea that this was more along the lines of hush money than perhaps a typical settlement, as well as the fact it seems as if Hockey Canada's investigation was.. incomplete. Doesn't mean it absolutely was, but it looks fishy.

We can argue semantics of hush money for debate-lord type reasons, but I think the question is worth asking how this settlement differs from others/typical ones, and what that may (or may not) imply.

 

[DaveMatthew]

Perhaps you are right.

But don’t lose sight of this: Hockey Canada settled the suit on behalf of 9 other parties (CHL and 8 John Does), apparently without informing them. To my mind, that’s significant because one defendant (Hockey Canada) claims to have liquidated investments to fund the settlement, and the other 9 defendants paid zip.

As far as I understand, the 8 John Does were not named defendants in the civil complaint. Only Hockey Canada was. Otherwise, it couldn't have been settled without their knowledge.

The John Does lawyers have taken issue with it because they feel that the settlement "implies", in the eyes of the public, that the players are guilty.

 

[inthe6ix]

Mete - was in Mexico
Makar - during SCF
Thomas - today

That’s the only players that have spoken I think.

Ok including your three, I tried counting up the supposed innocent using this article:

More players step forward in Hockey Canada sex assault investigation

Coyotes defenceman Connor Timmins is the 14th player from Canada’s 2018 world junior team of 22 to comment publicly. Some have proclaimed innocence. Most have promised co-operation.

www.thestar.com

Add:
Timmins
Dube
Clague
Bean
Point
Kyrou
Raddysh
Fabbro
Gadjovich
Foote
Katchouk
Hart

That's 15 players.. plus 8 players who are not listed, and you have 23.

Here is the 2018 squad with 22 players though:

Rosters

Rosters for the 2018 IIHF World Junior Championship in Buffalo, N.Y. at the Key Bank Center and HarborCenter. Get player details for Team Canada and other competing teams. Find names, heights, weights, birthdates, draft status, hometown and club teams, as well as player bios for all Canadian...

www.hockeycanada.ca

Unless someone in the list above is lying about their lack of involvement, someone help me with my math.

 

[PostBradMalone]

Is this supposed to be evidence of guilt or something?

Given that he/his reps have otherwise been utterly silent during an avalanche of denials from almost everyone else on the 2018 team? It's not inalienable proof of guilt obviously but worth noting, for sure.

 

[DaveMatthew]

The speed in which a settlement was made sort of supports the idea that this was more along the lines of hush money than perhaps a typical settlement, as well as the fact it seems as if Hockey Canada's investigation was.. incomplete. Doesn't mean it absolutely was, but it looks fishy.

We can argue semantics of hush money for debate-lord type reasons, but I think the question is worth asking how this settlement differs from others/typical ones, and what that may (or may not) imply.

It sounds like the investigation was dropped by Hockey Canada after they learned that criminal charges would not be pursued.

Basically, "well if it's not criminal, whatever, let's move on."

I 100% get why people would be upset about that. Hockey Canada should hold players to a higher moral standard than "don't be a criminal in the eyes of the law."

 

[Hale The Villain]

Given that he/his reps have otherwise been utterly silent during an avalanche of denials from almost everyone else on the 2018 team? It's worth noting, for sure.

Not denying publicly is worth noting, disabling Instagram comments when he's probably getting a slew of negative and hateful comments despite no confirmation of his involvement is not.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

In Canada, over 90% of civil cases are settled before heading to trial. It is usually the desired outcome of the complainant and the accused. I guess everyone is just out there paying hush money.

Hockey Canada didn't have to admit liability, yes. And the victim didn't have to relive the trauma she went through and was compensated financially.

We should just allow rapists who have money to just get away with it then.